-------
CONTINUED FROM PAGE V-8
1. POLLUTANT
AND CAS
NUMBER
(If MHtilfblfl
I. MARK 'X'
fcVKCT
MM***
b. ...
LIKVKB
C. «-
«. MAXIMUM DAILY
1-1
QC/M8 FRACTION - PESTICIDES (continued)
17P. HwKMhlor
Epoxld*
(1O24-B7-3)
1BF. PCB-1242
(S3489-21-9)
19f». PCB-12B4
(11097-S9.1)
20P. PCB-1221
<1 1104-28-21
71P. PCB-1232
(11141.16*1
22P. PCB-124B
J3P. PCB-126O
(110MM9-6)
I4P. PCS 1010
112*14-11-2)
2SP. ToxiphwM
(8001-38-2)
EPA l.o. NUM»n (copy from ;t«m J of form 1)
3. EFFLUENT
VALUE
«) «...
B MAXIMUM 3D DAY VALUE
WavatlaUt)
III
COMC«MTH*TION
(I --..
OUTFALL NUMBER
OM8 Wo. 2Q4O-OO96
Apfirov*/ *xptrtt 7 31 Si
C.LONC TEMM AVRG. VALUE
(1
1,1 ....
tl NO. OF
ANAU-
VSES
4, UNITS
a. CONCCN-
THATION
(X MAI*
5. INTAKE fiiptlonul)
*. LONG TtBM
(l| COMCBM-
TKATIOM
(tl »»
b. NO. OF
ANAL-
V««*
PAGE V-t
"A Form 3S10-2C (Rm, 2-86)
-------
APPENDIX E.4: FORM 2D
80
-------
United Slates Office of Water EPA Form 3510-20
Environmental Protection Enforcement and Permits August 1990
Agency Washington, DC 20460
Permiu Division
&EPA Application Form 2D
New Sources and
New Dischargers:
Application for Permit to
Discharge Process
Wastewater
-------
Form 2D
Form 2D must be completed in conjunction with EPA
Form 3510-1 (Form 1).
This form must be completed by all applicants who
checked "yes" to Item II-D in Application Form 1. How-
ever, facilities which discharge only nonprocess was-
tewater that is not regulated by an effluent limitations
guideline or new source performance standard may use
EPA Form 3510-2E (Form 2E). Educational, medical, and
commercial chemical laboratories should use this form
or EPA Form 3510-2C (Form 2C). To further determine if
you are a new source or a new discharger, see §122.2
and §122.29. This form should not be used for dis-
charges of stormwater runoff.
Public Availability of Submitted Information
You may not claim as confidential any information
required by this form or Form 1, whether the information
is reported on the forms or in an attachment. Section
402(j) of the CWA requires that all permit applications
shall be available to the public. This information will
therefore be made available to the public upon request.
You may claim as confidential any information you sub-
mit to EPA which goes beyond that required by this form
and Form 1. Confidentiality claims for effluent data must
be denied. If you do not assert a claim of confidentiality
at the time of submitting the information, EPA may make
the information public without further notice. Claims of
confidentiality will be handled in accordance with EPA's
business confidentiality regulations in 40 CFR Part 2.
Completeness
Your application will not be considered complete unless
you answer every question on this form and on Form 1
(except as instructed below). If an item does not apply to
you, enter "NA" (for "not applicable") to show that you
considered the question.
Followup Requirements
Although you are now required to submit estimated
data on this form (Form 2D), please note that no later
than two years after you begin discharging from the
proposed facility, you must complete and submit Items
V and VI of NPDES application Form 2C (EPA Form
3510-2C) How-ever, you need not complete those
portions of Item V requiring tests which you have
already performed under the discharge monitoring
requirements of your NPDES permit In addition, the
permitting authority may waive requirements of Items
V-A and VI if the permittee makes the demonstrations
required under 40 CFR §122.22(g)(7)(i)(B) and
122.21(gX9).
Definitions
All significant terms used in these instructions and in
the form are defined in the glossary found in the General
Instructions which accompany Form 1.
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev 8-90)
Instructions
Item I
You may use the map you provided for Item XI of Form 1
to determine the latitude and longitude (to the nearest
15 seconds) of each of your outfalls and the name of the
receiving water. You should name all waters to which
discharge is made and which flow into significant
receiving waters. For example, if the discharge is made
to a ditch which flows into an unnamed tributary which
in turn flows into a named river, you should provide the
name or description (if no name is available) of the ditch,
the tributary, and the river.
Item II
This item requires your best estimate of the date on
which your facility or new outfall will begin to discharge
Item III-A
List all outfalls, their source (operations contributing to
the flow), and estimate an average flow from each
source. Briefly describe the planned treatment for these
wastewaters prior to discharge. Also describe the ulti-
mate disposal of any solid or liquid wastes not dis-
charged. You should describe the treatment in either a
narrative form or list the proper code for the treatment
unit from a list provided in Table 2D-1
Item III-B
An example of an acceptable line drawing appears in
Figure 2D-1 to these instructions The line drawing
should show the route taken by water in your proposed
facility from intake to discharge. Show all sources of
wastewater, including process and production areas,
sanitary flows, cooling water, and storm water runoff.
You may group similar operations into a single unit,
labeled to correspond to the more detailed listing in Item
III-A. The water balance should show estimates of antic-
ipated average flows. Show all significant losses of
water to production, atmosphere, and discharge. You
should use your best estimates
Item III-C
Fill in every applicable column in this item for each
source of intermittent or seasonal discharge Base your
answers on your best estimate A discharge is intermit-
tent if it occurs with interruptions during the operating
hours of the facility. Discharges caused by routine main-
tenance shutdowns, process changes, or other similar
activities are not considered to be intermittent. A dis-
charge is seasonal if it occurs only during certain parts
of the year. The reported flow rate is the highest daily
value and should be measured in gallons per day Maxi-
mum total volume means the total volume of any one
discharge within 24 hours and is measured in units
such as gallons.
1-1
-------
Item IV
"Production" in this question refers to those goods
which the proposed facility will produce, not to "waste-
water" production This information is only necessary
where production-based new source performance
standards (NSPS) or effluent guidelines apply to your
facility. Your estimated production figures should be
based on a realistic projection of actual daily production
level (not design capacity) for each of the first three
operating years of the facility. This estimate must be a
long-term-average estimate (e.g., average production
on an annual basis) If production will vary depending on
long-term shifts in operating schedule or capacity, the
applicant may report alternate production estimates and
the basis foi the alternate estimates.
If known, report quantities in the units of measurement
used m the applicable NSPS or effluent guideline. For
example, if the applicable NSPS is expressed as "grams
of pollutant discharged per kilogram of unit production,"
then report maximum "Quantity Per Day" in kilograms
If you do not know whether any NSPS or effluent guide-
line applies to your facility, report quantities in any unit
of measurement known to you. If an effluent guideline
or NSPS specifies a method for estimating production,
that method must be followed.
There is no need to conduct new studies to obtain these
figures, only data already on hand are required. You are
not required to indicate how the reported information
was calculated
Items V-A. B. and C
These items require you to estimate and report data on
the pollutants expected to be discharged from each of
your outfalls Where there is more than one outfall, you
should submit a separate Item V for each outfall For Part
C only a list is required. Sampling and analysis are not
required at this time. If, however, data from such ana-
lyses are available, then those data should be reported.
Each part of this item addresses a different set of pollu-
tant^ or parameters and must be completed in accor-
dance with the specific instructions for that part The
following are the general and specific instructions for
Items V-A through V-C.
Item V General Instructions
Each part of this item requires you to provide an esti-
mated maximum daily and average daily value for each
pollutant or parameter listed (see Table 2D-2), according
to the specific instructions below. The source of the data
is also required.
For Parts A through C, base your determination of
whether a pollutant will be present in your discharge on
your knowledge of the proposed facility's raw materials.
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev 8-90)
maintenance chemicals, intermediate and final prod-
ucts, byproducts, and any analyses of your effluent or of
any similar effluent. You may also provide the determi-
nation and the estimates based on available in-house or
contractor's engineering reports or any other studies
performed on the proposed facility (see Item VI of the
form). If you expect a pollutant to be present solely as a
result of its presence in your intake water, please state
this information on the form
Please note that no later than 2 years after you begin
discharging from the proposed facility, you must com-
plete and submit Items V and VI of NPDES application
Form 2C (followup data).
Reporting Intake Data. You are not required to report
pollutants or parameters present in intake water unless
you wish to demonstrate your eligibilty fora "net" efflu-
ent limitation for these pollutants or parameters, that is,
an effluent limitation adjusted to provide allowance for
the pollutants or parameters present in your intake
water. If you wish to obtain credits for pollutants or
parameters present in your intake water, please insert a
separate sheet, with a short statement of why you
believe you are eligible (see §122 45 (g)), under Item VII
(Other Information). You will then be contacted by the
permitting authority for further instructions
All estimated pollutant or parameter levels must be
reported as concentration and as total mass, except for
discharge flow, temperature, and pH Total mass is the
total weight of pollutants or parameters discharged over
a day.
Use the following abbreviations for units
Concentration Mass
ppm ... .parts per million Ibs pounds
mg/1 .. .milligrams per liter ton tons (English tons)
ppb parts per billion mg milligrams
Ug/1 .. .micrograms per liter g grams
kg kilograms T Tonnes (metric tons)
Source
In providing the estimates, use the codes in the following table
to indicate the source of such information in column 4 of Parts
V A and B
Code
Engineering study 1
Actual data from pilot plants 1
Estimates from other engineering studies 2
Data from other similar plants 3
Best professional estimates 4
Others specify on the form
Item V-A
Estimates of data on pollutants or parameters inGroupAmust
be reported by all applicants for all outfalls, including outfalls
1-2
-------
containing only noncontact cooling water or nonprocess
wastewater
To request a waiver from reporting any of these pollu-
tants or parameters, the applicant must submit to the
permitting authority a written request specifying which
pollutants or parameters should be waived and the rea-
sons for requesting such a waiver. This request should
be submitted to the permitting authority before or with
the permit application. The permitting authority may
waive the requirements for information about these pol-
lutants or parameters if he or she determines that less
stringent reporting requirements are adequate to sup-
port issuance of the permit. No extensive documenta-
tion will normally be needed, but the applicant should
contact the permitting authority if she or he wishes to
receive instructions on what his or her particular
request should contain.
Item V-B
Estimates of data on pollutants in Group B must be
reported by all applicants for all outfalls, including out-
falls containing only noncontact cooling water or non-
process wastewater.You are merely required to report
estimates for those pollutants which you know or have
reason to believe will be discharged or which are limited
directly by an effluent limitations guideline (or NSPS) or
indirectly through promulgated limitations on an indica-
tor pollutant. The priority pollutants in Group B are
divided into the following three sections:
1) Metal toxic pollutants, total cyanide, and total
phenols
2) 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-Dioxin (TCDD) (CAS
# 1764-016)
3) Organic Toxic Pollutants (Gas Chromatography/-
Mass Spectrometry Fractions)
a) Volatile compounds
b) Acid compounds
c) Base/neutral compounds
d) Pesticides
For pollutants listed in Sections 1 and 3, you must report
estimates as instructed above.
For Section 2, you are required to report that TCDD may
be discharged if you will use or manufacture one of the
following compounds, or if you know or have reason to
believe that TCDD is or may be present in an effluent:
A 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy acetic acid (2,4,5-T) (CAS #
93-765);
B. 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy) propanoic acid (Silvex,
2,4, 5TP) (CAS # 93-72-I);
C 2-(2,4,5-tnchlorophenoxy) ethyl 2,2-
dichloropropionate (Erbon)(CAS # 136-25-4);
D 0,0-dimethyl 0-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyl) phosphoro-
thioate (Ronnel) (CAS # 299-84-3);
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev. 8-90)
E 2,4,5-tnchlorophenol (TCPMCAS # 95-95-4); or
F. Hexachlorophene (HCP) (CAS # 70-30-4)
Small Business Exemption
If you are a "small business," you are exempt from the
reporting requirement for Item V-B (section 3) You may
qualify as a "small business" if you fit one of the fol-
low-ing definitions:
1) Your expected gross sales will total less than
$100,000 per year for the next three years, or
2) in the case of coal mines, your average production
will be less than 100,000 tons of coal per year
If you are a "small business,"you may submit projected
sales or production figures to qualify for this exemption.
The sales or production figures you submit must be for
the facility which is the source of the discharge. The data
should not be limited only to production or sales for the
process or processes which contribute to the discharge,
unless those are the only processes at your facility For
sales data, where intracorporate transfers of goods and
services are involved, the transfer price per unit should
approximate market prices for those goods and services
as closely as possible. If necessary, you may index your
sales figures to the second quarter of 1980 to demon-
strate your eligibility for a small business exemption.
This may be done by using the gross national product
price deflator (second quarter of 1980 - 100), an index
available in "National Income and Product Accounts of
the United States" (Department of Commerce, Bureau
of Economic Analysis).
The small business exemption applies to the GC/MS
fractions (Section 3) of Item V-B only. Even if you are
eligible for a small business exemption,' you are still
required to provide information on metals, cyanide, total
phenols, and dioxin in Item V-B, as well as all of Items
V-A and C.
Item V-C
List any pollutants in Table 2D-3 that you believe will be
present in any outfalls and briefly explain why you
believe they will be present. No estimate of the pollu-
tant's quantity is required, unless you already have
quantitative data.
Note: The discharge of pollutants listed in Table 2D-4
may subject you to the additional requirements of sec-
tion 311 of the CWA (Oil and Hazardous Substance
Liability). These requirements are not administered
through the NPDES program. However, if you wish an
exemption under 40 CFR 117.12(aX2) from these require-
ments, attach additional sheets of paper to this form
providing the following information:
A. The substance and the amount of each substance
which may be discharged;
1-3
-------
B The origin and source of the discharge of the
substance,
C The treatment which is to be provided for the dis-
charge by
1 An onsite treatment system separate from any
treatment system which will treat your normal
discharge,
2 A treatment system designed to treat your nor-
mal discharge and which is additionally capable
of treating the amount of the substance identi-
fied under paragraph 1 above, or
3 Any combination of the above.
An exemption from the section 311 reporting require-
ments pursuant to 40 CFR Part 117 for pollutants on
Table 20 does not exempt you from the section 402
reporting requirements pursuant to 40 CFR Part 122
(Item V-C) for pollutants listed on Table 20-3.
For further information on exclusions from Section 311,
see 40 CFR Section 117.12(aX2)and(c), or contact your
EPA Regional off ice (Table 1 in the Form 1 instructions).
Item VI-A
If an engineering study was conducted, check the box
labeled "report available " If no study was done, check
the box labeled "no report."
Item VI-B
Report the name and location of any existing plant(s)
which (to the best of your knowledge) resembles your
planned operation with respect to items produced, pro-
duction process, wastewater constituents, or waste-
water treatment. No studies need be conducted to
respond to this item. Only data which are already availa-
ble need be submitted.
This information will be used to inform the permit writer
of appropriate treatment methods and their associated
permit conditions and limits.
Item VII
A space is provided for additional information which you
believe would be useful in setting permit limits, such as
additional sampling. Any response is optional.
Item VIII
The Clean Water Act provides for severe penalties for
submitting false information on this application form.
Section 309(cX2) of the Clean Water Act provides that
"Any person who knowingly makes any false statement,
representation, or certification in any application, . . .
shall upon conviction, be punished by a fine of no more
than $ 10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than six
months, or both."
40 CFR Part 12222 Requires the Certification To Be
Signed as Follows:
A For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer
A responsible corporate officer means (i) a presi-
dent, secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the
corporation in charge of a principal business func-
tion, or any other person who performs similar pol-
icy or decision-making functions for the corporation,
or (ii) the manager of one or more manufacturing,
production or operating facilities employing more
than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or
expenditures exceeding $25,000,000 (in second-
quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents
has been assigned or delegated to the manager in
accordance with corporate procedures
B. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively; or
C. For a municipality, State. Federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official. For purposes of this section,
a principal executive officer of a Federal agency
includes (i) the chief executive officer of the agency,
or (ii) a senior executive officer having responsibility
for the overall operations of a principal geographic
unit of the agency (e.g., Regional Administrators of
EPA).
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev. MO)
1-4
-------
PHYSICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
1
A ....... Ammonia Stripping
B ....... Dialysis
1_C ....... Diatomaceous Earth Filtration
1 _ D ....... Distillation
1 _ £ ....... Electrodialysis
1 _ F ....... Evaporation
1 G ....... Flocculation
1_H ....... Flotation
1 I ........ Foam Fractionation
1 J ....... Freezing
1 K ....... Gas-Phase Separation
1 L ....... Grinding (Comminutorsl
M Grit Removal
N Microstraining
0 Mixing
P Moving Bed Filters
Q Multimedia Filtration
R ...
1S ...
1 T ...
1 U ...
1V ...
1W Solvent Extraction
1X Sorption
.Rapid Sand Filtration
. Reverse Osmosis (Hyperfiltration)
.Screening
. Sedimentation (Settling)
.Slow Sand Filtration
CHEMICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
2A Carbon Adsorption
2B Chemical Oxidation
2C Chemical Precipitation
2D Coagulation
2E Dechlorination
2F Disinfection (Chlorine)
2G Disinfection (Ozone)
2H Disinfection (Other)
2I Electrochemical Treatment
2J Ion Exchange
2K Neutralization
2L Reduction
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
3A Activated Sludge
3B Aerated Lagoons
3C Anaerobic Treatment
3D Nitrification-Denitrification
3E Preaeration
3F Spray Irrigation/Land Application
3G Stabilization Ponds
3H Trickling Filtration
OTHER PROCESSES
4A Discharge to Surface Water
4B Ocean Discharge Through Outfall
4C Reuse/Recycle of Treated Effluent
4D Underground Injection
SLUDGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL PROCESSES
5A Aerobic Digestion
5B Anaerobic Digestion
5C Belt Filtration
5D Centrifugation
5-E
5F
5G
5-H
5I.
5-J
5K Freezing
5L Gravity Thickening
.Chemical Conditioning
.Chlorine Treatment
.Composting
.Drying Beds
.Elutriation
.Flotation Thickening
5M Heat Drying
5N Heat Treatment
50 Incineration
5P Land Application
5Q Landfill
5R Pressure Filtration
5S Pyrolysis
5T Sludge Lagoons
5U Vacuum Filtration
5V Vibration
5W Wet Oxidation
Table 2D-1
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
-------
GROUP A
Ammonia (as N)
Temperature (winter)
Temperature (summer)
pH
GROUPB
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Flow
Bromide
Total Residual Chlorine
Color
Fecal Cohform
Fluoride
Nitrate-Nitrite (as N)
Oil and Grease
Phosphorus (as P) Total
Radioactivity
(1) Alpha, Total
(2) Beta, Total
(3) Radium, Total
(4) Radium 226, Total
Section 1
Antimony, Total
Beryllium, Total
Chromium, Total
Lead, Total
Nickel, Total
Silver, Total
Zinc, Total
Phenols, Total
Section 2
2,3,7,8,Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-Dioxin
Section 3
GC/MS FRACTION* VOLATILE COMPOUNDS
Sulfate(as SO4)
Sulfide(asS)
Sulfitefas S03)
Surfactants
Aluminum, Total
Barium, Total
Boron, Total
Cobalt, Total
Iron, Total
Magnesium, Total
Molybdenum, Total
Manganese, Total
Tin, Total
Titanium, Total
Arsenic, Total
Cadmium, Total
Copper, Total
Mercury, Total
Selenium, Total
Thallium, Total
Cyanide, Total
Acrolein
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorodibramomethane
2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether
Dichlorobomomethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
Ethylbenzene
Methyl Chloride
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Toluene
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Acrylonitirle
Bromoform
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chloroform
1,1 -Dichloroethane
1,1 -Dichloroethane
1,3-Dichloropropylene
Methyl Bromide
Methylene chloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Table 2D-2
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev 8-90)
-------
GS/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS
2-Chlorophenol 2,4-Dichlorophenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol 4,6-Dmitro-O-Cresol
2,4-Dinitro-phenol 2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol P-Chloro-M-Cresol
Pentachloropnenol Phenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
GC/MS FRACTION BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS
Acenaphthene Acenaphtylene
Anthracene Benzidine
Benzo (a) Anthracene Benzo (a) Pyrene
3,5-Benzofluoranthene Benzo (ghi) Perylene
Benzo (k) Fluoranthene Bis (2 Chloroethoxy) Methane
Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate 2-Chloronaphthalene
4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether Chrysene
Dibenzo(a, h) Anthracene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene
3,3-Dichlorobenzidine Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate Di-N-Butyl Phthalate
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Di-N-Octyl Phthalate 1,2, Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzen)
Fluoranthene Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Hexachloroethane
Indeno (1,2,3-cd) Pyrem Isophorone
Naphthalene Nitrobenzene
N-Nitro-sodimethylamine N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine
N-Nitro-sodiphenylamine Phenanthrene
Pyrene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES
Aldrin Gamma-BHC
Alpha-BHC Delta-BHC
Beta-BHC Chlordane
4,4' DDT 4,4' DDE
4,4'-DDD Dieldrin
Alpha-Endosulfan Beta-Endosulfan
Endosulfan Sulfate Endrin
Endrin Aldehyde Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide PCS-1242
PCB-1254 PCB-1221
PCB-1232 PCB-1248
PCB-1260 PCB-1016
Toxaphene
"fractions defined in 40 CFR Part 136
Table 2D-2
EPA Form 3510-20 (8-90)
-------
TOXIC POLLUTANTS AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
REQUIRED TO BE IDENTIFIED BY APPLICANTS IF EXPECTED
TO BE PRESENT
TOXIC POLLUTANT
Asbestos
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Aeeltaldehyde
Allyl alcohol
Ally) chloride
Amy) acetate
Aniline
Benzonitnle
Benzyl chloride
Butyl acetate
Butylamme
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Carbon disulfide
Chlorpynfos
Coumpahos
Cresol
Crotonaldehyde
Cyclohexane
2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophinoxyacetic acid)
Diazmon
Dicamba
Dichlobenil
Dichlone
2,2 Diehloropropionic acid
Dichlorvos
Diethyl amine
Dimethyl amine
Dintrobenzene
Diquat
Disulfoton
Diuron
Epichlorohydrin
Ethion
Ethylene diamine
Formaldehyde
Furfural
Guthion
Isoprene
Isopropanolamme dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Kelthane
Kepone
Malathion
Mercaptodimethur
Methoxychlor
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Methyl mercaptan
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Mevinphos
Mexacarbate
Monoethyl amine
Monomethyl amine
Naled
Naphthenic acid
Nitrotoluene
Parathion
Phenolsulfonate
Phosgene
Propargite
Propylene oxide
Pyrethrins
Quinoline
Resorcinol
Strontium
Strychnine
2,4,5-T (2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid)
TOE (Tetrochlorodiphenyl ethane)
2,4,5-TPl2-(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy) propanic acid]
Trichlorofon
Triethanolamine dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Triethylamine
Uranium
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Xylene
Xylenol
Zirconium
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev 8-90)
TABLE 2D-3
-------
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Acetaldehyde
Acetic acid
Acetic anhydride
Acetone cyanohydrm
Acetyl bromide
Acetyl chloride
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Adipic acid
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Alyll chloride
Aluminum sulfate
Ammmonia
Ammonium acetate
Ammonium benzoate
Ammonium bicarbonate
Ammonium bichromate
Ammonium bifluoride
Ammonium bisulfite
Ammonium carbamate
Ammonium carbonate
Ammonium chloride
Ammonium chromate
Ammonium citrate
Ammonium flouroborate
Ammonium fluoride
Ammonium hydroxide
Ammonium oxalate
Ammonium silicofluoride
Ammonium sulfamate
Ammonium sulfide
Ammonium sulfite
Ammonium tartrate
Ammonium thiocyanate
Ammonium thiosulfate
Amyl acetate
Aniline
Antimony pentachloride
Antimony potassium tartrate
Antimony tribromide
Antimony trichloride
Antimony trifluoride
Antimony trioxide
Arsenic disulfide
Arsenic trichloride
Arsenic trioxide
Arsenic trisulfide
Barium cyanide
Benzene
Benzoic acid
Benzonitnte
Benzoyl chloride
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium chloride
Beryllium fluoride
Beryllium nitrate
Butylacetate
n-Butylphthalate
Butylamine
Butyric acid
Cadmium acetate
Cadmium bromide
Cadmium chloride
Calcium arsenate
Calcium arsenite
Calcium carbide
Calcium chromate
Calcium cyanide
Calcium dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Calcium hypochlorite
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chlorine
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Chloropyrifos
Chlorosulfonic acid
Chromic acetate
Chromic acid
Chromic sulfate
Chromous chloride
Cobaltous bromide
Cobaltous formate
Cobaltous sulfamate
Coumaphos
Cresol
Crotonaldehyde
Cupric acetate
Cupric acetoarsenite
Cupric chloride
Cupric nitrate
Cupric oxalate
Cupric sulfate
Cupric sulfate ammoniated
Cupric tartrate
Cyanogen chloride
Cyclohexane
2,4-D acid
(2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid)
2,4-D esters
(2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
esters)
DDT
Diazinon
Dicamba
Dichlobenil
Dichlone
Dichlorobenzene
Dichloropropane
Dichloropropene
Dichloropropene-Dichloropropane
mix
2.2-Dichloropropionic acid
Dichlorvos
Dieldrm
Diethylamine
Dimethylamine
Dinitrobenzene
Dinitrophenol
Dinitrotoluene
Diquat
Disulfoton
Diuron
Dodecylbenzesulfonic acid
Endosulfan
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Ethion
Ethylbenzene
Ethylenediamme
Ethylene dibromide
Ethylene dichloride
Ethylene diaminetetracetic
acid (EDTA)
Ferric ammonium citrate
Ferric ammonium exalate
Ferric chloride
Ferric fluoride
Ferric nitrate
Ferric sulfate
Ferrous chloride
Ferrous sulfate
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Fumaric acid
Furfural
Guthion
Heptachlor
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hydrochloric acid
Hydrofluoric acid
Hydrogen cyanide
Hydrogen sulfide
Isoprene
Isopropanolamine
dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Kelthane
Kepone
Lead acetate
Lead arsenate
Lead chloride
Lead fluoborate
Lead fluorite
Lead iodide
Lead nitrate
Lead stearate
Lead sulfate
Lead sulfide
Lead thiocyanate
Lindane
Lithium chromate
Malathion
EPA Form 3510-20 (8-90)
TABLE 2D-4
-------
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES (Continued)
Maleic acid
Maleic anhydride
Mercaptodimethur
Mercuric cyanide
Mercuric nitrate
Mercuric sulfate
Mercuric thiocyanate
Mercurous nitrate
Methoxychlor
Methyl mercaptan
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Mevmphos
Mexacarbate
Monoethylamme
Monomethylamme
Naled
Naphthalene
Naphthenic acid
Nickel ammonium sulfate
Nickel chloride
Nickel hydroxide
Nickel nitrate
Nickel sulfate
Nitric acid
Nitrobenezene
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrophenil
Nitrotoluene
Paraformaldehyde
Parathion
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phosoene
Phosphoric acid
Phosphorus
Phosphorus oxychlonde
Phosphorus pentasulfide
Phosphorus trichloride
Polychlormated biphenyls (PCB)
Potassium arsenate
Potassium arsenite
Potassium bichromate
Potassium cyanide
Potassium hydroxide
Potassium permanganate
Propargite
Propionic acid
Propionic anhydride
Propylene oxide
Pyrethnns
Qumolme
Resorcinol
Selenium oxide
Silver nitrate
Sodium
Sodium arsenate
Sodium arsenite
Sodium bichromate
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev 8-90)
Sodium bifluonde
Sodium bisulfite
Sodium chromate
Sodium cyanide
Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Sodium fluoride
Sodium hydrosulfide
Sodium hydroxide
Sodium hypochlorite
Sodium methylate
Sodium nitrate
Sodium phospate (dibasic)
Sodium phosphate (tribasic)
Sodium selenite
Strontium chromate
Strychnine
Styrene
Sulfuric acid
Sulfur monochlonde
2,4,5-T acid
{2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
acetic acid)
2,4,5-Tamines
(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
acetic acid amines)
2,4,5-T esters
(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
acetic acid esters)
2,4,5-T salts
(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy acetic
acid salts)
2,4,5-TP acid
(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
propanoic acid)
2,4,5-TP acid esters
(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy
propanoic acid esters)
TDE (Tetrachlorodiphenyl ethane)
Tetraethyl lead
Tetraethyl pyrophosphate
Thallium sulfate
Toluene
Toxaphene
Trichlorofon
Trichloroethylene
Trichlorophenol
Triethanolamine
dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Triethylamine
Trimethylamine
Uranyl acetate
Uranyl nitrate
Vanadium pentoxide
Vanadyl sulfate
Vinyl acetate
Vinylidene chloride
Xylene
Xylenol
Zinc acetate
Table 2D-4
Zinc ammonium chloride
Zinc borate
Zinc bromide
Zinc carbonate
Zinc chloride
Zinc cyanide
Zinc fluoride
Zinc formate
Zinc hydrosulfite
Zinc nitrate
Zinc phenolsulfonate
Zinc phosphide
Zinc silicofluonde
Zinc sulfate
Zirconium nitrate
Zirconium potassium fluoride
Zirconium sulfate
Zirconium tetrachloride
-------
LINE DRAWING
BLUE RIVER
1 90.000 GPD
MUNICIPAL
WATER SUPPLY
RAW
MATERIALS
10,000 GPD
SOLID WASTE
BLUE RIVER
10,000 GPD
COOLING WATER
4,000 GPO
MAX: 20,000 GPD
OUTFALL 002
50.000 GPO
70,000 GPD + STORMWATER
OUTFALL 001
SCHEMATIC OF WATf R PLOW
ROWN MILLS. INC
CITY. COUNTY. STATi
TO PRODUCT
5.000 GPD
TO ATMOSPHISf
5,000 GPD
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
Figure 2D-1
-------
Form Approved OMB No 20400086 Approval Expires 5,31/92
EPA ID NumbiM ,-, :,;/>y fnnn Item ! ,;/ Futiii 1 1
Please lype or pnni IP Hie unshaded areas only
2D ** c DA New Sources and New Dischargers
NPOES Ot PA Application for Permit to Discharge Process Wastewater
. Outfall Location
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^M
For each outfall, list the latitude and longitude and the name of. the receiving water
Outfall Number
Ilistl
Latitude Longitude Receiv ng Water tnamt'i
Deg Mm Sec Oeg Mm Sec '
^
i . . , _ ; -
1 Discharge Date IWhen do you expect 10 begin discharging?!
II. Flows. Sources of Pollution, and Treatment Technologies |
- --
- -- - -
-
^^^H
A For each outfall, provide a description of (1 ) All operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, including
process wastewater, sanitary wastewater, cooling water, and stormwater runoff; (2) The average flow contrib-
uted by each operation, and (3) The treatment received by the wastewater. Continue on additional sheets
if necessary
Outfall
Number
1 Operations Contributing Flow 2 Average Flow
(list) j (include units)
3 Treatment
^Description or List Codes from Table 2D 1 1
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
Page 1 ol 5
-------
B Atlach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility Indicate sources of intake water,
operations contributing v.jbtewater to the effluent, and treatment units labeled to correspond to the more
detailed descriptions in Item III-A. Construct a water balance on the line drawing by showing average flows
between intakes, operations, treatment units, and outfalls. If a water balance cannot bedetermined{e.g.,for
certain mining activities), provide a pictorial description of the nature and amount of any sources of water and
any collection or treatment measures.
C Except for storm runoff, leaks, or spills, will any of the discharges
seasonal?
1 1 Yes (complete the /allowing table! 1 1 No (go to item IV)
Outfall
Number
IV. Production
~mmm
1 Frequency
a Days
Per Week
(specify
average!
mmmm
b Months
Per Year
(specify
average!
M^
described in item III-A be intermittent or
a Maximum
Daily Flow
Rate
(in mgdl
M^M
2 Flow
b Maximum
Total Volume
(specify
with units!
__
c Duration
(in dayst
_
If there ts an applicable production-based effluent guideline or NSPS, for each outfall list the estimated level of production (projection of
actual production level, not design), expressed in the terms and units used m the applicable effluent guideline or NSPS, for each of the
first 3 years of operation If production is likely to vary, you may also submit alternative estimates (attach a separate sheet}
Year
a Quantity
Per Day
b Unnsol
Measure
c Operation. Product Material, etc (specify!
EPA
3510 20 (Rev 8-90'
Page 2 o« 5
CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE
-------
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
V. Effluent Characteristics ^^^^^^J
EPA ID Number (copy from Hem 1 of Form 1 / Oulfail Number
^1 HH^^^^H
A, and B: These items require you to report estimated amounts (both concentration and mass) of the pollutants to
be discharged from each of your outfalls. Each part of this item addresses a different set of pollutants and should
be completed in accordance with the specific instructions for that part. Data for each outfall should be on a
separate page. Attach additional sheets of paper if necessary
General Instructions (See table 2D-2 for Pollutants)
Each part of this item requests you to provide an estimated daily maximum and average for certain pollutants and
the source of information. Data for all pollutants in Group A, for a II outfalls, must be submitted unless waived by
the permitting authority. For all outfalls, data for pollutants in Group B should be reported only for pollutants
which you believe will be present or are limited directly by an effluent limitations guideline or NSPS or indirectly
through limitations on an indicator pollutant.
1 Pollutant
2 Maximum
Daily
Value
(include units/
3 Average
Daily
Value
/include unitsl
4 Source (see instructionsl
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev. 8-90)
Page 3 of 5
CONTINUE ON REVERSE
-------
CONTINUED FROM THE
ID Vn>'b.>r r(,i>/iv /Finn it,'
Use the space below to list any of the pollutants listed in Table 2D-3 of the instructions which you know or have
reason to believe will be discharged from any outfall For every pollutant you list, briefly describe the reasons you
believe it will be present.
1 Poiiutam
2 Reason for Discharge
\fl. Engineering Report on W»«tew«ter Traatmant
A. If there is any technical evaluation concerning your wastewaier treatment, including engineering reports or pilot plant studies, check the
appropriate box below
I I Report Available I I No Report
Provide the name and location of any existing plant(s) which, to the best of your knowledge, resembles this
production facility with respect to production processes, wastewater constituents, or wastewater treatments
Name
Location
EPA Form 3S10-2D (Rev. 8-90}
Page 4 of 5
CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE
-------
i/ll. Other Information (Optional)
Use the space below to expand upon any of the above questions or to bring to the attention of the reviewer any
other information you feel should be considered in establishing permit limitations for the proposed facility.
Attach additional sheets if necessary.
/ certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is. to the best of my
knowledge and belief. true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name and Official Title (type or print)
B Phone No
C Signature
0 Date Signed
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
Page 5 of 5
-------
Form Approved OMB No 20400086 Approval Expires 5/31/92
EPA ID Number (copy front Item / of form It
leas^ ivpe Of print r. ihe unshaded areas oni\
2D A C DA New Sources and New Dischargers
NPDES Ot KA Application for Permit to Discharge Process Wastewater
. Outfall Location
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^i^**^^^
For each outfall, list the latitude and longitude, and the name of the receiving water
Outfall Number
Hist)
Latitude Longitude j Receiving Water /name)
Deg Mmj Sec Deg ' Mm Sec
! i
. ! 1
i
i i i
\. Discharge Date (When do you expect to begin discharging'/
III. Flows. Sources of Pollution, and Treatment Technologies |
A. For each outfall, provide a description of (1 ) All operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, including
process wastewater, sanitary wastewater, cooling water, and stormwater runoff; (2) The average flow contrib-
uted by each operation; and (3) The treatment received by the wastewater. Continue on additional sheets
if necessary
Outfall
Number
1 Operations Contributing Flow
(list)
2. Average Flow
(include units)
3 Treatment
(Description or List Codes from Table 2D-1)
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
Page 1 of 5
-------
B Attach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility Indicate sources of intake water,
operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, and treatment units labeled to correspond to the more
detailed descriptions in Item III-A Construct a water balance on the line drawing by showing average flows
between intakes, operations, treatment units, and outfalls If a water balance cannot bedetermmed(e g , for
certain mining activities), provide a pictorial description of the nature and amount of any sources of water and
any collection or treatment measures
C. Except for storm runoff, leaks, or spills, will any of the discharges described in item III-A be intermittent or
seasonal?
1 1 Yes (complete the following tablet I I No (go to item IV)
Outfall
Number
IV. Production ^^^^|
^MH
1 Frequency
a Days
Per Week
(specify
average!
^M
b Months
Per Year
(specify
average)
2 Flow
a Maximum
Daily Flow
Rate
(in mgd)
^H
b Maximum
Total Volume
(specify
with units)
MM
c Duration
(in days/
\
If there is an applicable production-based effluent guideline or NSPS, for each outfall list the estimated level of production (projection of
actual production level, not design), expressed in the terms and units used in the applicable effluent guideline or NSPS. for each of the
first 3 years of operation. If production is likely to vary, you may also submit alternative estimates (attach a separate sheet)
a Quantity
Year Per Day
b Units of
Measure
c Operation. Product Material, etc /specify/
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev 8-90)
Page 2 of 5
CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE
-------
CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
V. Effluent ChiractBristict ^^^^HH^I
I EPA ID Number icopy from Hem 1 of form !/ 1 Outfall Number 1
^MHjj^BMM^M^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^I
A, and B: These items require you to report estimated amounts (both concentration and mass) of the pollutants to
be discharged from each of your outfalls. Each part of this item addresses a different set of pollutants and should
be completed in accordance with the specific instructions for that part. Data for each outfall should be on a
separate page. Attach additional sheets of paper if necessary.
General Instructions (See table 2D-2 for Pollutants)
Each part of this item requests you to provide an estimated daily maximum and average for certain pollutants and
the source of information. Data for all pollutants in Group A, for all outfalls, must be submitted unless waived by
the permitting authority. For all outfalls, data for pollutants in Group B should be reported only for pollutants
which you believe will be present or are limited directly by an effluent limitations guideline or NSPS or indirectly
through limitations on an indicator pollutant.
1 . Pollutant
2 Maximum
Daily
Value
(include units/
3 Average
Daily
Value
(include units!
4. Source {see instructionsl
EPA Pom 3510-2D (Rev. 8-90)
Page 3 of &
CONTINUE ON REVERSE
-------
ONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
EPA ID Number /copy from Item 1 ol Form 11
Use the space below to list any of the pollutants listed in Table 2D-3 of the instructions which you know or have
reason to believe will be discharged from any outfall For every pollutant you list, briefly describe the reasons you
believe it will be present.
Pollutant
2 Reason for Discharge
VI. Engineering Report on Waitewatar Treatment
If there is any technical evaluation concerning your wastewater treatment, including engineering reports or pilot plant studies, check the
appropriate box below
II Report Available II No Report
Provide the name and location of any existing plant(s) which, to the best of your knowledge, resembles this
production facility with respect to production processes, wastewater constituents, or wastewater treatments
Name
Location
EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev 8-90)
Page 4 of 5
CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE
-------
rll. Other Information {Optional)
Use the space below to expand upon any of the above questions or to bring to the attention of the reviewer any
other information you feel should be considered in establishing permit limitations for the proposed facility
Attach additional sheets if necessary
/ certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is. to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
A. Name and Official Title {type or print)
B Phone No
C. Signature
D Date Signed
EPA Form 3510-20 (Rev. 8-90)
Government Printing utti
281-724/28466
Page 5 of b
-------
APPENDIXES FORM2E
81
-------
United States Office of Water EPA Form 3510-2E
Environmental Protection Enforcement and Permits Revised August 1990
Agency Washington, DC 20460
Permit* Division ^________
<&EPA Application Form 2E
Facilities Which Do Not
Discharge Process
Wastewater
-------
Who Mu«t File Form 2E
EPA Form 3510-2E must be completed in conjunction
with EPA Form 3510-1 (Form 1). This short form may be
used only by operators of facilities which discharge only
nonprocess wastewater (process wastewater is water
that comes into direct contact with or results from the
production or use of any raw material, intermediate
product, finished product, byproduct, waste product, or
wastewater) which is not regulated by effluent limita-
tions guidelines or new source performance standards.
The form is intended primarily for use by dischargers
(new or existing) of sanitary wastes and noncontact
cooling water. It may not be used for discharges of
stormwater runoff or by educational, medical, or com-
mercial chemical laboratories or by publicly owned
treatment works (POTW's).
Where to File Applications
The application forms should be sent to the EPA
Regional Office which covers the State in which the
facility is located. Form 2E (the short form) must be used
only when applying for permits in States where the
NPDES permits program is administered by EPA. For
facilities located in States which are approved to admin-
ister the NPDES permits program, the State environ-
mental agency should be contacted for proper permit
application forms and instructions. Information on whe-
ther a particular program is administered by EPA or by a
State agency can be obtained from your EPA Regional
Office. Form 1, Table 1 of the "General Instructions"
lists the addresses of EPA Regional Offices and the
States within the jurisdiction of each Office.
Public Availability of Submitted Information
You may not claim as confidential any information
required by this form or Form 1, whetherthe information
is reported on the forms or in an attachment. Section
402(j) of the CWA requires that all permit applications
shall be available to the public. This information will
therefore be made available to the public upon request.
You may claim as confidential any information you sub-
mit to EPA which goes beyond that required by this form
or Form 1, However, confidentiality claims for effluent
data must be denied. If you do not assert a claim of
confidentiality at the time of submitting the information,
EPA may make the information public without further
notice. Claims of confidentiality will be handled in
accordance with EPA's business confidentiality regula-
tions in 40 CFR Part 2.
Completeness
Your application will not be considered complete unless
you answer every question on this form and Form 1
EPA Form 3510-2E (8-90)
Form 2E Instructions
(except as instructed below). If an item does not apply to
you, enter "NA" (for "not applicable") to show that you
considered the question.
Followup Requirements for New Dischargers and
New Sources
Please note that no later than 2 years after commence-
ment of discharge from the proposed facility, you must
complete and submit Item IV of this form (NPDES Form
2E). At that time you must test and report actual rather
than estimated data for the pollutants or parameters in
item IV, unless waived by the permitting authority.
Definitions
Significant terms used in these instructions and in the
form are defined in the Glossary found in the General
Instructions accompanying Form 1.
Item I
Under Part A, list an outfall number. Under Part B, list
the latitude and longitude to the nearest 15 seconds for
this outfall. Under Part C, list the name of the outfall's
receiving water. When there is more than one outfall,
you must submit a separate Form 2E (Items I, III, and IV
only) for each outfall.
Item II (New Dischargers Only)
This item requires your best estimate of the date on
which your facility will begin to discharge.
Item III
In Part A, indicate the general type(s) of wastes to be
discharged by placing an "x" in the appropriate box(es).
If "other nonprocess wastewater" is marked, it should
be identified. If cooling water additives are to be used,
they must be listed by name under Part B.
In addition, the composition of the cooling water addi-
tives should be listed if this information is available. The
composition of cooling water additives may be found on
product labels or from manufacturer's data sheets.
Item IV Reporting
All pollutant levels must be reported as concentration
and as total mass (except for discharge flow, pH, and
temperature). Total mass is the total weight of pollutants
discharged over a day. Use the following abbreviations
for units;
Concentration
parts per million
milligrams per liter
parts per billion
Mm
Ibs
ton
mg
pom
mg/1
ppb
Ug/1 micrograms per liter g
kg kilograms T
A. Existing Sources
You are required to provide at least one analysis for each
pollutant or parameter listed by filling in the requested infor-
pounds
tons (English tons)
milligrams
grams
Tonnes (metric tons)
1-1
-------
mation under the applicable column. Data reported
must be representative of the facility's current operation
(average daily value over the previous 365 days should
be reported). Most facilities routinely monitor these pol-
lutants or parameters as part of existing permit require-
ments.
The pollutants or parameters listed are: average flow,
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended sol-
ids (TSS), fecal coliform (if believed present or if sanitary
waste is discharged), pH, total residual chlorine (if chlo-
rine is used), temperature (winter and summer), oil and
grease, chemical oxygen demand (COD), total organic
carbon (TOC) (COD and TOC are only required if noncon-
tact cooling water is discharged), and ammonia (as N).
The analysis of these pollutants or parameters must be
done in accordance with procedures promulgated in 40
CFR Part 136. Grab samples must be used for pH,
temperature, residual chlorine, oil and grease, and fecal
coliform. For all other pollutants, 24-hour composite
samples must be used. Any further questions on sam-
pling or analysis should be directed to your EPA or State
permitting authority. The authority may request that you
do additional testing, if appropriate, on a case-by-case
basis under Section 308 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
If you expect a pollutant to be present solely as a result of
its presence in your intake water, state this information
on Item VII of the form.
B. New Dischargers
You are required to provide an estimated maximum daily
and average daily value for each pollutant or parameter
(exceptions noted on the form). Please note that fol-
lowup testing and reporting are required no later than 2
years after the facility starts to discharge. Sampling and
analysis are not required at this time. If, how-
ever, data from such analyses are available, then such
data should be reported. The source of the estimates is
also required. Base your determination of whether a
pollutant will be present in your discharge on your
knowledge of the proposed facility's use of maintenance
chemicals, and any analyses of your effluent or of any
similar effluent. You may also provide the estimates
based on available inhouse or contractor's engineering
reports or any other studies performed on the proposed
facility. If you expect a pollutant or parameter to be
present solely as a result of its presence in your intake
water, state this information on Item VII of the form.
In providing the estimates, use the codes in the follow-
ing table to indicate the source of such information.
Engineering study Code
Actual data from pilot plants 1
Estimates from other engineering studies 2
Data from other similar plants 3
Best professional estimates 4
Others specify on the form
C. Testing Waivers
To request a waiver from reporting any of these pollu-
tants or parameters, the applicant (whether a new or
existing discharger) must submit to the permitting
authority a written request specifying which pollutants
or parameters should be waived and the reasons for
requesting a waiver. This request should be submitted
to the permitting authority before or with the permit
application. The permitting authority may waive the
requirements for information about any pollutant or
parameter if he determines that less stringent reporting
requirements are adequate to support issuance of the
permit. No extensive documentation of the request will
normally be needed, but the applicant should contact
the permitting authority if he or she wishes to receive
instructions on what his or her particular request should
contain.
ItemV
Describe the average frequency of flow and duration of
any intermittent or seasonal discharge (except for storm-
water runoff, leaks, or spills). The frequency of flow
means the number of days or months per year there is
intermittent discharge. Duration means the number of
days or hours per discharge. For new dischargers, base
your answers on your best estimate.
Item VI
Describe briefly any treatment system(s) used (or to be
used for new dischargers), indicating whether the
treatment system is physical, chemical, biological, sludge
and disposal, or other. Also give the particular type(s) of
processes) used (or to be used). For example, if a physi-
cal treatment system is used (or will be used), specify the
processes applied, such as grit removal, ammonia strip-
ping, dialysis, etc.
hem VII
This item is intended for you to provide any additional
information (such as sampling results) that you feel
should be considered by the reviewer in establishing
permit limitations. Any response here is optional. If you
wish to demonstrate your eligibility for a "net" effluent
limitation, i.e., an effluent limitation adjusted to provide
credit for the pollutants) present in your intake water,
please add a short statement of why you believe you are
eligible (see §122.45(g)). You will then be contacted by
the permitting authority for further instructions.
Item VIII
The Clean Water Act provides severe penalties for sub-
mitting false information on this application form. Sec-
tion 309(cH2) of the Clean Water Act provides that "Any
person who knowingly makes any false statement.
EPA Form 3S10-2E (8-90)
I-2
-------
representation, or certification in any application, .. .
nail upon conviction, be punished by a fine of no more
than * 10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than six
months or both."
40 CFR Part 122.22 requires the certification to be
signed as follows:
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.
A responsible corporate officer means (i) a presi-
dent, secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the
corporation in charge of of a principal business func-
tion, or any other person who performs similar pol-
icy or decisionmaking functions for the corporation,
or (ii) the manager of one or more manufacturing,
production, or operating facilities employing more
than 250 persons or having gross annual sales or
expenditures exceeding $25,000,000 (in second
quarter 1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents
has been assigned or delegated to the manager in
accordance with corporate procedures.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general
partner or the proprietor, respectively; or
c. For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public
agency: by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official. For purposes of this section,
a principal executive officer of a Federal agency
includes (i) the chief executive officer of the agency,
or (ii} a senior executive officer having responsibility
for the overall operations of a principal geographic
unit of the agency (e.g., Regional Administrators of
EPA).
i-3
EPA Form 3S10-2E (»-»0)
-------
Please type or prim in the unshaded areas only
EPA ID Number (copy from Item 1 of form
Form Approved. OMB No. 2040-0086
Approval expire* 5-31-92.
Form
2E
NPOES
oEPA Facilities Which Do Not Discharge Process Wastewater
I. Receiving Waters
For this outfall, list the latitude and longitude, and name of the receiving waters).
Outfall
Number (list!
Latitude
Dog Mm Sec
Longitude
Pep Min Sec
Receiving Water {name)
II, Discharge Date (II a new discharger, the date you expect to begin discharging!
III. Type of Waste
A. Check the t>ox(es) Indicating the general typ«
(*>
Number of
Measurements
Takan
fltftyeer}
Source of
Estimate
fifrmw
ditchargfr)
Biocrwmicsl Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Fecal Coliform til b«liev«d
prestnt or if stnttfry wttte is
discharged)
Total Retiduel Chlorine (if
chlorine is usadl
Oil and Gre«*e
*Chamieal oxygen demand
H Ignt r»nge)
Value
fampef alure (Winter)
emperature (Summer)
'If nonconiaci cooling water is discharged
EPA Form 3S10-2E (8-90)
Page 1 o* 2
-------
I/. Except for leaks or spills, will the discharge described in this form be intermittent or seasonal?
If yes, briefly describe the frequency of flow and duration.
D
No
System (Dewto briefty My troitrnefM SY*t*fn(*) ill*! or to be used}
. Other Information I
Use the space be tow to expend upon any of th* bow questions or to bring to the attention of the reviewer any otf»er Inter
should be considered in establishing permit limitations. Attach additional sheets, if i
tattoo you fee!
I certify urxtopen^ of tow trMthit document »nd »if Mttchi
m^^ Beted on my inquiry of the
pa^MM vpevions M^ inatfia^ trte sysf am, or irVaM^avvovw dHncc^
/* to the awat of my Itnowftdg* indbtlicf. true, accurate undcompto*. I am aw*nt thtt r/wr« ar* tignifiemtttp»n»ltifg for submitting /*/«
information, including th» pottibiHtY of fin« and imprisonment for knowing viotttion*. _
A. Name A Official Title
B. Phone No. (area code
& no.)
C. Signature
0. Date Signed
EPA Form 3510-2E (1*90)
Page 2 of 2
-------
Form Approved OMB No. 2040-0086
EPA ID Number (copy from Item 1 of Form 1 >
Approval expires 5-31-92
AEPA Facilities Which Do Not Discharge Process Wastewater
For thto outfall liat the latitude and longitude, and name of the receiving water(s)
Discharge Date (W new discharger, the date you expect to begin discharging)
DOttier Nonprocess
Wastewater (Mfntifyl
If any cooling water additives are used, list them here. Briefly describe their composition if this information is available
1..-. Jal... _. - ^
wWffity^MW aflMrlACeMfffMyt
MV DHMMM^pW ~ l^POWIto 9KIIMNMI V0T «l)tt pMTWIMMNV «Kt90 If) tH0 Mft~fH
Jwrity. Instead of «M number of mecewwnema taken, provide the source of «t
MMamor
SSnetalaW"'*"
Ten Suspends* SoUda (T8«
«mMM rttunHurr wen* *
«%cn»«MO
To»IBislnip
Source of
Estimate
(if new
discharger)
*M noncontacl cooling water is discharged
EPA Form 3510-2E (8-90)
Page 1 of 2
-------
. Except for leaks or spills, will the discharge described in this form be interrnittent or seasonal?
If yes, briefly describe the frequency of flow and duration.
Ye*
D
No
VI. Treatment System (Describe briefly any treatment systemfs) toed of to to i
VII. Other Information (Optional)
Use the space below to expand upon any of the above questions or to bring to the attention of the reviewer any other information you feel
should be considered in establishing permit limitations. Attach additional sheets, tf neceesary.
VIII. Certification
I certify under penatty of law that thiso\>cwnenterrteJlanechmerHswerepreperedurKfo*my direction or s
a system designed to assure that qualified personnel property gather andeveluate the information submitted. Bated on my inquiry of the
person or persons who manege the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted
is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. Iam aware that there are significantpenalties for submittingfalsa
information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
A. Name & Official Title
B. Phone No. (area code
& no.)
C Signature
D. Date Signed
EPA Form 3510-2E (8-90)
WS. GOVERNMENT PRNTINQOFFCe: 1801517-003/47028
Page 2 of 2
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA/451-K-97-001
May 1997
f\
EPA Regional Approaches to
Improving Air Quality
-------
AlR POLLUTION CAN
BE TRANSPORTED
HUNDREDS OF MILES
DOWNWIND FROM
ITS ORIGIN.
SINCE AIR POLLUTANTS
DO NOT RECOGNIZE
POLITICAL BOUNDARIES,
STATES AND COMMUNITIES
CANNOT INDEPENDENTLY
SOLVE ALL OF THEIR AIR
POLLUTION PROBLEMS.
20
12
This model of a July 1991 ozone episode shows how far
downwind emissions originating from industrial and mobile
sources in the boxed area can be transported.
N T R O D U C T
O N
Each indivfjual breathes nearly 13,000 liters
(approximately 3,400 gallons) of air every day.
Yet the air is being polluted by human
activities like driving cars, burning fossil fuels,
and manufacturing chemicals, and natural
events such as forest fires. These add gases and
particles to the air we breathe and, in high
enough concentrations, can have harmful
effects on people and the environment. Many
air pollutants such as those that form urban
smog, acid rain, and some toxic compounds
remain in the environment for long periods of
time and can be transported great distances
from their origin.
The struggle for clean air is almost as old as
industrialized society. In 1661, John Evelyn
and John Graunt of England each published
studies associating negative health effects
with industrial air emissions. Both researchers
described the transport of pollutants between
England and France and suggested protecting
human health by locating industrial facilities
outside of towns and using taller smokestacks
to spread "smoke" into "distant parts."
Research continues to show that air pollution
can be carried hundreds of miles from its
source and can cause health and
environmental problems on a regional or
even global scale. In people, air pollution can
cause burning eyes, irritated throats, difficulty
with breathing, long-term damage to the
respiratory and reproductive systems, cancer,
and, in extreme cases, death. Trees, lakes,
crops, buildings, and statues can be damaged
by air pollution. Air pollutants also cause
haze, impairing visibility in cities, national
parks, and other scenic areas.
Under the Clean Air Act, passed by Congress
in 1970 and recently amended in 1990, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) sets and enforces air pollutant limits
on sources such as power plants and industrial
facilities to help protect against harmful
health and environmental effects. Although
the Clean Air Act is a Federal law, state
and local agencies are responsible for
implementing many of its requirements.
Specific air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide
(SO,), particulate matter, ground-level ozone,
and the emissions that form these pollutants
can travel great distances from their sources.
Since air pollutants do not recognize political
boundaries, states and communities cannot
independently solve all of their air pollution
problems. Resolving air pollution control
issues often requires state and local
governments to work together to reduce air
emissions. The Clean Air Act established
groups such as the Ozone Transport
Commission in the northeastern U.S. and
the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission in the western U.S. to develop
regional strategies to address and control air
pollution. Many other such groups have also
been formed to address the regional transport
of air pollutants.
This brochure describes selected air pollutants
of regional concern in the U.S. and
summarizes ongoing efforts to control them.
1
-------
ROUND-LEVEL OZONE
Ozone that occurs naturally in the upper
atmosphere surrounding the Earth provides a
filter for the damaging ultraviolet light emitted
by the Sun. At ground level, ozone is harmful
to living things. Ground-level ozone is an air
pollutant that damages human health,
vegetation, and many common materials. It is
a key ingredient of urban smog.
SOURCES
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly into
the air, but rather is formed by gases called
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC), which in the presence of
heat and sunlight, react to form ozone. Ground-
level ozone forms readily in the atmosphere,
usually during hot weather. As a result, it is
known as a "summer-time" air pollutant.
Emissions of NOxare produced primarily when
fossil fuels are burned in motor vehicle engines,
power plants, and industrial boilers. There are
hundreds of thousands of sources of VOC
emissions including automobile emissions,
gasoline vapors, chemical solvents, and
consumer products like paints.
HEALTH &
ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
Repeated exposure to ozone pollution for
several months may cause permanent
structural damage to the lungs. Because ozone
pollution usually forms in hot weather,
anyone who spends time outdoors in the
summer is at risk, particularly children,
moderate exercisers, and outdoor workers.
E%'en when inhaled at very low levels,
ground-level ozone triggers a variety of health
problems including aggravated asthma,
reduced lung capacity, and increased
susceptibility to respiratory illnesses like
pneumonia and bronchitis.
Ground-level ozone is also responsible for
1 to 2 billion dollars in reduced crop
production in the U.S. each year. Because
ground-level ozone interferes with the ability
of plants to produce and store food, they are
more susceptible to disease, insects, other
pollutants, and harsh weather. Ozone also
damages the foliage of trees and other plants,
ruining the appearance of cities, national
parks, and recreation areas.
REGIONAL
TRANSPORT
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA has set
acceptable levels, called National Ambient
Air Quality Standards, for ozone in the air we
breathe. Some parts of the U.S. are currently-
unable to meet these standards. These areas
are described as "nonattainrnent" areas. Tens
of millions of Americans live in ozone
"nonattainrnent" areas, primarily in parts of
the Northeast, Lake Michigan area, Atlanta,
southeastern Texas, and parts of California.
Many of these nonattainrnent areas have
focused a great deal of effort on reducing VOC
and, in some cases, NOX emissions from
stationary (factories) and mobile (vehicles)
sources within their jurisdictions. In several
cases, emission controls are not producing the
reductions in ground-level concentrations
of ozone needed to meet the national
health standard.
+ NO, + Heat: 4= =
A. 4w'
According to this simplified equation, volatile organic compounds and oxides
of nitrogen react, in the presence of heat and sunlight, to form oione.
-------
Ozone "precursors," such as NOX emissions, as
well as ozone itself, can he carried hundreds of
miles from their origins, causing air pollution
over wide regions. Although many urban areas
have made efforts to control ozone by reducing
local NOX and VOC emissions, incoming
ozone transported from upwind areas also
needs to be addressed in order to meet the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
High levels of ozone entering some
nonattainment areas can make achieving the
national ozone standard difficult and costly,
unless upwind sources are identified and
controlled. If these sources fall within a certain
state's boundaries, it can take measures to
control them. If, as is often the case, these
sources fall beyond the political boundaries of
that state, it must work with EPA and other
states to reduce air pollution on a regional
scale. Often, it is more cost-effective to reduce
emissions from upwind sources than to control
emissions from smaller and smaller businesses
in the nonattainment areas being affected
downwind.
Some regional strategies for reducing ground-
level ozone include:
@ reducing NOX emissions from power
plants and industrial combustion
introducing low-emission cars
and trucks
burning gasoline reformulated to
reduce VOC, NOX, and other
.2 0.15
« 0.10
8. 0.05
o>
P n
50
100 150
Distance (miles)
200
250
Industrial/Urban Area
Rural
Urban
Downwind/Rural
Ozone, VOC, and A/0, air emissions from upwind industrial/urban areas contribute to ozone concentrations hundreds of
miles downwind in rural and other urban areas. When combined with local air emissions, regionally transported ozone
causes some areas to exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) lor ozone.
GROUND-LEVEL OZONE is
ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR
1 TO 2 BILLION DOLLARS
IN REDUCED CROP
PRODUCTION IN THE U.S.
EACH YEAR. BECAUSE
GROUND-LEVEL OZONE
INTERFERES WITH THE
ABILITY OF PLANTS TO
PRODUCE AND STORE
FOOD, THEY ARE MORE
SUSCEPTIBLE TO DISEASE,
INSECTS, OTHER
POLLUTANTS, AND
HARSH WEATHER.
-------
ARTICULATE MATTER
EVIDENCE FROM COMMUNITY
STUDIES LINKS PART1CULATE
EXPOSURE TO PREMATURE
DEATH, INCREASED
HOSPITALIZAT1ON, SCHOOL
ABSENCE, AND LOST WORK
DAYS DUE TO RESPIRATORY
AND CARDIOVASCULAR
DISEASES LIKE ASTHMA.
Paniculate matter, which includes solid
particles as well as liquid droplets found in
the air, can be described as "haze." Breathing
paniculate matter can cause serious health
problems, Particulates also reduce visibility
in many parts of the U.S. They can also
accelerate corrosion of metals and damage
paints and building materials such as concrete
and limestone.
SOURCES
Paniculate matter comes from a variety of
sources. Some particles are emitted directly
from their sources such as smokestacks arid cars.
In other cases, gases such as sulfur oxide, SO,,
NOx, and VOC interact with other
compounds in the air to form particulate
matter. As a result, the chemical and physical
composition of particles varies widely. "Coarse"
particles are larger than 2.5 micrometers and
generally come from sources such as vehicles
traveling on unpaved roads, materials handling,
crushing and grinding operations such as
cement manufacturing, and combustion
sources. Particles less than 2,5 micrometers
(0,0004 inch) in diameter are known as "fine"
particles. Fine particles result from fuel
combustion in motor vehicles, power plants and
industrial facilities, residential fireplaces,
woodstove.s wildfires, and prescribed forest
burning. Fine particles can also be formed in
the atmosphere from gases such as SO,, NOX,
and VOC.
HEALTH &
ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
Particulate matter less than 10 micrometers
in size, including fine particles less than 2,5
micrometers, can penetrate deep into the
lungs. On a stnoggy day, one can inhale
millions of particles in a single breath. Tens
of millions of Americans live in areas that
exceed the national health standards for
particulates. In recent studies, exposure to
particulate pollution either alone or with
other air pollutants has been linked with
premature death, difficult breathing,
aggravated asthma, increased hospital
admissions and emergency room visits, and
increased respiratory symptoms in children.
People most at risk from exposure to fine
particulate matter are children, the elderly, and
people with chronic respiratory problems.
Fine particles scatter and absorb light,
creating a haze that limits our ability to see
distant objects. Some particles, such as
sultates and nitrates, grow in size as humidity
fine particle^ j
power plant sulfates f
1 1
! diesel gxhaust t
1 I
tobacco smoke
[ 1
( photochemical smog
t
2.5
coarse particles
1
fly ash
l pollens
I
cement dust
t coal dust
1
l human 1
1 l
1
1
1
I
1
1
\
|
1
lair
l
1
0.01
0.1
1.0
10.0
100.0
This schematic shows the general size range of selected airborne particles in micrometers.
The size range of a human hair is also indicated. (Not dram to standard scale.)
-------
in the air increases, which increases the
amount of haze and reduces visibility. Particle
plumes of smoke, dust, and/or colored gases
that are released to the air can generally be
traced to local sources such as industrial
facilities or agricultural burning. Regional haze
is produced by many widely dispersed sources,
reducing visibility over large areas that may
include several states.
REGIONAL HAZE
Chemical reactions of air pollutants and
weather conditions can create fine particles,
which can remain in the air for several days
and be transported great distances. As a
result, fine particles transported from urban
and industrial areas may contribute
significantly to impaired visibility in places,
such as national parks, valued for their scenic
views and recreational opportunities.
Sources of regional haze vary from region to
region. In the eastern U.S., for example,
sulfates from power plants and other large
industrial sources play a major role. In the
western U.S., nitrates, sulfates, organic matter,
soot, and dust emitted by power plants, motor
vehicles, petroleum and chemical industrial
facilities, wildfires, and forest-management
burning, all contribute to reduced visibility.
Visibility conditions vary across the country.
With a few exceptions, much of the eastern
U.S. has poorer visibility than the western
U.S. because of higher levels of particles from
manmade and natural sources, as well as the
effect of higher humidity levels on those
particles. Visibility in the eastern U.S. should
naturally be about 90 miles, but air pollutants
have reduced this range from 14 to 24 miles.
In the western U.S., visual range should be
approximately 140 miles, while current
conditions limit it to 33 to 90 miles. Visibility
also varies seasonally and is generally worse
during the summer months, when humidity is
higher and the air is stagnant.
The Clean Air Act established special goals
for visibility in some national parks and
wilderness areas. In 1994, EPA began
developing a regional haze program that is
intended to ensure that continued progress is
made toward the national visibility goal of "no
manmade impairment." Such control efforts
would likely result in improved public health
protection and visibility in areas outside
national parks as well.
Examples of regional strategies for reducing
fine particulate levels include:
© reducing paniculate emissions by
conserving energy and promoting
renewable energy sources like solar-
ami wind'powered energy
© controlling SO2 emissions from power
plants and industrial sources
© reducing particulate emissions from
diesel truck and bus exhaust
O reducing controlled burning to manage
undergrowth in forested areas.
EPA's "REGIONAL HAZE"
PROGRAM IS INTENDED
TO ENSURE CONTINUED
PROGRESS IS MADE
TOWARD THE NATIONAL
VISIBILITY GOAL OF
"NO MANMADE
IMPAIRMENT."
Visibility impairment in Acadia National Park, Maine.
-------
C I D
RAIN
Chesapeake Bay
Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuarine
system in the continental U.S. and is home
to more than 2,000 species offish, shellfish,
and wildlife. Increasing levels of nitrogen
compounds in the Bay are harming this
aquatic ecosystem. The influx of higher
than normal amounts of nutrients (e.g.,
nitrogen, phosphorous) allows excessive
growth and reproduction of algae,
eventually changing aquatic systems by
depleting dissolved oxygen and decreasing
light penetration to submerged plants.
Recent research concludes that air pollution
.from power plants is a significant source of
nitrogen in the Chesapeake Bay. Studies
show that 27 percent of the total nitrogen
deposited in the Chesapeake Bay and tidal
tributaries is from transport and deposition of
air pollutants. Similarly, hundreds of other
estuaries such as Pwget Sound, Washington
and Pamlico Sound, North Carolina, are
suffering from effects of excess nitrogen.
The Chesapeake Bay Agreement, a
cooperative action among the U.S. EPA,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and the
District of Columbia, was enacted to reduce
and control pollution sources affecting water
quality in the Bay. Goals of the agreement
are to achieve a 40 percent reduction in
nutrients, such as nitrogen, being input to
the Bay by the year 2000 and to cap those
inputs at 60 percent of 1985 levels. States
participating in the agreement are evaluating
how reductions in NO^ air emissions will
help achieve these goals.
Acid rain is formed when sulfur dioxide
(SO,) and oxides of nitrogen (NOJ are
released into the air. While airborne, SO,
and NO^ gases and particles contribute to
visibility impairment and impact human
health. These gaseous compounds react with
other substances in the atmosphere to form
weak acids and fall to earth as rain, fog, snow,
or dry particles. They cause lakes and streams
to become acidic and unsuitable for many
fish, damage forests, and cause deterioration
of cars, buildings, and historical monuments.
SOURCES
By far, power plants burning coal, oil, and
natural gas are the primary source of SO,
emissions. In the U.S., 70 percent of SO,
emissions come from such plants. Nitrogen
oxides are emitted into the air from cars and
trucks, coal-burning power plants, and
industrial combustion operations such as
boilers and heaters.
REGIONAL
TRANSPORT &
ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
In the past, industrial facilities and power
plants had shorter smokestacks. When air
pollution from these stacks settled in
populated areas near the plants and caused
sickness, stacks were built much higher. At
that time, many believed that if the air
pollutants were sent high into the
atmosphere, they would no longer be a
problem. We now know that emissions
released high in the atmosphere can be
transported great distances. The Ohio River
Valley, where power plants burn high-sulfur
coal, leads the U.S. in emissions of SO, and
NO^. Consequently, areas receiving the most
acid rain are downwind (generally northeast)
of the Ohio River Valley. The ecological
effects of acid rain depend on both the total
amount of acid rain deposited in an area and
its soil characteristics. Some soils, such as
those generally found in most of the Midwest,
contain acid-neutralizing compounds. These
areas can be exposed to years of acid
deposition without experiencing significant
environmental problems. But the thin soils of
the northeastern mountains have very little
acid-buffering ability, making this area, along
with eastern Canada, vulnerable to acid rain
damage. Other areas along the Appalachians,
as well as certain high elevation western
areas, are also sensitive to acid deposition.
Lower pH levels have been found in aquatic
systems of the northeastern U.S., indicating
higher acidity. These conditions can interrupt
reproductive cycles of aquatic plants and
animals. Acid deposition can also filter
through soils, pick up toxic metals as it passes
through, and carry them to lakes and streams,
where they accumulate and affect the aquatic
food chain.
Statue ruined by acid deposition. Photograph courtesy ot
the National Park Service.
-------
I
REDUCING ACID
RAIN
How Acid is Acid Rain?
Vinegar Distilled Water
Lemon Juice "Pure" Rain Baking Soda
Acid Rain ~~ ' ~|
Hie Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
require major reductions in SO, and NOX
emissions and establish a market-based
approach to managing emissions of SOr
Coal-fired electric power plants are the
primary target for reducing these pollutants
in the U.S. Beginning in 1995 (Phase I), EPA
allocated a limited number of "allowances" to
445 electric power plants. These plants can
emit up to one ton of SO, emissions during a
1 -year period for each allowance. Allowances
can be bought, sold, or traded among utilities,
brokers, or others. Utilities must ensure that
their emissions do not exceed the allowances
they hold. Pollution control equipment, the
10 11
12 13
14
use of low-sulfur coal, and implementation
of energy-efficient measures such as home
insulation programs and energy-efficient
lighting are ways power plants can reduce
their SO, emissions. In the year 2000,
Phase II tightens the annual SO, emissions
on the large high-emitting Phase I plants and
sets restrictions on smaller, cleaner plants.
By 2010, EPA's Acid Rain Program and the
utility industry expect to achieve a 10 million
ton teduction from 1980 SO, emission levels.
The Clean Air Act also calls for a 2 million
ton reduction in NOX emissions by the year
2000, a significant portion to be achieved
by installation of controls on coal-fired
utility plants.
in
c 30
o
M
£ 20
w
I 101
OT
"E
LU
Cvj
O
C/3
Although not obvious to the casual observer, many lakes have been affected by acid deposition. Big Rock Lake in the southwestern
Adirondacks of New York State has been by acid rain over the last Fish populations have been severely
impacted. (Source: Adirondack Lakes Survey Corporation Interpretive Report, 1990. Photograph courtesy of the Adirondack Council.;
Utility SO2 Emissions
No A|ad Rain Program
Acid Rain Program
ol
1980
1990
2000
2010
Year
By the year 2010, EPA's Acid Rain Program
is expected to reduce S02emissions
10 million tons from 1980 levels.
-------
OXIC AIR POLLUTANTS
WITHIN THE NEXT 10 YEARS,
THE NATIONAL TOXIC AIR
POLLUTANT PROGRAM IS
EXPECTED TO LOWER
EMISSIONS OF TOXIC
POLLUTANTS 75 PERCENT
AND THUS REDUCE ADVERSE
HUMAN HEALTH AND
ECOSYSTEM EFFECTS.
Humans
aid Eagle
=*** Sfvfft \
Smslt Chi!) "Soujpln
Bactsria/Fufigi Plankton
Simplified aquatic foot wet. Persistenl pollutants do
not down easily in the environment They accumulate
in body tissues and concentrate at each step ol the
food chain.
Toxic air pollutants are known to cause or are
suspected of causing cancer, adverse
reproductive, developmental, and central
nervous system effects, and other serious
health problems. The Clean Air Act lists 188
toxic air pollutants as hazardous. Examples of
toxic air pollutants include heavy metals like
mercury and lead, manmade chemicals like
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), polycyclic
organic matter (POM), dioxin and benzene,
and pesticides like dichlorodiphenyl-
trichloroethane (DDT). Some toxic air
pollutants remain in the environment for
only short periods of time. These pollutants,
including compounds such as formaldehyde,
toluene, and benzene, generally impact
human health and the environment near
emission sources. Other toxic air pollutants,
such as lead, mercury, PCB, and DDT, break
down slowly, if at all, in the environment and
can be redeposited many times. Additionally,
they build up in the body and concentrate as
they rise through the food chain. Many of
these "persistent" pollutants, emitted from
various sources including motor vehicles and
industrial facilities, are appearing in
unexpected locations far away from their
sources, including the Great Lakes, Lake
Champlain, and the Chesapeake Bay.
REDUCING Toxic
AIR POLLUTANTS
EPA has identified 174 categories of sources
that emit one or more of the 188 toxic air
pollutants. These sources vvill he required to
reduce emissions over the next 10 years.
Since 1990, EPA's toxic air pollutant program
has issued a number of rules to control toxic
air releases from approximately 50 categories
of sources. These include large industrial
complexes such as chemical plants, oil
refineries, and steel mills and smaller sources
such as dry cleaners and commercial
sterilizers. One of these rules applies to the
organic chemical manufacturing industry,
which produces chemicals used in many
industrial processes. This rule alone will
reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants by
over half-a-million tons annually (a 90
percent reduction) and will lower smog-
causing VOC by about 1 million tons
annually (an 80 percent reduction). Within
the next 10 years, EPA's national program is
expected to lower emissions of toxic air
pollutants 75 percent.
SOURCES
Metals and other toxic air pollutants that
persist in the environment and are
transported over broad regions come from a
variety of sources. Mercury, for example, is a
toxic metal that comes from both natural and
manmade sources. Coal-fired power plants,
municipal waste incinerators, medical waste
incinerators, and cement kilns that burn
hazardous waste or coal are among the major
manmade sources of mercury. Natural sources
of atmospheric mercury include gases released
from the Earth's crust by geysers, volcanic
eruptions, and forest fires. PCB are industrial
chemicals used widely in the U.S. from 1929
until 1978 as coolants and lubricants and in
electrical equipment. The manufacture of
PCB in the U.S. stopped in 1977, and use
was restricted in 1979. POM includes a
number of cancer-causing products of
incomplete combustion and can come from
diesel engines and other motor vehicles,
wood burning, and industrial burning of fossil
fuels. DDT is an insecticide that was widely
used in this country from 1946 until 1972.
DDT is still used in other countries and, by
special permit, in the U.S. Many VOC and
fine particulates are also toxic air pollutants.
Controlling air concentrations of ozone and
paniculate matter has the added benefit of
reducing toxic air pollutants.
-------
HEALTH &
ElsrvmONMENTAL
EFFECTS
At certain levels, toxic air pollutants can
cause human health effects ranging from
nausea and difficulty in breathing to cancer.
Health effects can also include birth defects,
serious developmental delays in children, and
reduced immunity to disease in adults and
children. Toxic air pollutants can also be
deposited onto soil or into lakes and streams
where they affect ecological systems and can
eventually affect human health when
consumed in contaminated food,
particularly fish.
For example, people who regularly consume
fish from the Great Lakes have been found to
have higher concentrations of PCB, DDT,
and other toxic chemicals in their bodies
than people who do not. Fish-eating birds,
mammals, and reptiles have experienced a
variety of adverse effects associated with
chemical pollution.
LONG-RANGE
TRANSPORT
Scientific studies conducted over the past
30 years consistently indicate that toxic air
pollutants can be deposited at locations far
from their sources. For example, a number of
toxic air pollutants persist in the
environment and concentrate through the
food web, including toxaphene, a pesticide
used primarily in the cotton belt, and have
been found in fatty tissues of polar bears and
other Arctic animals thousands of miles from
any possible source. Lead and other trace
metals have been measured in the air and
rainfall at remote locations over the Atlantic
and Pacific Oceans, great distances from
likely sources. Core samples from peat bogs in
the Great Lakes region show deposition of
new releases of DDT. Since DDT is used only
under special conditions in the U.S., this
toxic compound may be originating from
sources as far away as Mexico or Central
America. Fortunately, Mexico has recently
banned the use and production of DDT.
TOXIC AIR POLLUTANTS
CAN BE DEPOSITED
ONTO SOIL OR INTO
LAKES AND STREAMS,
WHERE THEY AFFECT
ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
AND CAN EVENTUALLY
AFFECT HUMAN HEALTH
WHEN CONSUMED IN
CONTAMINATED FOOD,
PARTICULARLY FISH.
-------
EGIONAL EFFORTS TO
Several regional organizations have been
formed to address problems associated with
long-range transport of air pollution.
These organizations are described in the
summaries below.
OZONE TRANSPORT
COMMISSION (OTC)
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
established the OTC and the Northeast
Ozone Transport Region it\ recognition of
long-standing regional ozone problems in
the northeastern U.S. The Commission
comprises the governors or their designees
and an ait pollution control official from
each of 12 states (Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, New jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Virginia) and the District of Columbia.
Administrators for three northeastern EPA
Regions also participate.
The OTC states have agreed on a number of
steps to reduce regional air pollution. For
example, they have agreed to introduce a
low-emission vehicle (LEV) program similar
to that in California, which includes five
categories of vehicles that meet increasingly
stringent emissions standards. The OTC,
automobile manufacturers, and EPA are also
working on an agreement for a national LEV
program, which would bring ''cleaner cars" to
all states, not just those in the northeastern
U.S. The OTC has also agreed to signifi-
cantly reduce NOK emissions throughout the
Regional ozone transport
region from large stationary sources such as
power plants and other large fuel combustion
sources, using a market-based approach. By
1999, NOS emissions in the OTC states are
expected to be reduced by approximately 52
percent from the 1990 baseline,
OZONE TRANSPORT
ASSESSMENT GROUP
(OTAG)
OTAG includes 37 states east of the
Rocky Mountains. It is convened by the
Environmental Council of States (an
organization comprised of state environmental
commissioners) for analyzing long-range
transport of ozone and the compounds that
form ozone. The goal of OTAG is to identify
and recommend to EPA cost-effective control
strategies for VOC and NO, to facilitate
compliance with the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for ozone. OTAG includes
representatives from states with and without
areas that fail to meet the national ozone
standards. EPA, industry representatives,
public health advocates, and environmental-
ists are also included in OTAG discussions.
OTAG's regional-scale ozone modeling shows
that transport plays an important role in local
levels of ozone. OTAG is expected to
complete its analyses and make its
recommendations to EPA in 1997.
GRAND CANYON
VISIBILITY TRANSPORT
COMMISSION
(GCVTC)
GCVTC was established by EPA in 1991 to
advise on strategies for protecting visual air
quality at national parks and wilderness areas
on the Colorado Plateau. The Commission
includes governors of Arizona, California,
Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon,
Utah, and Wyoming, and representatives of
the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Acoma
Pueblo, Hualapai Tribe, and the Columbia
River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. Federal
agencies, including the Department of
Agriculture, the Department of the Interior,
and EPA are also represented.
In 1996, the Commission released recommen-
dations for improving visibility on the
Colorado Plateau, including;
0 establishing an emissions cap/target
far the region and an emissions trading
program to keep the region within
the cap
O decreasing mobile source emissions
& minimizing visibility impairment from
controlled burning
& identifying areas called "clean air
corridors" as important sources of clean
air for national paries and other scenic
vistas (sources of paniculate emissions
will be closely monitored in these areas).
EPA expects to pursue methods for imple-
menting these recommendations including
continued regional coordination and
development of regional haze rules.
SOUTHERN
APPALACHIAN
MOUNTAINS
INITIATIVE (SAMI)
SAMI is a nonprofit, voluntary organization
formed in 1992 to address regional air quality
problems in southern Appalachia, particularly in
high elevations, national parks, and recreation
areas. Groups involved in this effort include
Federal, state, and local agencies; environmental
and industrial representatives; academic
institutions; and private citizens. SAMI is
identifying options for managing air emissions in
the southern Appalachians, with special
attention focused on how these options could
affect the regional environment and economy.
SAMI is expected to complete its analysis and
make recommendations to states by 1999 on
control strategies for pollutants that cause acid
rain, visibility impairment, and ground-level
ozone in the southern Appalachians.
10
-------
ADDRESS AIR POLLUTION
LAKE MICHIGAN
OZONE STUDY
(LMOS) AND OZONE
CONTROL PROGRAM
(LMOP)
In 1989, EPA and the states of Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin signed an
agreement to study the ozone air quality
problem in the Lake Michigan region. In
1991, this group signed a second agreement
to establish control measures to improve
regional air quality. These efforts have
contributed to a regional understanding of
ozone transport, as well as determining the
steps necessary to control air pollutants that
form ground-level ozone. Recent accomplish-
ments of this group include developing and
applying a state-of-the-art model for examin-
ing the transport of ozone in the Lake
Michigan region, supporting initial state
implementation plan efforts to control
ozone-forming air pollutants for the four
Lake Michigan states, and working coopera-
tively with other states as part of the
OTAG discussions.
NORTH AMERICAN
RESEARCH STRATEGY
FOR TROPOSPHERIC
OZONE (NARSTQ)
NARSTO is a 10-year research program,
chartered in 1995 as a public/private
partnership. It includes researchers and policy
makers of over 70 organizations from
government, utilities, industry, and academia
throughout Mexico, the U.S., and Canada.
The goal of NARSTO is to develop a
scientific and technological basis for managing
ground-level ozone. NARSTO plans to
publish its first Ozone State-of-Science
Assessment Document in 1998, in which it
will address assessment issues including:
& significant research developments
relating to ground-level ozone in the
last 10 years
O urban and regional sources ofVOC
and NOX emissions and transport
of ozone
© the effectiveness of existing emission
control measures.
As a science-focused research program based
on international cooperation, NARSTO will
continue to be important in the resolution of
long-range ozone transport problems across
North America.
SOUTHERN OXIDANTS
STUDY (SOS)
The SOS, established through cooperative
agreements in 1991, is long-term, academic
research designed to provide a better
understanding of how ozone forms in the
southeastern U.S. In addition to major
academic institutions like the Georgia
Institute of Technology and North Carolina
State University, the private sector and
Government have also played a significant
role in the overall partnership. The Electric
Power Research Institute, the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
the Tennessee Valley Authority, EPA, and
many state and local Southeastern environ-
mental agencies and companies participated
in major research programs in the metropoli-
tan areas of Atlanta (1992) and Nashville
(1994-95). As part of these efforts, data
gathered at monitoring sites has provided
insight into ground-level ozone formation in
the Southeast and around the country.
INTEGRATED
ATMOSPHERIC
DEPOSITION
NETWORK (IADN)
The IADN is a U.S./Canadian cooperative
effort that involves toxic air pollutant
monitoring. This network consists of five
monitoring stations, one placed on each of
the Great Lakes, that gather data on
atmospheric concentrations of toxic air
pollutants such as the pesticides lindane and
dieldrin, heavy rnetals including lead and
arsenic, and chemicals such as PCB and
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. These
monitors help determine the atmospheric
contribution of these compounds to the
concentrations found in the Great Lakes
ecosystem. IADN helps to identify trends in
concentrations of toxic air pollutants, assists
in determining how to reduce toxic air
emissions, and supports research toward
understanding the effects of toxic air
pollutants on the Great Lakes.
INTERNATIONAL
EFFORTS
There are several other important coopera-
tive efforts underway to address air pollution
that crosses our national boundaries with
Canada and Mexico. Under the La Paz
Agreement, the U.S. and Mexico work to
analyze and reduce air pollution in commu-
nities along our common border, Similarly,
the U.S. and Canada have signed an air
quality agreement to address air pollution
issues of mutual concern, such as acid rain
and ozone transport, and they also have
embarked on a strategy to reduce and
eliminate certain persistent toxic pollutants
such as mercury and PCB. The North
American Free Trade Agreement
established the Commission for Environmen-
tal Cooperation to foster joint air pollution
control efforts among all three countries and
to ensure that pollution created in one
country does not affect the health of the
citizens and the environment in another.
"These efforts to date include establishing
and upgrading monitoring networks along
the U.S./Mexico border, developing a system
tor the U.S. and Canada to notify each other
of major new sources of air pollution, and
establishing an international air quality
management commission to address
pollution in the El Paso, Texas and Juarez,
Mexico area.
11
-------
N C L U S I O N
To effectively control air pollution, the U.S.
Congress, EPA, and states have recognized
the need for regional, as well as national and
local, cooperation. Since air pollution does
not respect political boundaries, regional
approaches are often among the most
effective ways to control its transport. The
overall quality of the nation's air continues
to improve, despite increases in population,
gross national product, and vehicle miles
traveled. Efforts to maintain and build on this
progress into the 21st century will require
continued cooperation among international,
national, state, tribal, and local governments,
as well as industry, environmental groups,
and private citizens.
-"" **f «^'j>*"-3.v,*^,-
. , ' ' ,«-«.» j I 'i , »
!^*J ,* ->.«,f»x:t*«*->. * -«;f A,<. *»
^5
ACRONYMS
* DDT - Dichlorodiphenyl-trichloroethane
EPA - U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
GCVTC - Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission
1ADN - Integrated Atmospheric
Deposition Network
LEV - Low Emission Vehicle
LMOP - Lake Michigan Ozone
Control Program
LMOS - Lake Michigan Ozone Study
NARSTO - North American Research
Strategy for Tropospheric Ozone
NO^ - Oxides of Nitrogen
OTAG - Ozone Transport
Assessment Group
OTC - Ozone Transport Commission
PCB - Polychlorinated Biphenyls
POM - Fob/cyclic Organic Matter
ppm - parts per million
SAMI - Southern Appalachian
Mountains Initiative
SO, - Sulfur Dioxide
SOS - Southern Oxidants Study
VOC - Volatile Organic Compounds
-------
FOR MOM
INFORMATION ON
REGIONAL AIR
POLLUTION
TRANSPORT CONTACT:
EPA Headquarters
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
202-260-2080
Homepage: http://www.epa,
gov/docs/oar/oarhome.html
EPA Regional Offices
U.S. EPA Region I (Connecticut,
Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, Vermont)
John E Kennedy Federal Building
Room 2203
Boston, MA 02203
617-565-3482
U.S. EPA Region II (New Jersey,
New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands)
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
212-6374081
U.S. EPA Region III (Delaware,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West
Virginia, District of Columbia)
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 1910?
215-597-2100
U.S. EPA Region IV (Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee)
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
404-562-9077
U.S. EPA Region V (Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin)
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
312-353-2212
U.S. EPA Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana,
New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas)
1445 Ross Avenue, 12th Floor, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
214-665-7220
U.S. EPA Region VII (Iowa, Kansas,
Missouri, Nebraska)
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
913-551-7020
U.S. EPA Region VIII (Colorado,
Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Utah, Wyoming)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
303-312-6312
U.S. EPA Region IX (Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Nevada, Guam, American
Samoa)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
415-744-1264
U.S. EPA Region X (Idaho,
Washington, Oregon, Alaska)
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
206-553-0218
Other Organizations Discussed
Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission
600 17th Street,
Suite 1705 South Tower
Denver, CO 80202-5452
303-623-9378
Integrated Atmospheric
Deposition Network
77 W. Jackson Boulevard, MC-G-9J
Chicago, IL 60604
312-353-2000
Lake Michigan Ozone Study and
Control Program
2350 East Devon Avenue, Suite 242
Des Plaines, IL 60018
847-296-2181
North American Research Strategy
for Tropospheric Ozone
4811 West 18th Avenue
Kennewick, Washington 99337
509-735-1318
Homepage: http://narsto.owt.com/Narsto
Ozone Transport Assessment Group
Environmental Council of States
444 N. Capitol Street, NW Suite 517
Washington, DC 20001
202-624-3660
Homepage: http://www.epa.
gov/oar/otag/otag.html
Ozone Transport Commission
444 N. Capitol Street, NW Suite 638
Washington, DC 20001
202-508-3840
Southern Appalachian
Mountains Initiative
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
704-251-6889
Homepage: http://www.tva.gov/orgs/
sami/samihomepage.htm
Southern Oxidants Study
North Carolina State University
Box 8002
Raleigh, NC 27695-8002
919-515-4649
Homepage: http://www2.ncsu.edu/
ncsu/CIL/souther_oxidants/
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (MD-10)
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 2771 1
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
contains at least 20% recycled paper
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA/451/K-98-001
February 1998
http://www.epa.gov
£EPA
Taking Toxics Out of the Air
Progress in Setting "Maximum Achievable
Control Technology" Standards Under
the Clean Air Act
JX Printed on paper that contains at
r' least 20 percent postconsumer fiber.
-------
Photos (pages 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, and 18) by S.C. Delaney/EPA
Photos (pages 17 and 21) Copyright © 1997 PhotoDisc, Inc.
-------
Table of Contents
What Are Toxic Air Pollutants? 2
Where Do Air Toxics Come From? 3
Where Do Air Toxics Go? 4
How Are People Exposed to Air Toxics? 5
Health Effects 5
How Do Air Toxics Affect the Environment? 5
What Has EPA Done to Reduce Air Toxics? 6
The Pre-1990 "Risk-Only" Approach
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments: A "Technology First, Then Risk" Approach
What Progress Has Been Made in Reducing Toxic Air Pollution? 7
Looking Ahead 8
The Next Steps
For Further Information .. ..9
Summaries of EPA's Final Air Toxics MACT Rules 10
Summaries of Related Solid Waste Incineration Rules.. . 22
-------
The air we breathe can be contami-
lated with pollutants from factories,
vehicles, power plants, and many
)ther sources. These pollutants
have long been a major concern because
of the harmful effects they have on peoples'
health and the environment. Their impact
depends on many factors, including the
quantity of air pollution to which people are
exposed, the duration of the exposures, and
the potency of the pollutants. The effects of
air pollutants can be minor and reversible
(such as eye irritation) or debilitating (such
as aggravation of asthma) and even fatal
(such as cancer).
Since 1970, the Clean Air Act has provided
the primary framework for protecting people
and the environment from the harmful effects
of air pollution. A key component of the Clean
Air Act is a requirement that the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) significantly
reduce daily, so-called "routine" emissions of
the most potent air pollutants: those that are
known or suspected to cause serious health
problems such as cancer or birth defects. The
Clean Air Act refers to these pollutants as
"hazardous air pollutants," but they are also
commonly known as toxic air pollutants or,
simply, air toxics.
Prior to 1990, the Clean Air Act required EPA
to set standards for each toxic air pollutant
individually,
based on its
particular The technology- and performance-
health risks.
This approach
proved difficult
and minimally
effective at
reducing emis-
sions. As a
result, when
amending the
Clean Air Act
in 1990, Con-
gress directed
based standards issued by EPA
over the past 6 years have proven
extremely successful. Once fully
implemented, these standards
will cut emissions of toxic air
pollutants by nearly 1 million tons
per yearalmost 10 times greater
reductions than EPA was able
to achieve in 20 years under the
pre-1990 approach.
EPA to use a
"technology-based" and performance-based
approach to significantly reduce emissions of
air toxics from major sources of air pollution,
followed by a risk-based approach to address
any remaining, or residual, risks.
Sources of Air Toxics
Routine Emissions From
Stationary Sources
Mobile Sources
Each year, millions of
tons of toxic pollutants
are released into the
air from both natural
and manmade sources.
Volcanoes
Accidental Releases
Forest Fires
-------
Mobile Sources and Accidental Releases
While this document focuses on EPA's efforts to reduce routine emissions from stationary
sources, EPA also is working to reduce toxic emissions from:
Mobile sources, such as cars and trucks. For example, EPA and state governments
(e.g., California) have reduced emissions of benzene, toluene, and other toxic pollut-
ants from mobile sources by requiring the use of reformulated gasoline and placing
limits on tailpipe emissions. For more information, contact EPA's Office of Mobile
Sources at www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/toxics.htm or call (202) 260-7400.
Accidental releases, including leaks and spills. For example, EPA has established
regulations under the Clean Air Act requiring certain facilities to implement risk
management programs that will help prevent accidental releases of toxic chemicals.
For more information, contact EPA's Office of Chemical Emergency Preparedness
and Prevention at www.epa.gov/swercepp or call (800) 424-9346.
Under the "technology-based" approach, EPA
develops standards for controlling the "rou-
tine" emissions of air toxics from each major
type of facility within an industry group (or
"source category"). These standardsknown
as "maximum achievable control technology
(MACT) standards"are based on emissions
levels that are already being achieved by the
better-controlled and lower-emitting sources
in an industry. This approach assures citizens
nationwide that each major source of toxic air
pollution will be required to employ effective
measures to limit its emissions. Also, this ap-
proach provides a level economic playing field
by ensuring that facilities that employ cleaner
processes and good emission controls are not
disadvantaged relative to competitors with
poorer controls.
In setting MACT standards, EPA does not
generally prescribe a specific control technol-
ogy. Instead, whenever feasible, the Agency
sets a performance level based on technology
or other practices already used by the indus-
try. Facilities are free to achieve these perfor-
mance levels in whatever way is most
cost-effective for them. The MACT standards
issued by EPA over the past 6 years have
proven extremely successful. Once fully imple-
mented, these standards will cut emissions of
toxic air pollutants by nearly 1 million tons
per year.
Eight years after each MACT standard is is-
sued, EPA must assess the remaining health
risks from source categories. If necessary,
EPA may implement additional standards
that address any significant remaining risk.
This document describes what air toxics are,
where they come from, and how they can
impact people and the environment. It also
describes the individual standards EPA has
issued to reduce emissions of air toxics from
industries such as chemical manufacturing,
petroleum refining, and steel manufacturing.
Additional information on air toxics and
EPA's air toxics programs can be found on the
Internet at www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw.
What Are Toxic Air
Pollutants?
Toxic (also called hazardous) air pollutants are
those pollutants that are known or suspected
to cause cancer or other serious health effects,
such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or
to cause adverse environmental effects. The
degree to which a toxic air pollutant affects
a person's health depends on many factors,
including the quantity of pollutant the person
is exposed to, the duration and frequency of
-------
exposures, the toxicity of the chemical, and the
person's state of health and susceptibility.
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments list 188
toxic air pollutants that EPA is required to
control.1 Examples of toxic air pollutants in-
clude benzene, which is found in gasoline;
perchloroethylene, which is emitted from
some dry cleaning facilities; and methylene
chloride, which is used as a solvent and paint
stripper by a number of industries. Examples
of other listed air toxics include dioxin, asbes-
tos, toluene, and metals such as cadmium,
mercury, chromium, and lead compounds.
Where Do Air Toxics
Come From?
Scientists estimate that millions of tons of
toxic pollutants are released into the air
each year. Some air toxics are released from
natural sources such as volcanic eruptions
and forest fires. Most, however, originate
from manmade sources, including both
mobile sources (e.g., cars, buses, trucks) and
stationary sources (e.g., factories, refineries,
power plants). This document focuses on
EPA's efforts, as of January 1998, to reduce
routine (as opposed to accidental) emissions of
toxic air pollutants from stationary sources.
Routine emissions from stationary sources
constitute almost two-thirds of all manmade
air toxics emissions.
There are two types of stationary sources that
generate routine emissions of air toxics:
"Major" sources are defined as sources
that emit 10 tons per year of any of the
listed toxic air
pollutants, or
25 tons per year
of a mixture of air
toxics. Examples
include chemical
plants, steel mills,
Major
Source
24%
Based on 1993 emission inventory data, major sources
account for about 24 percent of air toxics emissions, area
sources for 35 percent, and mobile sources for 41 percent.
Accidental releases and natural sources, which also
contribute air toxics to the atmosphere, are not included
in these estimates.
oil refineries, and hazardous waste incin-
erators. These sources may release air
toxics from equipment leaks, when materi-
als are transferred from one location to
another, or during discharge through
emissions stacks or vents. One key public
health concern regarding major sources is
the health effects on populations located
downwind from them.
"Area" sources consist of smaller sources,
each releasing smaller amounts of toxic
pollutants into the air. Area sources are
defined as sources that emit less than
10 tons per year of a single air toxic,
or less than 25 tons
per year of a com-
bination of air
toxics. Examples
include neighbor-
hood dry cleaners
and gas stations.
Though emissions
from individual
area sources are
often relatively small, collectively their
emissions can be of concernparticularly
where large numbers of sources are located
in heavily populated areas.
1 The list originally included 189 chemicals. Based on new scientific information, EPA removed caprolactam from the list in 1996;
thus, the current list includes 188 pollutants.
-------
EPA's published list now contains 175 catego-
ries of industrial and commercial sources that
emit one or more toxic air pollutants. For
each of these "source categories," EPA indi-
cated whether the sources are considered to
be "major" sources or "area" sources. The
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments direct EPA
to set standards requiring all major sources of
air toxics (and some area sources that are of
particular concern) to significantly reduce
their air toxics emissions.
Where Do Air Toxics Go?
Once released, toxic pollutants can be carried
by the wind, away from their sources, to other
locations. Factors such as weather, the terrain
(i.e., mountains, plains, valleys), and the
chemical and physical properties of a pollut-
ant determine how far it is transported, its
concentration at various distances from the
source, what kind of physical and chemical
changes it undergoes, and whether it will
degrade, remain airborne, or deposit to land
or water.
Some pollutants remain airborne and contrib-
ute to air pollution problems far from the pol-
lution source. Other pollutants released into
the air can be deposited to land and water
bodies through precipitation, or by settling
directly out of the air onto land or water.
Eventually, a large portion of those pollutants
deposited near water bodies or small tributar-
ies will reach the water bodies via stormwater
runoff or inflow from the tributary streams.
Some toxic air pollutants are of particular con-
cern because they degrade very slowly or not
at all, as in the case of metals such as mercury
or lead. These persistent air toxics (as they are
called) can remain in the environment for
a long time (or forever, in the case of metals)
and can be transported great distances.
Toxic
Pollutants
/ Wet
Deposition
Evaporation
of Deposited
Pollutants
Toxic air pollutants can be deposited to land and water bodies through precipitation (wet deposition) or by settling directly
out of the air (dry deposition). Repeated cycles of transport, deposition, and evaporation can move toxic air pollutants very
long distances.
-------
Often, persistent air toxics reach the ground,
evaporate back into the atmosphere, and
are then transported further until they are
deposited on the ground again. Repeated
cycles of transport, deposition, and evapora-
tion can move toxic air pollutants very long
distances. For example, toxic pollutants such
as toxaphene, a pesticide used primarily in the
cotton belt, have been found in the Antarctic,
thousands of miles from their likely emissions
sources.
How Are People
Exposed to Air Toxics?
People are exposed to toxic air pollutants in
many ways that can pose health risks, such
as by:
Breathing contaminated air.
Ingesting contaminated food products
such as fish from contaminated waters;
meat, milk, or eggs from animals that fed
on contaminated plants; and fruits and
vegetables grown in contaminated soil on
which air toxics have been deposited.
Ingesting contaminated water. Some people
may be exposed to toxic air pollutants by
drinking contaminated water.
Ingesting contaminated soil. Young children
also may be exposed by ingesting contami-
nated soil from their hands, food, or objects
they place in their mouths.
Touching (skin contact) contaminated soil,
dust, or water (for example, during recre-
ational use of contaminated water bodies).
Once ingested, some of the more persistent
toxic air pollutants accumulate in body
tissues. Also, through a phenomenon called
biomagnification, predators typically accumu-
late even greater pollutant concentrations than
their contaminated prey. As a result, people
and other animals at the "top" of the food
chain who eat contaminated fish or meat are
exposed to concentrations that are much higher
than the concentrations in the water, air, or soil.
Fish consumption advisories have been issued
for thousands of water bodies nationwide,
including the Great Lakes, Lake Champlain,
the Potomac River, and Chesapeake Bay.
Thirty-nine states currently have consumption
advisories for specific water bodies, warning
consumers about mercury-contaminated fish
and shellfish. Ten of those states have adviso-
ries on every inland water body. Many of
these advisories have been issued for water
bodies that were once thought to be relatively
pristine, where deposition from the atmo-
sphere is thought to be a major source of
the pollution.
Health Effects
People who are exposed to toxic air pollut-
ants at sufficient concentrations and for suffi-
cient durations may increase their chances of
getting cancer or experiencing other serious
health effects. Depending on which air toxics
an individual is exposed to, these health ef-
fects can include damage to the immune sys-
tem, as well as neurological, reproductive
(e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, and
respiratory problems. A growing body of evi-
dence indicates that some air toxics (e.g., DDT,
dioxins, and mercury) may disturb hormonal
(or endocrine) systems. In some cases this hap-
pens by pollutants either mimicking or block-
ing hormones. Health effects associated with
endocrine disruption include reduced fertility,
birth defects, and breast cancer.
How Do Air Toxics Affect
the Environment?
Toxic pollutants in the air, or deposited on
soils or surface waters, can have a number of
environmental impacts. Like humans, ani-
mals can experience health problems if they
are exposed to sufficient concentrations of air
toxics over time. Numerous studies conclude
that deposited air toxics are contributing to
-------
birth defects, reproductive failure, and dis-
ease in animals. Persistent toxic air pollutants
are of particular concern in aquatic ecosys-
tems because the pollutants accumulate in
sediments and may biomagnify in tissues of
animals at the top of the food chain to con-
centrations many times higher than in the
water or air.
Toxic pollutants that mimic hormones also
pose a threat to the environment. In some
wildlife (e.g., birds, shellfish, fish, and mam-
mals), exposures to pollutants such as DDT,
dioxins, and mercury have been associated
with decreased fertility, decreased hatching
success, damaged reproductive organs, and
altered immune systems.
What Has EPA Done to
Reduce Air Toxics?
The Pre-1990 "Risk-Only" Approach
Prior to 1990, the Clean Air Act directed EPA
to regulate toxic air pollutants based on the
risks each pollutant posed to human health.
Specifically, the Act directed EPA to:
Identify all pollutants that caused "serious
and irreversible illness or death."
Develop standards to reduce emissions of
these pollutants to levels that provided an
"ample margin of safety" for the public.
While attempting to control air toxics during
the 1970s and 1980s, EPA became involved in
many legal, scientific, and policy debates over
which pollutants to regulate and how strin-
gently to regulate them. Debates focused on
risk assessment methods and assumptions,
the amount of health risk data needed to jus-
tify regulation, analyses of the costs to indus-
try and benefits to human health and the
environment, and decisions about "how safe
is safe."
During this time, EPA lacked adequate meth-
ods to assess risk and lacked adequate health
and environmental criteria to establish a solid
foundation for risk-based decision-making on
the multitude of air toxics emitted throughout
the United States. Many regulators, as well as
many members of the communities to be
regulated, were reluctant to accept risk as-
sessment as a legitimate policy tool. During
this period, EPA and the scientific community
gained valuable knowledge about risk assess-
ment methods. However, the chemical-by-
chemical regulatory approachan approach
based solely on riskproved difficult, and in
20 years EPA regulated only seven pollutants
(asbestos, benzene, beryllium, inorganic
arsenic, mercury, radionuclides, and vinyl
chloride). Collectively, these standards only
cut annual air toxics emissions by an esti-
mated 125,000 tons.
The 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments: A "Technology
First, Then Risk" Approach
Realizing the limitations of a chemical-by-
chemical decision framework based solely on
risk, and acknowledging the gaps in scientific
and analytical information, Congress adopted
a new strategy in 1990, when the Clean Air
Act was amended. Specifically, Congress re-
vised Section 112 of the Clean Air Act to
mandate a more practical approach to reduc-
ing emissions of toxic air pollutants.
This approach has two components. In the
first phase, EPA develops regulations
MACT standardsrequiring sources to meet
specific emissions limits that are based on
emissions levels already being achieved by
many similar sources in the country. Even
in its earliest stages, this new "technology-
based" approach has clearly produced real,
measurable reductions. In the second phase,
EPA applies a risk-based approach to assess
how these technology-based emissions limits
are reducing health and environmental risks.
Based on this assessment, EPA may imple-
ment additional standards to address any
significant remaining, or residual, health or
environmental risks. EPA is currently devel-
oping a strategy for addressing residual risks
from air toxics.
-------
Maximum Achievable
Control TechnologyMACT
EPA's MACT standards are based on the emissions levels already achieved by the best-
performing similar facilities. This straight-forward, performance-based approach yields
standards that are both reasonable and effective in reducing toxic emissions. This approach
also provides a level economic playing field by ensuring that facilities with good controls
are not disadvantaged relative to competitors with poorer controls.
When developing a MACT standard for a particular source category, EPA looks at the level
of emissions currently being achieved by the best-performing similar sources through clean
processes, control devices, work practices, or other methods. These emissions levels set a
baseline (often referred to as the "MACT floor") for the new standard. At a minimum, a
MACT standard must achieve, throughout the industry, a level of emissions control that is
at least equivalent to the MACT floor. EPA can establish a more stringent standard when
this makes economic, environmental, and public health sense.
The MACT floor is established differently for existing sources and new sources:
For existing sources, the MACT floor must equal the average emissions limitations cur-
rently achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of sources in that source category, if
there are 30 or more existing sources. If there are fewer than 30 existing sources, then the
MACT floor must equal the average emissions limitation achieved by the best-perform-
ing five sources in the category.
For new sources, the MACT floor must equal the level of emissions control currently
achieved by the best-controlled similar source.
Wherever feasible, EPA writes the final MACT standard as an emissions limit (i.e., as a
percent reduction in emissions or a concentration limit that regulated sources must
achieve). Emissions limits provide flexibility for industry to determine the most effective
way to comply with the standard.
What Progress Has Been
Made in Reducing Toxic
Air Pollution?
As of January 1998, EPA has issued 23 air
toxics MACT standards under Section 112 of
the Clean Air Act Amendments. These stan-
dards affect 48 categories of major industrial
sources, such as chemical plants, oil refiner-
ies, aerospace manufacturers, and steel mills,
as well as eight categories of smaller sources,
such as dry cleaners, commercial sterilizers,
secondary lead smelters, and chromium elec-
troplating facilities. EPA has also issued two
standards under Section 129 of the Clean Air
Act to control emissions, including certain
toxic pollutants, from solid waste combustion
facilities (one standard for municipal waste
combustors and the other for medical waste
incinerators). Together, these standards
reduce emissions of over 100 different air
toxics. When fully implemented, these stan-
dards will reduce air toxics emissions by
about 1 million tons per yearalmost 10 times
greater reductions than were achieved under
all the pre-1990 standards. Each of the
final rules developed since 1990 is summa-
rized as an appendix to this document
(pages 10 to 22). These summaries describe
the sources for which final rules have been
issued, the types of pollutants the sources
emit, and how EPA's rules are reducing
their emissions.
-------
Some of these air toxics rules have the added
benefit of reducing ground-level ozone (urban
smog) and particulate matter. This occurs be-
cause some air toxics are also smog-causing
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (e.g., tolu-
ene) or particulate matter (e.g., chromium).
In addition, some of the technologies and prac-
tices designed to control air toxics also reduce
VOCs or types of particulate matter that are
not currently among the 188 listed air toxics.
Reductions of smog-causing pollutants and
particulate matter are important because of
the health and environmental problems they
can cause. Most notably, urban smog can
cause respiratory problems and can damage
vegetation, and particulate matter can cause
many detrimental impacts on human health,
such as bronchitis, lung damage, increased
infection, aggravation of asthma, and prema-
ture death. In addition many of these pollut-
ants can contribute significantly to impaired
visibility in places, such as national parks,
that are valued for their scenic views and
recreational opportunities.
EPA has consistently worked to develop air
toxics standards that achieve the required re-
ductions in air pollution while providing regu-
lated communities with as much flexibility as
possible in deciding how to comply with the
standards. For example, under a flexible regu-
lation, industries may reduce their emissions
by redesigning their processes, capturing and
recycling emissions, changing work practices,
or installing any of a variety of control tech-
nologies. Flexibility helps industries minimize
the cost of compliance and encourages pollu-
tion prevention. To provide flexibility, EPA
makes every effort to develop standards that
are based on performance measures rather
than specific control devices, and that allow
for equivalent alternative control measures.
Looking Ahead
EPA has focused most of its initial air toxics
control efforts under the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments on reducing emissions by
setting technology-based standards. In addi-
tion to the 23 final air toxics MACT stan-
dards, EPA has also proposed a number
of other rules covering 22 source categories,
such as polyurethane foam production,
wool fiberglass operations, and phosphoric
acid/phosphate fertilizer production.
Over the next several years, EPA will con-
tinue to work with industry and others to
develop standards for all remaining source
categories to reduce air toxics emissions even
further. The Agency expects to complete a
number of standardssuch as agricultural
chemical production and pharmaceuticals
manufacturingby the end of 1998, and
dozens of other standards by the year 2000.
Under the Clean Air Act Amendments, exist-
ing regulated facilities generally have up to
3 years from the date a MACT standard is
finalized to come into compliance with that
standard's requirements. New sources must
be in compliance upon start-up. Within the
next 10 years, as these additional standards
are implemented, emissions of toxic air pollut-
ants are expected to be reduced by about
75 percent from 1990 levels.
The Next Steps
EPA anticipates that its technology-based
approach will continue to prove extremely
successful at reducing air toxics. Other
air toxics reductions are also expected to
continue as a result of mobile and other sta-
tionary source control programs (e.g., imple-
mentation of new particulate and ozone
national ambient air quality standards) that
indirectly reduce toxics. At the same time,
however, the Agency recognizes the need for
continued research into the dangers posed by
air toxics.
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments call for
EPA to supplement its technology-based ap-
proach by assessing the effectiveness of the
MACT standards at reducing the health and
environmental risks posed by air toxics. Based
on this assessment, the Agency may imple-
ment additional standards that address any
-------
significant remaining, or residual, risk. After
setting a MACT standard, EPA has 8 years
(9 years for the earliest standards) to examine
the risk posed by continued emissions from
regulated facilities and to issue requirements
for additional controls if they are necessary
to reduce an unacceptable residual risk. Cur-
rently, EPA is working with industry repre-
sentatives, states, and others to develop a
residual risk program, and is collecting the
necessary data to conduct the first risk assess-
ments, beginning in 1998.
In addition to the residual risk assessments of
MACT standards, the Clean Air Act Amend-
ments also require EPA to conduct special
studies to assess whether certain air toxics
problems may not be fully addressed by the
MACT and residual risk programs. Since
1990, EPA has published two reports on
deposition of air toxics and their detrimental
effects on the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay,
Lake Champlain, and coastal waters. In these
reports, EPA listed 15 pollutants of greatest
concern that have a tendency to persist in the
environment and accumulate. The pollutants
of concern are: metals (mercury, cadmium,
lead), dioxins, furans, polycyclic organic
matter, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
pesticides (such as chlordane and DDT/
DDE), and nitrogen compounds. EPA is
continuing to develop and implement strate-
gies under the Clean Air Act Amendments
to reduce releases of these pollutants. The
Agency is expected to issue subsequent
reports every 2 years, outlining any control
measures needed to achieve further reduc-
tions in toxic pollutants that are being
deposited in water bodies.
EPA is also studying air toxics emitted from
coal-, oil-, and gas-fired electric utility power
generation plants and the health hazards
associated with these emissions. Preliminary
information indicates that emissions of toxic
pollutants from coal-fired power plants are
expected to increase by 30 percent over the
next 2 decades, while emissions from oil-
fired power plants are expected to decline by
50 percent. Utility plants (primarily coal-fired
plants) emit approximately 51 tons per year
of mercury nationwide, which is roughly
32 percent of the manmade mercury emis-
sions in the United States. This study is in-
tended to determine if emissions of toxic air
pollutants from power plants should be con-
trolled under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act
because of health risk concerns. EPA plans to
publish a final report in 1998.
The Clean Air Act Amendments also require
EPA to develop an urban strategy that will
reduce air toxic emissions from area sources
to address the associated health risk problems
posed by the most highly toxic pollutants (at
least 30 of them). In addition, the Amend-
ments require that EPA study the need for
and feasibility of controlling emissions of toxic
pollutants from motor vehicles and fuels. EPA
is looking at an integrated approach that ad-
dresses the urban air toxic emissions from
both stationary sources and mobile sources.
EPA is currently analyzing data to determine
which air toxics sources will be included in
the urban air toxics program, which is ex-
pected to be completed by the end of 1998.
For Further Information
For further information on EPA's air
toxics program and other activities
under the Clean Air Act Amendments,
contact the following Web sites and
EPA offices:
Unified Air Toxics Website
Internet: www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw
EPA Office of Air and Radiation
Internet: www.epa.gov/oar/
(202) 260-7400
EPA Office of Mobile Sources
Internet: www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/
omshome.htm
EPA Office of Chemical Emergency
Preparedness and Prevention
Internet: www.epa.gov/swercepp
(800) 424-9346
-------
Summaries of EPA's Final Air Toxics MACT Rules
The following summaries describe 23 air toxics rules EPA has issued since 1990 under Section 112
of the Clean Air Act.
DRY CLEANERS
Final rule published September 22, 1993
Dry cleaning facilities are the largest source
of perchloroethylene (also called perc) emis-
sions in the United States. Because dry
cleaners are located in many communities
across the country, perc emissions from dry
cleaners are often released in close proxim-
ity to large numbers of people.
Perc can cause dizziness, nausea, and
headaches and is suspected to cause cancer
in humans.
EPA's rule requires all dry cleaners that
use perc to implement pollution prevention
measures. It also contains specific control
requirements that vary depending on the
type of machinery and the amount of perc
a facility uses.
The rule affects approximately 30,000 dry
cleaners and will reduce perc emissions at
these facilities by about 7,300 tons per year.
COKE OVEN BATTERIES AT STEEL PLANTS
Final rule published October 27, 1993
Coke oven batteries (a group of ovens con-
nected by common walls) are used to con-
vert coal into coke, which is then used in
blast furnaces to convert iron ore to iron.
Coke oven emissions contain benzene (a
known carcinogen) and other chemicals that
can cause cancer of the respiratory tract, kid-
ney, and prostate. Long-term exposure to
coke oven emissions can also cause conjunc-
tivitis, severe dermatitis, and lesions of the
respiratory and digestive systems.
EPA's rule provides guidelines for day-to-
day operations and sets emissions limits for
existing sources and even tighter limits for
new sources. The rule was developed
through a formal regulatory negotiation
process that involved extensive industry
participation. It provides industry with
a menu of compliance optionsthis
flexibility should significantly reduce
compliance costs.
The coke oven rule affects 29 existing
facilities and will reduce air toxics by
approximately 1,500 tons per year.
Air Toxics Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
10
-------
ORGANIC CHEMICAL PRODUCTION PLANTS
Final rule published April 22, 1994
EPA's rule reduces emissions of 131 or-
ganic air toxics from chemical manufactur-
ing processes in the Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry and
from several other chemical production
processes. The rule applies to production
of about 385 chemicals.
The rule requires reductions in toxic organic
air pollutants emitted from process vents,
storage vessels, transfer racks, equipment
leaks, and wastewater treatment systems.
Emissions averaging is allowed in the rule
as a compliance option to give industry
flexibility in meeting the emissions
reduction limits.
The rule affects an estimated 310 facilities
and will reduce air toxics emissions by
510,000 tons per yeara 90 percent reduc-
tion from the preregulated levels emitted
by these facilities. The rule will also reduce
VOCs by about 1 million tons per year
an 80 percent reduction from the preregu-
lated levels emitted by these facilities,
and equivalent to taking approximately
38 million cars off the road.
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS COOLING TOWERS
Final rule published September 8, 1994
Industrial process cooling towers are used
to remove heat from industrial processes. In
the past, chromium was added to cooling
tower waters to prevent equipment corro-
sion and control algae growth.
Chromium (Chromium VI, the most toxic
form, is known to cause lung cancer) is ulti-
mately released from the cooling towers
into the air. Most individual industrial pro-
cess cooling towers do not qualify as major
sources of air toxics; however, almost all
cooling towers are part of large production
facilities (e.g., petroleum refineries,
chemical manufacturing plants, and
primary metal producers) that do qualify.
EPA's rule prohibits the use of chromium-
based water treatment chemicals and
suggests that facilities substitute phosphate-
based chemicals.
The rule affects an estimated 800 cooling
towers at about 400 major sources nation-
wide and will reduce chromium emissions
by 25 tons per yeara 100 percent reduction
from the preregulated levels emitted by
these facilities.
11
-------
HALOGENATED SOLVENT
CLEANING MACHINES
Final rule published December 2, 1994
Halogenated solvent cleaning machines
(also known as degreasers) are used to clean
oil and residues in the manufacturing and
assembly of metal parts. Halogenated sol-
vent cleaning is not a distinct industry, but
it is an integral part of many industries,
such as the aerospace and motor vehicle
manufacturing industries. There are three
basic types of solvent cleaning equipment:
Batch vapor cleaners, which heat the sol-
vent to create a solvent vapor zone within
which the parts are cleaned.
In-line cleaners, which are enclosed de-
vices distinguished by a conveyor system
used to supply a continuous stream of
parts for cleaning.
Batch cold cleaners, which use liquid sol-
vent to remove soils from part surfaces.
Numerous air toxics contained in these sol-
vent mixtures are released during the clean-
ing process.
The rule applies to cleaning machines that
use methylene chloride, perchloroethylene,
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1 -trichloroethane,
carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, or any
combination of these solvents in a total
concentration that is greater than 5 percent
by weight.
EPA's rule combines equipment and work
practice standards that emphasize pollution
prevention. As an alternative to complying
with the equipment standards option, facili-
ties using batch vapor or in-line cleaning
machines may demonstrate that each sol-
vent cleaning machine emits less than an
overall solvent emissions limit.
The rule affects an estimated 9,000 facilities
that use solvent cleaning machines and will
reduce air toxics emissions at these facilities
by 85,300 tons per year and VOC emissions
by 81,700 tons per year.
COMMERCIAL STERILIZATION
AND FUMIGATION OPERATIONS
Final rule published December 6, 1994
A number of industries (including medical
equipment suppliers; pharmaceutical com-
panies; cosmetics manufacturers; spice
manufacturers; libraries, museums, and
archives; and contact sterilizers) use ethyl-
ene oxide as a sterilant for heat- or
moisture-sensitive materials or as a fumi-
gant to control microorganisms or insects.
Ethylene oxide (a probable human carcino-
gen that also can cause adverse reproduc-
tive and developmental effects) is released
during these operations.
EPA's rule sets ethylene oxide emissions
limits for sterilization chamber vents, cham-
ber exhaust vents, and aeration rooms.
The rule affects an estimated 114 sources
and will reduce ethylene oxide emissions
by about 1,000 tons per yeara 94 percent
reduction from the preregulated levels
emitted by these sources.
12
-------
GASOLINE DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES
Final rule published December 14, 1994
The gasoline distribution standard regu-
lates bulk terminals and pipeline breakout
stations, which transfer and store gasoline
as it goes from petroleum refineries to ser-
vice stations and gasoline bulk plants.
Approximately 10 toxic air pollutants, in-
cluding benzene and toluene, are present in
gasoline vapor. These pollutants are re-
leased from gasoline distribution facilities
during tank truck and rail car loading op-
erations, gasoline storage, and equipment
leaks.
EPA's rule requires the use of pollution pre-
vention methods (such as improving seals
on storage tanks and inspecting equipment
for leaks) and the use of controls (such as
vapor processors to collect and treat gas
vapors displaced during cargo tank loading
operations).
The rule affects an estimated 240 gasoline
bulk terminals and 20 pipeline breakout
stations. It will reduce air toxics emissions
from these facilities by 2,300 tons per year
and VOC emissions by over 38,000 tons per
year. In addition, the collection and/or
prevention of gasoline evaporation under
the final rule is expected to result in energy
savings of an estimated 10 million gallons
of gasoline per year.
MAGNETIC TAPE MANUFACTURING
Final rule published December 15, 1994
Magnetic tape manufacturers make prod-
ucts such as audio and video cassettes and
computer diskettes.
Toxic air pollutants are released when sol-
vent mixtures are used during coating and
equipment cleaning operations. In addition,
particulate air toxics may be released when
magnetic particles are transferred to the
coating mixture.
EPA's rule requires 95 percent control for
most types of emission points, including the
coating operations. For many of these emis-
sion points, EPA has developed alternative
emissions standards, such as one that allows
facilities the flexibility to commit to more
stringent control of their coating operations
in lieu of controlling certain storage tanks.
The rule affects an estimated 14 of the
25 facilities that manufacture magnetic tape.
It will reduce emissions of air toxics, most of
which are VOCs, by 2,300 tons per year.
13
-------
CHROMIUM ELECTROPLATING
AND ANODIZING OPERATIONS
Final rule published January 25, 1995
Chromium electroplating and anodizing
operations coat metal parts and tools with a
thin layer of chromium to protect them from
corrosion and wear. Examples of electro-
plated parts include appliances, automotive
parts, and large cylinders used in construc-
tion equipment and printing presses.
Anodized parts include miscellaneous
aircraft components such as wings and
landing gears.
Chromium VI (known to cause lung cancer)
is released during the electroplating and
anodizing processes.
EPA's rule sets specific emissions limits for
new and existing chromium electroplating
and anodizing operations that fall into spe-
cific size categories. The rule requires facili-
ties to meet emissions limits through the use
of pollution prevention practices and controls.
The rule affects an estimated 1,500 hard
chromium electroplating facilities, 2,800
decorative chromium electroplating facili-
ties, and 700 chromium anodizing facilities.
It will reduce chromium emissions by
173 tons per yeara 99 percent reduction
from the preregulated levels emitted by
these facilities.
BASIC LIQUID EPOXY RESINS AND
NON-NYLON POLYAMIDE RESINS
MANUFACTURE
Final rule published March 8, 1995
Basic liquid epoxy resins are used in the
production of glues, adhesives, plastic parts,
and surface coatings. Non-nylon polyamide
or wet strength resins are used to improve
the strength of paper.
Epichlorohydrin (strongly suspected of
causing cancer and known to cause respira-
tory problems) is released during the resin
manufacturing process.
EPA's rule is based on an epichlorohydrin
emissions limit, which provides facilities
with the flexibility to meet the regulation's
requirements with a variety of compliance
options. The rule also requires facilities
to implement leak detection and repair
programs.
The rule affects all three basic liquid epoxy
resins manufacturing facilities and all nine
non-nylon polyamide manufacturing facili-
ties. It will reduce epichlorohydrin emis-
sions by 110 tons per year.
14
-------
SECONDARY LEAD SMELTER INDUSTRY
Final rule published June 23, 1995
Secondary lead smelters produce lead from
scrap and provide the primary means for
recycling lead-acid automotive batteries.
The basic operations performed at these
facilities include battery breaking, smelting,
refining and alloying.
Secondary lead smelter facilities emit a
number of toxic air pollutants, including
1,3-butadiene (a known human carcinogen)
and lead compounds.
EPA's rule requires facilities to reduce emis-
sions from a number of sources, including
smelting furnaces, kettles, dryers, and fugi-
tive sources such as material handling.
The rule affects all 23 secondary lead smelt-
ers in the United States. It will reduce emis-
sions of air toxics from these facilities by
1,400 tons per yeara 72 percent reduc-
tion from the preregulated levels emitted by
these facilities. In addition, the rule is ex-
pected to reduce emissions of particulate
matter (which can cause serious respiratory
problems) from these facilities by 150 tons
per year, and carbon monoxide (which can
cause adverse health effects, including fa-
tigue, nausea, and respiratory problems) by
88,000 tons per year.
Air Toxics Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
PETROLEUM REFINING INDUSTRY
Final rule published August 18, 1995
Petroleum refineries process crude oil
to produce automotive gasoline, diesel
fuel, lubricants, and other petroleum-
based products.
Toxic air pollutants, including benzene
(a known human carcinogen) and toluene
(known to affect the central nervous system
and cause developmental problems), are
released from storage tanks, equipment
leaks, process vents, and wastewater
collection and treatment systems at
these facilities.
EPA's rule requires facilities to control emis-
sions from these sources. The rule allows
emissions averaging within the petroleum
refining facility, and provides additional
flexibility by permitting the use of emissions
averaging among emission points at petro-
leum refineries, marine terminal loading
operations, and gasoline distribution facili-
ties located at the same site.
The rule affects all 192 petroleum refin-
eries in the United States and will reduce
emissions of 11 air toxics by 53,000 tons per
yeara 59 percent reduction from the pre-
regulated levels
emitted by these
facilities. In addi-
tion, the rule is
expected to reduce
VOC emissions by
over 277,000 tons
per yeara 60 per-
cent reduction from
preregulated levels
emitted by these
facilities.
15
-------
AEROSPACE MANUFACTURING
AND REWORK INDUSTRY
Final rule published September 1, 1995
Aerospace manufacturing and rework fa-
cilities produce and/or repair aerospace
vehicles and vehicle parts, such as air-
planes, helicopters, space vehicles, and
missiles.
Toxic air pollutants such as methylene
chloride (strongly suspected of causing
cancer) and chromium (Chromium VI, the
most toxic form, is known to cause lung
cancer) are released from these facilities
during paint stripping, cleaning, priming,
top
coat application, and chemical milling
maskant operations.
EPA's rule requires facilities to eliminate
most emissions of toxic air pollutants (par-
ticularly methylene chloride) from paint
stripping operations and to implement con-
trols that will reduce emissions of air toxics
resulting from other operations. The final
rule provides a variety of options for meet-
ing these requirements.
The rule is likely to yield substantial cost
savings for industry sources by providing
industry the flexibility to meet the reduc-
tions in the most cost-effective way. For
example, the rule contains a market-based
emissions averaging provision, which al-
lows facilities to overcontrol some emission
points while undercontrolling others.
The rule affects an estimated 2,800 aero-
space manufacturing facilities and will
reduce emissions of air toxics and VOCs
by 123,000 tons per yeara 60 percent
reduction from the preregulated levels
emitted by these facilities.
Air Toxics and VOC Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
82,000 tons
MARINE TANK VESSEL
LOADING OPERATIONS
Final rule published September 19, 1995
Marine tank vessels are used to transport
crude oil, gasoline, and toxic chemicals
among refineries, bulk terminals, chemical
plants, and pipeline terminals.
These vessels release toxic air pollutants
(including benzene, toluene, hexane, xylene,
and ethyl benzene) into the air during load-
ing and unloading operations.
EPA's rule sets limits for both air toxic pol-
lutants and VOCs. It requires large marine
loading terminals (i.e., terminals that load
either 200 million barrels per year of crude
oil, or 10 million barrels per year of gaso-
line) to reduce emissions of VOCs by
95 percent. It also requires all other major
sources to reduce air toxic emissions by
97 percent.
The rule affects an estimated 30 marine
tank vessel loading facilities. It will reduce
emissions of air toxics from these facilities
by approximately 4,500 tons per year
and VOC emissions by approximately
43,000 tons per year.
16
-------
WOOD FURNITURE MANUFACTURING
Final rule published December 7, 1995
The wood furniture manufacturing indus-
try includes cabinet shops and facilities
that make residential and industrial furni-
ture.
Toxic air pollutants, including toluene,
xylene, methanol, and formaldehyde, are
released from these facilities during finish-
ing, gluing, and cleaning operations. These
air toxics can cause eye, nose, throat, and
skin irritation; damage to the heart, liver,
and kidneys; and reproductive effects.
EPA's rule limits the amount of hazardous
air pollutants that can be contained in the
coatings used for finishing, gluing, and
cleaning operations (substitutes are avail-
able that contain lower quantities of hazard-
ous air pollutants). In addition, the rule
contains work practice standards such as
keeping containers closed, training workers,
and periodically inspecting equipment to
locate and repair leaks.
The rule affects an estimated 750 wood
furniture manufacturing facilities and will
reduce air toxics emissions by 33,000 tons
per yeara 60 percent reduction from
preregulated levelsand VOC emissions
by an additional 8,400 tons per year.
Air Toxics Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
22,000 tons
SHIPBUILDING AND SHIP REPAIR INDUSTRY
Final rule published December 15, 1995
The shipbuilding and repair industry in-
cludes shipyards that construct and/or re-
pair commercial or military vessels, such as
barges and tankers.
Toxic air pollutants such as xylene and tolu-
ene are released during painting and associ-
ated cleaning operations.
EPA's rule, which is based on pollution pre-
vention measures, requires that containers
of paint and cleansers be kept closed, and
that facilities use low-VOC coatings for
painting and coating operations and handle
solvent and paint wastes in a manner that
minimizes spills and evaporation. The rule
does not apply to major source shipyards
that use less than 1,000 liters (approximately
264 gallons) of coatings per year, or to
boatyards that only build or repair recre-
ational vessels (marine or freshwater) less
than 20 meters (about 66 feet) long.
The rule affects an estimated 35 shipbuild-
ing and repair facilities and will reduce
emissions of air toxics from these facilities
by 350 tons per yeara 24 percent reduction
from the preregulated levels emitted by
these facilities.
17
-------
PRINTING AND PUBLISHING
Final rule published May 30, 1996
EPA's rule covers two distinct segments of
the printing and publishing industry:
Publication rotogravure printers, which
produce paper products such as cata-
logues, magazines, newspaper inserts,
and telephone directories.
Package-product rotogravure and wide-
web flexographic facilities that print on
paper, plastic film, metal foil, and vinyl
for use in products such as flexible pack-
aging, labels, and gift wrap.
Toxic air pollutants (including toluene,
xylene, methanol, and hexane) are released
from the ink systems used by both types
of printers.
For publication rotogravure facilities, EPA's
rule limits air toxics emissions to 8 percent
of the total amount used (for example, facili-
ties that use only hazardous-air-pollutant-
based solvents would be required to recover
92 percent of the air toxics). For package-
product rotogravure and wide-web
flexographic facilities, the rule requires
95 percent overall control of all organic
hazardous air pollutant emissions from
their presses.
EPA's rule incorporates flexible compliance
options into its emissions control require-
ments. Facilities may use pollution preven-
tion methods (which allow printers to
eliminate the use of toxic chemicals or to
substitute nontoxic chemicals for toxic
ones), traditional emissions capture and
control equipment, or a combination of
the two.
The rule affects an estimated 27 publication
rotogravure facilities and 100 package-prod-
uct rotogravure and wide-web flexographic
facilities. It will reduce air toxics emissions
from publication rotogravure printers by
about 5,500 tons per year, and those from
package-product rotogravure and wide-web
flexographic printers by about 2,100 tons
per year.
OFF-SITE WASTE OPERATIONS
Final rule published July 1, 1996
Off-site waste facilities include hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal fa-
cilities; industrial wastewater treatment
facilities; solvent recycling facilities; and
used-oil recovery facilities that manage
hazardous air pollutant-containing materi-
als generated at other facilities.
A number of toxic air pollutants (including
chloroform, toluene, formaldehyde, and
xylene) are released from tanks, process
vents, equipment leaks, containers, surface
impoundments, and transfer systems
at these facilities.
EPA's rule combines equipment, opera-
tions, and work practice standards. For ex-
ample, the rule requires that containers be
covered and that process vents meet 95 per-
cent organic emission controls.
The rule affects an estimated 250 off-site
waste operation facilities. It will reduce air
toxics emissions by 43,000 tons per year and
VOC emissions by 52,000 tons per year.
-------
ELASTOMER PRODUCTION
Final rule published September 5, 1996
Elastomers are used in the production of
many synthetic rubber products, including
tires, hoses, footwear, adhesives, wire insu-
lation, floor tiles, and latexes.
A number of toxic air pollutants (such as
styrene, hexane, and toluene) are released
during the initial stages of the elastomer
manufacturing process.
EPA's rule requires that facilities use a pol-
lution prevention technique to reduce the
amount of air toxics released during elas-
tomer production. The rule sets emissions
limits for several specific emission points-
storage tanks, process vents, equipment
leaks, and wastewater systems. It also
contains a market-based emissions aver-
aging provision that allows facilities to
overcontrol some emissions points while
undercontrolling others, thus achieving
the required reductions in the most cost-
effective manner possible.
The rule affects 36 facilities nationwide and
will reduce air toxics emissions by approxi-
mately 6,400 tons annuallya 50 percent
reduction from current levels.
Air Toxics Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
6,400 tons
POLYETHYLENE TEREPHTHALATE POLYMER
AND STYRENE-BASED THERMOPLASTIC
POLYMERS PRODUCTION
Final rule published September 12, 1996
Polyethylene terephthalate polymers and
styrene-based thermoplastics are used in the
manufacture of such products as polyester
fibers, soft drink bottles, plastic automotive
parts, packing materials, and plastic toys.
A number of toxic pollutants (including sty-
rene, butadiene, and methane!) are released
into the air during polymer production.
To reduce the amount of air toxics released
from polymer production facilities, EPA's
rule sets emissions limits for several emis-
sions points: storage vessels, process vents,
equipment leaks, and wastewater opera-
tions. The rule also limits releases from pro-
cess contact cooling towers at some existing
and new facilities.
EPA developed the rule in partnership with
industry representatives and other major
stakeholders. The Agency estimates that
new facilities will experience annual cost
savings of about $5 million under the rule,
due to pollution prevention measures.
The rule affects 66 facilities nationwide
and will reduce emissions by approxi-
mately 3,880 tons annuallya 20 percent
reduction from current levels.
Air Toxics Emissions
Pre-rule
Post-rule
I
I
9,400 ton
5,520 to
19
-------
PRIMARY ALUMINUM REDUCTION INDUSTRY
Final rule published October 7, 1997
Primary aluminum reduction plants pro-
duce molten aluminum metal (virgin alumi-
num) from alumina ore. Typically, primary
aluminum plants are components of larger
facilities that prepare a variety of finished
products. These larger facilities also typi-
cally include secondary aluminum plant
operations, which use aluminum metal
to make products such as cans, aircraft
and automotive products, and construction
materials. Standards for secondary alumi-
num production are under development
by EPA and are not addressed in this
final rule.
Air toxics released during the production
of molten aluminum metal include hydro-
gen fluoride (which can cause serious res-
piratory damage) and polycyclic organic
matter (which is strongly suspected of
causing cancer and other serious health
effects).
Developed in partnership with state regu-
lators, industry stakeholders, and tribal
governments, EPA's final rule contains an
emissions averaging provision that allows
facilities to overcontrol some emissions
points while undercontrolling others, thus
achieving the required reductions in the
most cost-effective manner possible. As a
further cost-saving incentive, facilities that
consistently perform below the levels set in
the standard will be allowed to reduce the
frequency of sampling or emissions testing.
To achieve the required reductions, the final
rule relies on a combination of pollution
prevention measures, including work prac-
tices, equipment modifications, operating
practices, housekeeping measures, and in-
process recycling.
The rule affects 24 facilities nationwide.
It will reduce fluoride emissions by about
3,700 tons per year, polycyclic organic mat-
ter emissions by about 2,000 tons per year,
and particulate matter emissions by 16,000
tons per year. These emission levels repre-
sent a reduction of approximately 50 per-
cent from preregulated levels.
Pre-rule
Post-rule
Pre-rule
Post-rule
Pre-rule
Post-rule
Fluoride Emissions
Paniculate Matter Emissions
Polycyclic Organic Matter Emissions
4,000 to
2,000 ton
20
-------
PULP AND PAPER MILLS
Two final rules signed November 74, 1997
Wood and non-wood fiber sources such as
cotton, linen, and straw are turned into pulp
either though cooking via chemicals (known
as digestion), mechanical grinding, or a
combination of both. Following digestion
or grinding, the resulting fibrous mass is
washed, screened, and (depending on the
final product) sometimes bleached.
A number of toxic air pollutants (including
chloroform, chlorine, formaldehyde, metha-
nol, acetaldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone, and
metals) are released during cooking, wash-
ing, bleaching, and chemical recovery
processes at these facilities.
EPA's air toxics rules are part of an inte-
grated, multimedia regulation designed to
control pollutant releases to the water and
air. The integrated rules allow the pulp and
paper industry to consider all regulatory
requirements at one time in order to select
the most effective pollution prevention and
control technologies.
EPA has issued two final air toxics stan-
dards for the pulp and paper industry that
cover emissions from pulping and bleach-
ing processes at mills that chemically pulp
wood; papermaking processes at all mills;
and pulping and bleaching at non-wood,
mechanical, and secondary fiber mills. EPA
has also proposed requirements for emis-
sions from the chemical recovery area of
chemical wood pulping mills.
The two final rules will affect approxi-
mately 155 mills. These final rules will re-
duce air toxics emissions by 153,000 tons
per year (a 67 percent reduction from
preregulated levels at these facilities);
VOC emissions by 450,000 tons per year;
and total reduced sulfur emissions by
86,000 tons per year. The proposed rule
would reduce air toxics emissions by an
additional 2,900 tons per year; VOC
emissions by 36,000 tons per year; and
particulate matter emissions by 26,000 tons
per year.
Air Toxics Emissions (Final Rules)
Pre-rule
Post-rule
230,000 tons
77,000 tons
21
-------
Summaries of Related Solid Waste Incineration Rules
EPA has also issued final rules to control emissions of certain air toxics from solid waste combustion
facilities. These rules set emissions limits for new solid waste combustion facilities and provide emis-
sions guidelines for existing solid waste combustion facilities under Section 129 of the Clean Air Act.
MUNICIPAL WASTE COM BUSTO RS
Final rule published December 19, 1995; amended August 25, 1997
Municipal waste combustors include incin-
erators that burn waste and waste-to-energy
plants that generate energy from garbage.
EPA's final rule applies to all municipal
waste combustion units with the capacity to
burn more than 250 tons of garbage per day
(known as large municipal waste combus-
tion units; EPA has initiated development
of rules for small municipal waste combus-
tion units).
Municipal waste combustors release a num-
ber of pollutants, including cadmium, lead,
mercury, dioxin, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen
chloride, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate
matter. Dioxin and mercury are of particular
concern because they are toxic, persist in the
environment, and bioaccumulate.
EPA's rule contains strict standards for new
incinerators and sets MACT-based emis-
sions limits for existing incinerators.
The rule affects an estimated 164 municipal
waste combustion units and will signifi-
cantly reduce air toxics emissions (dioxins,
lead, cadmium, and mercury). The rule will
reduce dioxin emissions by 99 percent and
mercury emissions by 90 percent, compared
with 1990 emissions levels from these
sources. Overall emissions of other air pol-
lutants (including sulfur dioxide, particulate
matter, nitrogen oxides, and hydrogen chlo-
ride) will be reduced by more than 90,000
tons per year.
HOSPITAL/MEDICAL/INFECTIOUS
WASTE INCINERATORS
Final rule published September 15, 1997
Hospital, medical, and infectious waste is
solid waste produced in the diagnosis, treat-
ment, or immunization of humans or ani-
mals; it includes needles, gauzes, boxes, and
packaging materials. Fewer than half of all
hospitals and a small number of nursing
homes, pharmaceutical research laborato-
ries, and veterinary clinics use incinerators
to dispose of their waste.
A number of toxic air pollutants, including
dioxins, mercury, lead, and cadmium, are
released into the air during the incineration
process.
EPA's rule contains emissions limits
for new incinerators and emissions guide-
lines for existing incinerators. The rule
establishes emissions limits for nine pollut-
ants (including dioxin, lead, cadmium, and
mercury). It requires training of incinerator
operators and establishes requirements for
appropriate siting of new incinerators.
The rule affects an estimated 2,400 existing
incinerators and will reduce air toxics emis-
sions (dioxins, lead, cadmium, and mer-
cury) by more than 25 tons per year.
Dioxins will be reduced by over 90 percent
from the current levels emitted by these
incinerators. The rule will also reduce other
air pollutant emissions (particulate matter,
carbon monoxide, and hydrogen chloride)
by over 7,000 tons per year.
22
-------
Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load
- TMDL - Program and Regiilations
Background
Tftf Need- The Quality a/ Our Nuttou's Waters
Over 40% of our assessed waters still do not meet toe *atst quality ^tanckud;
states, temtoriest and authorized tribes have set for them. This amounts to over
20,000 individual rivec segments, lakes, .aad estuaries. These impaired water:.
include approximately 300,000 miles of rivfi's and shoreline:, and approximately
5 million acres, of lakes polluted moatlv by sediments, excess nutrients,, and
harmful microorganisms. An over^'heimktg majority of the population - 21 8
million -Jive within 10 miles of the impaired waters.
Section i03(tl) of the Clean Water Act
Under section 3Q3idi of the 1972 Clean Water Act, states, territories, and
authorized tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters. These
impaired waters do not meet water quality standards that states, tenitories, and
authorized tribes have set for them, e\en after point sources of pollution have
installed the rrnnirniira requited levels of pollution control technology. The law
requires that these jurisdictions establish priority rankingE far «* users on the- lists
and develop TMDLsfor these Water:.
What is ti TMDL?
A TMDL specifies 'the maximum amount of a pollutant that a ^vatei'bodv can
receive 'and still meet *ater quality standards, and allocates pollutant' loading
among, point .and nonpoinf pollutant sources By law.1, EP A must approve or
disapprove lists and TMDLs established by states, territories^ and authorized
tribes. If a state, territory, or authorized tribe submission is. inadequate, EPA
I oil Q'lS.iOlP;1?!! Ml
-------
Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load - TMDL - Program and Regulations wysiwyg://47/file:/G|/CD-ROM7overviewfs.html
must establish the list or the TMDL. EPA issued regulations in 1985 and 1992
that implement section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act - the TMDL provisions.
Litigation
While TMDLs have been required by the Clean Water Act since 1972, until
recently states, territories, authorized tribes, and EPA have not developed many.
Several years ago citizen organizations began bringing legal actions against EPA
seeking the listing of waters and development of TMDLs. To date, there have
been about 40 legal actions in 38 states. EPA is under court order or consent
decrees in many states to ensure that TMDLs are established, either by the state
or by EPA.
EPA Actions to Implement the TMDL Program
Federal Advisory Committee
In an effort to speed the Nation's progress toward achieving water quality
standards and improving the TMDL program, EPA began, in 1996, a
comprehensive evaluation of EPA's and the states' implementation of their Clean
Water Act section 303(d) responsibilities. EPA convened a committee under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, composed of 20 individuals with diverse
backgrounds, including agriculture, forestry, environmental advocacy, industry,
and state, local, and tribal governments. The committee issued its
recommendations in 1998.
The New TMDL Rule
These recommendations were used to guide the development of proposed
changes to the TMDL regulations, which EPA issued in draft in August, 1999.
After a long comment period, hundreds of meetings and conference calls, much
debate, and the Agency's review and serious consideration of over 34,000
comments, the final rule was published on July 13, 2000. However, Congress
added a "rider" to one of their appropriations bills that prohibits EPA from
spending FY2000 and FY2001 money to implement this new rule.
Current TMDL Program
The current rule remains in effect until 30 days after Congress permits EPA to
implement the new rule. TMDLs continue to be developed and completed under
the current rule, as required by the 1972 law and many court orders. The
regulations that currently apply are those that were issued in 1985 and amended
in 1992 (40 CFR Part 130, section 130.7). These regulations mandate that
states, territories, and authorized tribes list impaired and threatened waters and
develop TMDLs.
Overview of the 1992 TMDL Regulations-Under Which the
Current Program Operates
2 of 5 9/18/01 9:28 AM
-------
Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load - TMDL - Program and Regulations wysiwyg://47/file:/G|/CD-ROM7overviewfs.html
Scope of Lists of Impaired Waters
° States, territories, and authorized tribes must list waters that are
both impaired and threatened by pollutants.
° The list is composed of waters that need a TMDL.
0 At the state's, territory's, or authorized tribe's discretion, the
waterbody may remain on the list after EPA approves the TMDL,
or until water quality standards are attained.
2-Year Listing Cycle
0 States, territories, and authorized tribes are to submit their list of
waters on April 1 in every even-numbered year, except in 2000. In
March 2000, EPA issued a rule removing the requirement for the
2000 list - though some states are choosing to submit such lists on
their own initiative.
Methodology Used to Develop Lists
° States, territories, and authorized tribes must consider "all existing
and readily available water quality-related information" when
developing their lists.
° Monitored and evaluated data may be used.
° The methodology must be submitted to EPA at the same time as
the list is submitted.
0 At EPA's request, the states, territories, or authorized tribes must
provide "good cause" for not including and removing a water from
the list.
Components of a TMDL
o A TMDL is the sum of allocated loads of pollutants set at a level
necessary to implement the applicable water quality standards,
including -
Wasteload allocations from point sources, and
Load allocations from nonpoint sources and natural
background conditions.
o A TMDL must contain a margin of safety and a consideration of
seasonal variations.
Priorities/Schedules for TMDL Development
0 States, territories, and authorized tribes must establish a priority
ranking of the listed waterbodies taking into account the severity of
pollution and uses to be made of the water, for example, fishing,
swimming, and drinking water.
0 The list must identify for each waterbody the pollutant that is
causing the impairment.
0 States, territories, and authorized tribes must identify waters
targeted for TMDL development within the next 2 years.
Public Review/Participation
0 Calculations to establish TMDLs are subject to public review as
defined in the state's continuing planning process.
EPA Actions on Lists and TMDLs
° EPA has 30 days in which to approve or disapprove a state's,
territory's, or authorized tribe's list and the TMDLs.
o If EPA disapproves either the state's, territory's, or authorized
tribe's list or an individual TMDL, EPA has 30 days to establish the
3 of 5 9/18/01 9:28 AM
-------
Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load - TMDL - Program and Regulations wysiwyg://47/file:/G|/CD-ROM7overviewfs.html
list or the TMDL. EPA must seek public comment on the list or
TMDL it establishes.
1997 Interpretative Guidance for the TMDL Program
o EPA issued guidance in August, 1997, to respond to some of the
issues raised as the program developed. The guidance includes a
number of recommendations intended to achieve a more nationally
consistent approach for developing and implementing TMDLs to
attain water quality standards. These recommendations include:
0 States, territories, and authorized tribes should develop schedules
for establishing TMDLs expeditiously, generally within 8-13 years
of being listed. EPA Regions should have a specific written
agreement with each state, territory or authorized tribe in the
Region about these schedules. Factors to be considered in
developing the schedule could include:
Number of impaired segments;
Length of river miles, lakes, or other waterbodies for which
TMDLs are needed;
Proximity of listed waters to each other within a watershed;
Number and relative complexity of the TMDLs;
Number and similarities or differences among the source
categories;
Availability of monitoring data or models; and
Relative significance of the environmental harm or threat.
0 States, territories, and authorized tribes should describe a plan for
implementing load allocations for waters impaired solely or
primarily by nonpoint sources, including -
Reasonable assurances that load allocations will be achieved,
using incentive-based, non-regulatory or regulatory
approaches. TMDL implementation may involve individual
landowners and public or private enterprises engaged in
agriculture, forestry, or urban development. The primary
implementation mechanism may include the state, territory,
or authorized tribe section 319 nonpoint source management
program coupled with state, local, and federal land
management programs and authorities,
Public participation process, and
Recognition of other watershed management processes and
programs, such as local source water protection and urban
storm water management programs, as well as the state's
section 303(e) continuing planning process.
For more information, see EPA's TMDL web site at:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/
0 Status report on litigation
0 TMDL Federal Advisory Committee Report
0 Maps and information on impaired waters
o Links to other TMDL web sites, including states
0 Regulations and guidance
4 of 5 9/18/01 9:28 AM
-------
Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load - TMDL - Program and Regulations wysiwyg://47/file:/G|/CD-ROM7overviewfs.html
Back to TMDL Homepage
OWOW Front Page Watershed Approach Front Page
[EPA Home | Search | Browse | What's New | Comments ]
Revised: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 09:25:42
file:///G|/CD-ROM/overviewfs.html
5 of 5 9/18/01 9:28 AM
-------
Mi re i '1:".li I'lul
n IHz'Clll Pl.4llJi_, , I .III: ,l .
'.Vdil.inj'.. i Dl: -.'lUTHj. .j --
Seven Cardinal
Rules of Risk
Communication
-------
(.1
VA
t:»',,;t.U^tlr- 1,0!," <> lli.-.-n j,
Ar.ceoE and invclvr?
ic as & -?Kjii
l.wcJ-3«lir
f '« i' % -ij t"i- ' [ :i i .- ' t
< i- i i , ,i ',
" - . i i, i Ihl i t>\ l'i,1 M
>( l,' ! . ' i - "fi
* <
-------
ID the public's
concerns
.
iniiziti&ir
Guideline; LV > > *
.
..ink. or wan1
Jake-fh? IHT* tn
thinking: u«- it
.''- mton'JL'v. - .-i i i
- i .,i i, , ...
i IF a staki< In 11 i" I
ii 1.1, JdtJJllilTriiilMi VMlri 11-.I i
Irv Ih puf VLUjr&L'U In I hi111 nlfli't'
\ I ill i ..........
wl>ftl (hi,^ tn id. iiildn-.-. i,, i . M
CCll in- Ml- ..- '-\\''' .1- ' . I
-in . ; . i I ; '. ., ..... >.
, , - ,.
i
tt^ Cunadti
fc^k' t«t the tfiiiMkiTi
">** twr^jnr't.'d aboui «<
I fait; CXR^KIitf
I r.-- I
' " ixiu da not laiit^. jr
xueoii* 4ay
I. .11" ;
«»^taVx* Diidoio; ti^ in:-''" 0.
, HI ,i, pi s^ihli- Minpk.Ti'.iJluj!, nils
i .1 -- .iliuul n.-]jah:iiis i I'" uri
H^IP - B . -I
"I .... uLlli' i"iflK' L'.lUl
iHiilluji. Li' in dijub^ I ear.
,h I in/. Illi-IV iin|niV>.ilii'r
Ifm*---!! ('i-.-irlr.. m.iv thmk ym
I i 'in MM1'.. I 'L5CUS5. J>ll.
'I I
*vr,|l P. . ir ' 'I.: - : '
uli- . i h,-r
'
-k
r 1'niUiirv,; In .I, .
h ullu'i
..... hl'li
-------
1 .' . - »sr
* l-cw tntrtg-1 TLiLt ri-L
cm
litv- ur pui*hc (Ija^'-i , i1!" ii--- - . l.i ; I
' .>3 roli: m K.-f1>n, . I n
1 rmurinfi outonn
.-'- Jife
t" lo n?p.
-..-'--,
In life? nt-tsi.-
acts T, .'
#&&*(* «*) pn<
''« not
n»
if media JPC frcn «*i>
'«5lBd in poiiac5- . .
II.,' irif T: -' '
t I
,. ,
Speiit dearly and
with compassion
«: Jin
JKC fn-
ptith i
t.-ML'- Ufh.1,. iXlTK -,«-If i 11.1
I i 11 . i|;ift\L'Tl|i.'1itr.' ', ri m liaTW.'rijI'
I - ! > ^.implex and an-ct-dnU-
i -iib; tn.ilimul nsk il.ii.k..
'!" AM.4.1 Ji'^ant, absii
n ili-i-ldli; !.»'l|;il,l|.^' abullll illMtllh.
HL|Min'.,, jirid Illnr:---!1 i Ai.l,nn\vk'il);(i'
,liv.l t('M|',nnl ihnlii . \- . -.1- ,iuj H'||
h |(MI».| III . r ..... ,-. i ., ii |,,',.|.||.
,r< ,- I ' ".^fT
. I . I- ..-.- ,
. . I . l. i 11 ...
(hi ).( I-:. .1. . - .,- jr»s>'jrt2ni "
.
;jc\
: It .
.l
- '
CMUW
teir.
» KV i
ii rlc intomfl : - "
Jill W lU IHtf Iv --UPS .
ISi-vi>i |44 your i-ttcirt>
|'h ll »UI Jl'.f.- JT!.'V:'.,I ',
' nuwlcdgftTtaild sjvm(i-'lm«
-------
M,- th^jr 11 a
II pL-upK' ,,r\.-
my el ft qjultt.' uipLibk1 4>f
anrsEi] nd i rx^
. L'v-!.Ti if MK-V ::iuv run
I'M,'
L'TWifTfi-k t-V. Akcri.wilh tht
-!:? i>i, -i i ii-f ,,,iti' rnirrfj ^i; HI.-J .......
C(>H fityn,-" \t< -|M,f i '(Hi n^i^vnufi.i"
Ji,' [.- LhfO.1tH~ :'! {>',*: '! '.iHllrH (fit K !-'.
lHflflfhbfiJfrl .if CV^i.'i'i^'hJ L/rriVirirhi
lil'f^. -VI If f'rOMjff,-^ j,' I'I'IL' iri...,-.'L
,'i'f Ki.^- t-.-.T'i.-L- :5K.-U TV., [i
, V.n. .-.nl' i'u-Jit ','n '»!
-I' ... .". L;KVV -I".- 1 ii
jJii !- ,'f 'I,.,. L'lf.liL-t: ii.l
P.-I ji i- iV.
L'i as .'j.
,ifi',
i kitVvS.ri'1'1 if L'I^JV frvii'i ufs^ f-:i "i <'
' '. Iff If .|.'.Vrlfr.,'MI
-------
c/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Wastewater
Management (4203)
EPA-833-B-98-002
February 1999
Introduction to the National
Pretreatment Program
biFfii d-^i'.-nnr-f Mm
V Jitiji jri^d! -Mml PT-F,-s,»t nsf'f
Programs
Cuifiiince Mama*
fqr PQTW Pr
-
' :r: w
Ir.r Implemanting
fatal Tnnk: Oi^tftitics £TTOI
-------
Disclaimer
Mention of trade names or commercial products in this
document or associated references does not constitute
an endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface iii
List of Acronyms v
Glossary of Terms vii
1. POTWs and the Need for the Pretreatment Program 1
Sewage Treatment 1
Need for the Pretreatment Program 2
2. Overview of the National Pretreatment Program 5
The Clean Water Act 5
The General Pretreatment Regulations 6
POTW Pretreatment Programs 7
3. Pretreatment Standards 11
Prohibited Discharge Standards 11
Categorical Standards 12
Local Limits 20
Summary of Standards 22
4. POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities 23
Legal Authority 23
Industrial Waste Surveys 24
Permitting 25
Inspections 26
Sampling 27
Enforcement 28
Data Management and Record Keeping 31
Public Participation and POTW Reporting 32
5. Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities 35
Reporting Requirements 35
Self-Monitoring Requirements 39
Record Keeping Requirements 40
6. Hauled Wastes 43
Nature of Hauled Wastes 43
Control Programs 43
Concerns 45
7. Pollution Prevention 47
Pollution Prevention and the Pretreatment Program 48
Benefits of Pollution Prevention 49
Pollution Prevention Assistance 50
8. Bibliography 51
APPENDICES
A Annotated Summaries of Existing Pretreatment Guidance Material A-1
B Document Ordering Information B-1
C EPA/State Primary Pretreatment Contacts/Addresses C-1
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Preface
PREFACE
The industrial boom in the United States during the 1950s and 60s brought with it a level of pollution
never before seen in this country. Scenes of dying fish, burning rivers, and thick black smog engulfing major
metropolitan areas were images and stories repeated regularly on the evening news. In December of 1970,
the President of the United States created the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through an
executive order in response to these critical environmental problems.
In 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act (CWA) to restore and maintain the integrity of the
nation's waters. Although prior legislation had been enacted to address water pollution, those previous
efforts were developed with other goals in mind. For example, the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act protected
navigational interests while the 1948 Water Pollution Control Act and the 1956 Federal Water Pollution
Control Act merely provided limited funding for State and local governments to address water pollution
concerns on their own.
The CWA required the elimination of the discharge of pollutants into the nation's waters and the
achievement of fishable and swimmable waterquality levels. EPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permitting Program represents one of the key components established to accomplish this
feat. The NPDES program requires that all point source discharges to waters of the U.S. (i.e., "direct
discharges") must be permitted.
To address "indirect discharges" from industries to Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs), EPA,
through CWA authorities, established the National Pretreatment Program as a component of the NPDES
Permitting Program. The National Pretreatment Program requires industrial and commercial dischargers
to treat or control pollutants in their wastewater prior to discharge to POTWs.
In 1986, more than one-third of all toxic pollutants entered the nation's waters from publicly owned
treatment works (POTWs) through industrial discharges to public sewers.1 Certain industrial discharges,
such as slug loads, can interfere with the operation of POTWs, leading to the discharge of untreated or
inadequately treated wastewater into rivers, lakes, etc. Some pollutants are not compatible with biological
wastewater treatment at POTWs and may pass through the treatment plant untreated. This "pass through"
of pollutants impacts the surrounding environment, occasionally causing fish kills or other detrimental
alterations of the receiving waters. Even when POTWs have the capability to remove toxic pollutants from
wastewater, these toxics can end up in the POTWs sewage sludge, which in many places is land applied
to food crops, parks, or golf courses as fertilizer or soil conditioner.
The National Pretreatment Program is unique in that the General Pretreatment Regulations require all
large POTWs (i.e., those designed to treat flows of more than 5 million gallons per day) and smaller POTWs
with significant industrial discharges to establish local pretreatment programs. These local programs must
enforce all national pretreatment standards and requirements in addition to any more stringent local
requirements necessary to protect site-specific conditions at the POTW. More than 1,500 POTWs have
developed and are implementing local pretreatment programs designed to control discharges from
approximately 30,000 significant industrial users.
Since 1983, the Pretreatment Program has made great strides in reducing the discharge of toxic
pollutants to sewer systems and to waters of the U.S. In the eyes of many, the Pretreatment Program,
implemented as a partnership between EPA, States, and POTWs, is a notable success story in reducing
impacts to human health and the environment. These strides can be attributed to the efforts of many
Federal, State, local, and industrial representatives who have been involved with developing and
implementing the various aspects of the Pretreatment Program.
EPA, Environmental Regulations and Technology: The National Pretreatment Program, July 1986,
p.4.
-------
Preface Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
EPA has supported the Pretreatment Program through development of numerous guidance manuals.
EPA has released more than 30 manuals that provide guidance to EPA, States, POTWs, and industry on
various pretreatment program requirements and policy determinations. Through this guidance, the
Pretreatment Program has maintained national consistency in interpretation of the regulations.
Nevertheless, turnover in pretreatment program staff has diluted historical knowledge leaving new staff
and other interested parties unaware of existing materials. With this in mind, the intent of this guidance
manual, Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program, is to:
(1) provide a reference for anyone interested in understanding the basics of pretreatment program
requirements, and
(2) provide a roadmap to additional and more detailed guidance materials for those trying to
implement specific elements of the Pretreatment Program.
While the Pretreatment Program has demonstrated significant reductions in pollutants discharged to
POTWs, Congress' goals of zero discharge of toxic pollutants and fishable/swimmable water quality have
not been realized. EPA is currently working to establish more cost-effective and common sense approaches
to environmental protection (e.g., using watershed, streamlining, and reinvention concepts), creating new
responsibilities for all those involved in the National Pretreatment Program. Many current challenges
remain, while many new ones likely lie ahead. This guidance manual is intended to provide an
understanding of the basic concepts that drive the Program, the current status of the Program and program
guidance, and an insight into what the future holds for all those involved with implementing the Pretreatment
Program.
As noted above, this guidance manual is organized to provide an overview of program requirements and
to referthe readerto more detailed EPA guidance that exists on specific program elements. To accomplish
this, the guidance manual incorporates two key features: 1) the first page of each chapter contains a list of
EPA references applicable to the topics discussed in that chapter, and 2) abstracts of each reference are
provided in Appendix A with document ordering information provided in Appendix B. Addresses of EPA and
State pretreatment staff are provided in AppendixC. Additionally, Chapters contains a bibliography of these
guidance materials, and other materials that may be useful to the reader and describes how to obtain them.
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
List of Acronyms
LIST OF ACRONYMS
Acronym Full Phrase
AA Approval Authority
AO Administrative Order
BAT Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
BCT Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
BMP Best Management Practices
BMR Baseline Monitoring Report
BOD5 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BPJ Best Professional Judgment
BPT Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
CA Control Authority
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CIU Categorical Industrial User
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
CWA Clean Water Act (formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972) Pub. L. 92-500, as amended by Pub. L. 95-
217, Pub. L. 95-576, Pub. L. 96-483, Pub. L. 97-117, and Pub. L. 100-4, 33 U.S.C. 1251 etseq.
CWF Combined Wastestream Formula
CWT Centralized Waste Treater
DMR Discharge Monitoring Report
DSE Domestic Sewage Exclusion
DSS Domestic Sewage Study
ELG Effluent Limitations Guideline
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Preparedness and Community Right to Know Act
ERP Enforcement Response Plan
FDF Fundamentally Different Factors
FR Federal Register
FWA Flow Weighted Average
gpd Gallons per Day
ID Industrial User
LEL Lower Explosive Limit
MAHL Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading
MAIL Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading
MGD Million Gallons per Day
MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet
NAICS North American Industry Classification System (replaces SIC coding system in 1998)
NOV Notice of Violation
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council
NSPS New Source Performance Standard
O&G Oil and Grease
Acronym Full Phrase
-------
List of Acronyms
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
O&M Operations and Maintenance
OCPSF Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers
P2 Pollution Prevention
PCI Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
PCS Permit Compliance System
PIRT Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PSES Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
PSNS Pretreatment Standards for New Sources
QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SIU Significant Industrial User
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures
SNC Significant Noncompliance
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
SUO Sewer Use Ordinance
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TIE Toxicity Identification Evaluation
TOMP Toxic Organic Management Program
TRE Toxicity Reduction Evaluation
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TSS Total Suspended Solids
TTO Total Toxic Organics
USC United States Code
UST Underground Storage Tank
WET Whole Effluent Toxicity
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Glossary of Terms
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
This glossary includes a collection of terms used in this manual and an explanation of each term. To
the extent that definitions and explanations provided in this glossary differ from those in EPA regulations or
other official documents, the definitions used herein are intended for use in understanding this manual only.
Act or "the Act" [40 CFR §403.3(b)]
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 USC 1251
et.seq.
Approval Authority [40 CFR §403.3(c)]
The Director in an NPDES State with an approved State Pretreatment Program and the appropriate EPA
Regional Administrator in a non-NPDES State or State without an approved pretreatment program.
Approved POTW Pretreatment Program or Program [40 CFR §403.3(d)]
A program administered by a POTW that meets the criteria established in 40 CFR Part 403 and which
has been approved by a Regional Administrator or State Director.
Approved State Pretreatment Program
A program administered by a State that meets the criteria established in 40 CFR §403.10 and which has
been approved by a Regional Administrator
Approved/Authorized State
A State with an NPDES permit program approved pursuant to section 402(b) of the Act and an approved
State Pretreatment Program.
Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR) [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.12(b)]
A report submitted by categorical industrial users (CILJs) within 180 days after the effective date of an
applicable categorical standard, or at least 90 days prior to commencement of discharge for new sources,
which contains specific facility information, including flow and pollutant concentration data. For existing
sources, the report must also certify as to the compliance status of the facility with respect to the categorical
standards.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
A level of technology based on the best existing control and treatment measures that are economically
achievable within the given industrial category or subcategory.
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management
practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the U.S. BMPs also include treatment requirements,
operating procedures and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal,
or drainage from raw material storage.
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
A level of technology represented by the average of the best existing wastewatertreatment performance
levels within an industrial category or subcategory.
Best Professional Judgment (BPJ)
The method used by a permit writer to develop technology-based limitations on a case-by-case basis
using all reasonably available and relevant data.
Slowdown
-------
Glossary of Terms Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
The discharge of water with high concentrations of accumulated solids from boilers to prevent plugging
of the boilertubes and/or steam lines. In cooling towers, blowdown is discharged to reduce the concentration
of dissolved salts in the recirculating cooling water.
Bypass [40 CFR §403.17(a)]
The intentional diversion of wastestreams from any portion of an Industrial User's treatment facility.
Categorical Industrial User (CIU)
An industrial user subject to National categorical pretreatment standards.
Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Limitations on pollutant discharges to POTWs promulgated by EPA in accordance with Section 307 of
the Clean Water Act, that apply to specific process wastewater discharges of particular industrial categories
[40 CFR § 403.6 and 40 CFR Parts 405-471].
Chain of Custody (COC)
A record of each person involved in the possession of a sample from the person who collects the sample
to the person who analyzes the sample in the laboratory.
Chronic
A stimulus that lingers or continues for a relatively long period of time, often one-tenth of the life span
or more. Chronic should be considered a relative term depending on the life span of an organism. The
measurement of chronic effect can be reduced growth, reduced reproduction, etc., in addition to lethality.
Clean Water Act (CWA)
The common name for the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Public law 92-500; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.: legislation which provides statutory authority for both NPDES and Pretreatment Programs.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
A codification of Federal rules published annually by the Office of the Federal Register National Archives
and Records Administration. Title 40 of the CFR contains the regulations for Protection of the Environment.
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO)
A discharge of untreated wastewater from a combined sewer system at a point prior to the headworks
of a publicly owned treatment works. CSOs generally occur during wet weather (rainfall or snowfall). During
periods of wet weather, these systems become overloaded, bypass treatment works, and discharge directly
to receiving waters.
Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF) [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.6(e)]
Procedure for calculating alternative discharge limits at industrial facilities where a regulated
wastestream from a categorical industrial user is combined with other wastestreams prior to treatment.
Compliance Schedule
A schedule of remedial measures included in a permit or an enforcement order, including a sequence
of interim requirements (for example, actions, operations, or milestone events) that lead to compliance with
the CWA and regulations.
Composite Sample
Sample composed of two or more discrete samples. The aggregate sample will reflect the average
water quality covering the compositing or sample period.
Concentration-based Limit
A limit based upon the relative strength of a pollutant in a wastestream, usually expressed in mg/l.
Continuous Discharge
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program _ Glossary of Terms
A discharge that occurs without interruption during the operating hours of a facility, except for infrequent
shutdowns for maintenance, process changes or similar activities.
Control Authority [paraphrased from 40 CFR § 403. 12(a)]
A POTWwith an approved pretreatment program or the approval authority in the absence of a POTW
pretreatment program.
Conventional Pollutants
BOD, TSS, fecal coliform, oil and grease, and pH
Daily Maximum Limitations
The maximum allowable discharge of pollutants during a 24 hour period. Where daily maximum
limitations are expressed in units of mass, the daily discharge is the total mass discharged over the course
of the day. Where daily maximum limitations are expressed in terms of a concentration, the daily discharge
is the arithmetic average measurement of the pollutant concentration derived from all measurements taken
that day.
Detection Limit
The minimum concentration of an analyte(substance) that can be measured and reported with a 99%
confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero as determined by the procedure set forth in
40 CFR Part 1 36, Appendix B.
Development Document
Detailed report of studies conducted by the U.S. EPAforthe purpose of establishing effluent guidelines
and categorical pretreatment standards.
D i I ute Wastestream [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403. 6(e) (1) (i)]
For purposes of the combined wastestream formula, the average daily flow (at least a 30-day average)
from : (a) boiler blowdown streams, non-contact cooling streams, storm water streams, and demineralized
backwash streams; provided, however, that where such streams contain a significant amount of a pollutant,
and the combination of such streams, prior to treatment, with an industrial user's regulated process
wastestream(s) will result in a substantial reduction of that pollutant, the Control Authority, upon application
of the industrial user, may exercise its discretion to determine whether such stream(s) should be classified
as diluted or unregulated. In its application to the Control Authority, the industrial user must provide
engineering, production, sampling and analysis, and such other information so the control authority can make
its determination; or (b) sanitary wastestreams where such streams are not regulated by a categorical
pretreatment standard; or (c) from any process wastestreams which were, or could have been, entirely
exempted from categorical pretreatment standards pursuant to paragraph 8 of the NRDC v. Costle Consent
Decree (12 ERG 1833) for one more of the following reasons (see Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 403):
a. the pollutants of concern are not detectable in the effluent from the industrial user (paragraph
b. the pollutants of concern are present only in trace amounts and are neither causing nor likely to
cause toxic effects (paragraph (8)(a)(iii));
c. the pollutants of concern are present in amounts too small to be effectively deduced by technologies
known to the Administrator (paragraph (8)(a)(iii)); or
d. the wastestream contains only pollutants which are compatible with the POTW (paragraph (8)(b)(l)).
Effluent Limitations Guideline
Any effluent limitations guidelines issued by EPA pursuant to Section 304(b) of the CWA. These
regulations are published to adopt or revise a national standard prescribing restrictions on quantities, rates,
and concentrations of chemical, physical, biological, and other constituents which are discharged from point
sources, in specific industrial categories (e.g., metal finishing, metal molding and casting, etc).
Enforcement Response Plan [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.8(f)(5)]
Step-by-step enforcement procedures followed by Control Authority staff to identify, document, and
respond to violations.
-------
Glossary of Terms Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Existing Source
Any source of discharge, the construction or operation of which commenced prior to the publication by
the EPA of proposed categorical pretreatment standards, which will be applicable to such source if the
standard is thereafter promulgated in accordance with Section 307 of the Act.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA)
The title of Public law 92-500; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA),
enacted October 18, 1972.
Flow Weighted Average Formula (FWA) [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.6(e)]
A procedure used to calculate alternative limits where wastestreams regulated by a categorical
pretreatment standard and nonregulated wastestreams combine after treatment but prior to the monitoring
point.
Flow Proportional Composite Sample
Combination of individual samples proportional to the flow of the wastestream at the time of sampling.
Fundamentally Different Factors [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.13]
Case-by-case variance from categorical pretreatment standards based on the factors considered by EPA
in developing the applicable category/subcategory being fundamentally different than factors relating to a
specific industrial user.
General Prohibitions [40 CFR §403.5(a)(1)]
No user shall introduce into a POTWany pollutant(s) which cause pass through or interference.
Grab Sample
A sample which is taken from a wastestream on a one-time basis with no regard to the flow of the
wastestream and without consideration of time. A single grab sample should be taken over a period of time
not to exceed 15 minutes.
Indirect Discharge or Discharge [40 CFR §403.3(g)]
The introduction of pollutants into a POTW from any non-domestic source regulated under section
307(b), (c), or (d) of the Act.
Industrial User (IU) or User [40 CFR §403.3(h)]
A source of indirect discharge.
Industrial Waste Survey
The process of identifying and locating industrial users and characterizing their industrial discharge.
Inhibition Concentration
Estimate of the toxicant concentration that would cause a given percent reduction (e.g., IC25) in a
nonlethal biological measurement of the test organisms, such as reproduction or growth.
Interference [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.3(i)]
A discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: (1)
inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal;
and (2) therefore is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTWs NPDES permit (including an
increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation) or of the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal
in compliance with ... [applicable] statutory provisions and regulations or permits issued thereunder (or more
stringent State or local regulations) ...
Local Limits [paraphrased 40 CFR § 403.5(c)]
Specific discharge limits developed and enforced by POTWs upon industrial or commercial facilities to
implement the general and specific discharge prohibitions listed in 40 CFR §§403.5(a)(1) and (b).
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Glossary of Terms
Monthly Average
The arithmetic average value of all samples taken in a calendar month for an individual pollutant
parameter. The monthly average may be the average of all grab samples taken in a given calendar month,
or the average of all composite samples taken in a given calendar month.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
The national program for issuing, modifying, revoking and reissuing, terminating, monitoring and
enforcing discharge permits from point sources to waters of the United States, and imposing and enforcing
pretreatment requirements, under sections 307, 402, 318, and 405 of the CWA.
National Pretreatment Standard or Pretreatment Standard or Standard [40 CFR §403.3(j)]
Any regulation containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA in accordance with section
307(b) and (c) of the Act, which applies to Industrial Users. This term includes prohibitive discharge limits
established pursuant to §403.5.
New Source [40 CFR §403.3(k)]
Any building, structure, facility or installation from which there is or may be a discharge of pollutants, the
construction of which commenced after the publication of proposed Pretreatment Standards under section
307(c) of the Act which will be applicable to such source if such standards are thereafter promulgated in
accordance with that section provided that
(a) The building, structure, facility or installation is constructed at a site at which no other discharge
source is located; or
(b) The building, structure, facility or installation totally replaces the process or production equipment
that causes the discharge of pollutants at an existing source; or
(c) The production or wastewater generating processes of the building, structure, facility, or installation
are substantially independent of an existing source at the same site. In determining whether these
are substantially independent, factors such as the extent to which the new facility is integrated with
the existing plant, and the extent to which the new facility is engaged in the same general type of
activity as the existing source, should be considered.
Construction on a site at which an existing source is located results in a modification rather than a new
source if the construction does not create a new building, structure, facility, or installation meeting the criteria
of paragraphs (k)(1)(ii), or (k)(1)(iii) of this section but otherwise alters, replaces, or adds to existing process
or production equipment.
Construction of a new source, as defined under this paragraph has commenced if the owner or operator has:
(i) Begun, or caused to begin as part of a continuous onsite construction program:
(A) Any placement, assembly, or installation of facilities or equipment; or
(B) Significant site preparation work including clearing, excavation, or removal of existing buildings,
structures, or facilities which is necessary for the placement, assembly, or installation of new
source facilities or equipment, or
(C) Entered into a binding contractual obligation for the purchase of facilities or equipment which
are intended to be used in its operation within a reasonable time. Options to purchase or
contracts which can be terminated or modified without substantial loss, and contracts for
feasibility, engineering, and design studies do not constitute a contractual obligation under this
paragraph.
90-Day Final Compliance Report [40 CFR §403.12(d)]
A report submitted by categorical industrial users within 90 days following the date for final compliance
with the standards. This report must contain flow measurement (of regulated process streams and other
-------
Glossary of Terms Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
streams), measurement of pollutants, and a certification as to whether the categorical standards are being
met.
Nonconventional Pollutants
Any pollutant that is neither a toxic pollutant nor a conventional pollutant (e.g., manganese, ammonia,
etc.)
Non-Contact Cooling Water
Water used for cooling which does not come into direct contact with any raw material, intermediate
product, waste product, or finished product. The only pollutant contributed from the discharge is heat.
Non-Regulated Wastestream
Unregulated and dilute wastestreams (not regulated by categorical standards).
Pass Through [40 CFR §403.3(n)]
A discharge which exits the POTW into waters of the United States in quantities or concentrations which,
alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a cause of a violation of any
requirement of the POTWs NPDES permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a
violation).
Periodic Compliance Report [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.12(e) & (h)]
A report on compliance status submitted by categorical industrial users and significant noncategorical
industrial users to the control authority at least semiannually (once every six months).
Point Source [40 CFR 122.2]
Any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel,
tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fixture, container, rolling stock concentrated animal feeding operation vessel,
or other floating craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged.
Pollutant [40 CFR 122.2]
Dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge,
munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials (except those regulated under the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.)), heat, wrecked or discarded equipment,
rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal and agricultural waste discharged into water.
Pretreatment [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.3(q)]
The reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature
of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants
into a POTW.
Pretreatment Requirements [40 CFR §403.3(r)]
Any substantive or procedural requirement related to Pretreatment, otherthan a National Pretreatment
Standard, imposed on an Industrial User.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
Categorical Standards and requirements applicable to industrial sources that began construction prior
to the publication of the proposed pretreatment standards for that industrial category.(see individual
standards at 40 CFR Parts 405-471.)
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
Categorical Standards and requirements applicable to industrial sources that began construction after
the publication of the proposed pretreatment standards forthat industrial category, (see individual standards
at 40 CFR Parts 405-471.)
Priority Pollutant
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Glossary of Terms
Pollutant listed by the Administrator of EPA under Clean Water Act section 307(a). The list of the current
126 Priority Pollutants can be found in 40 CFR Part 423 Appendix A.
Process Wastewater
Any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into contact with or results from the
production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, byproduct, or waste product.
Production-Based Standards
A discharge standard expressed in terms of pollutant mass allowed in a discharge per unit of product
manufactured.
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) [40 CFR §403.3(o)]
A treatment works as defined by section 212 of the Act, which is owned by a State or municipality (as
defined by section 502(4) of the Act). This definition includes any devices or systems used in the storage,
treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It also
includes sewers, pipes or other conveyances only if they convey wastewaterto a POTW Treatment Plant.
The term also means the municipality as defined in section 502(4) of the Act, which has jurisdiction over the
Indirect Discharges to and the discharges from such a treatment works.
Regulated Wastestream
For purposes of applying the combined wastestream formula, a wastestream from an industrial process
that is regulated by a categorical standard.
Removal Credit [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.7]
Variance from a pollutant limit specified in a categorical pretreatment standard to reflect removal by the
POTW of said pollutant.
Representative Sample
A sample from a wastestream that is as nearly identical as possible in composition to that in the larger
volume of wastewater being discharged and typical of the discharge from the facility on a normal operating
day.
Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO)
Untreated or partially treated sewage overflows from a sanitary sewer collection system.
Self-Monitoring
Sampling and analyses performed by a facility to ensure compliance with a permit or other regulatory
requirements.
Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO)
A legal mechanism implemented by a local government entity which sets out, among others,
requirements for the discharge of pollutants into a publicly owned treatment works.
Significant Industrial User (SIU) [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.3(t)]
(1) All users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 CFR 403.6 and 40 CFR chapter
I, subchapter N; and (2) Any other industrial user that: discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or
more of process wastewater to the POTW (excluding sanitary, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown
wastewater); contributes a process wastestream which makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry
weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant; or is designated as such by the Control
Authority as defined in 40 CFR403.12(a) on the basis that the industrial user has a reasonable potential for
adversely affecting the POTWs operation or for violating any pretreatment standard or requirement (in
accordance with 40 CFR 403.8(f)(6)].
Significant Noncompliance (SNC) [40 CFR §403.8(f)(2)(vii)]
Industrial user violations meeting one or more of the following criteria:
1) Chronic violations of wastewater discharge limits, defined here as those in which sixty-six
percent or more of all of the measurements taken during a six month period exceed (by any
magnitude) the daily maximum limit or the average limit for the same pollutant parameter;
-------
Glossary of Terms Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
2) Technical Review Criteria (TRC) violations, defined here as those in which thirty-three percent
or more of all of the measurements for each pollutants parameter taken during a six-month period
equal or exceed the product of the daily maximum limit or the average limit multiplied by the
applicable TRC (TRC=1.4 for BOD, TSS, fats, oil, and grease, and 1.2 for all other pollutants except
PH);
3) Any other violation of a pretreatment effluent limit (daily maximum or longer-term average) that
the Control Authority determines has caused, alone or in combination with other dischargers,
interference or pass through (including endangering the health of POTW personnel or the general
public);
4) Any discharge of a pollutant that has caused imminent endangerment to human health, welfare
or to the environment or has resulted in the POTW's exercise of its emergency authority under
paragraph (f)(1)(vi)(B) of this section to halt or prevent such a discharge;
5) Failure to meet, within 90 days after the schedule date, a compliance schedule milestone
contained in a local control mechanism or enforcement order for starting construction, completing
construction, or attaining final compliance;
6) Failure to provide, within 30 days after the due date, required reports such as baseline
monitoring reports, 90-day compliance reports, periodic self-monitoring reports, and reports on
compliance with compliance schedules;
7) Failure to accurately report noncompliance;
8) Any other violation or group of violations which the Control Authority determines will adversely
affect the operation or implementation of the local pretreatment program.
Slug Discharge [40 CFR §403.8(f)(2)(v)]
Any discharge of a non-routine, episodic nature, including but not limited to, an accidental spill or a
noncustomary batch discharge.
Specific Prohibitions [40 CFR §403.5(b)]
The following pollutants shall not be introduced into a POTW:
1) Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW, including but not limited to,
wastestreams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit or 60 degrees
Centigrade using the test methods specified in 40 CFR Part 261.21;
2) Pollutants which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW, but in no case discharges
with pH lowerthan 5.0, unless the works is specifically designed to accommodate such discharges;
3) Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which will cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW
resulting in interference;
4) Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants(BOD, etc.) Released in a discharge at a
flow rate and/or concentration which will cause interference with the POTW;
5) Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in interference, but
in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTW treatment plant exceeds
40°C(104°F) unless the Approval Authority, upon request of the POTW, approves alternative
temperature limits;
6) Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will
cause interference or pass through;
7) Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors, or fumes within the POTW in a
quantity that may cause acute worker health and safety problems;
8) Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by the POTW.
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
A system developed by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget that is used to classify various types
of business entities. Effective in 1998, the SIC scheme is replace by the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS), although EPA has not yet implemented this change.
Storm Water
Rain water, snow melt, and surface runoff and drainage.
Time Proportional Composite Sample
A sample consisting of a series of aliquots collected from a representative point in the discharge stream
at equal time intervals over the entire discharge period on the sampling day.
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Glossary of Terms
Toxic Pollutant
Any pollutant listed as toxic under section 307(a)(1) oftheCWA, or in the case of sludge useordisposal
practices, any pollutant identified in regulations implementing section 405(d) of the CWA.
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation
A site-specific study conducted in a stepwise process designed to identify the causative agent(s) of
effluent toxicity, isolate the sources of toxicity, evaluate the effectiveness of toxicity control options, and then
confirm the reduction in effluent toxicity.
Toxicity Test
A procedure to determine the toxicity of a chemical or an effluent using living organisms. A toxicity test
measures the degree of effect on exposed test organisms of a specific chemical or effluent.
Toxicity Identification Evaluation
Set of procedures to identify the specific chemicals responsible for effluent toxicity.
Unregulated Wastestream
For purposes of applying the combined wastestream formula, a wastestream not regulated by a
categorical standard nor considered a dilute wastestream.
Upset [paraphrased from 40 CFR §403.16(a)]
An exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with categorical
Pretreatment Standards because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the Industrial User. An Upset
does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment
facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventative maintenance, or careless or improper
operation.
Water Quality Criteria
Comprised of both numeric and narrative criteria. Numeric criteria are scientifically derived ambient
concentrations developed by EPA or States for various pollutants of concern to protect human health and
aquatic life. Narrative criteria are statements that describe the desired water quality goal.
Water Quality Standard
A statute or regulation that consists of the beneficial designated use or uses of a waterbody, the numeric
and narrative water quality criteria that are necessary to protect the use or uses of that particular waterbody,
and an antidegradation statement.
Whole Effluent Toxicity
The total toxic effect of an effluent measured directly with a toxicity test.
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program POTWs and the Need for the Pretreatment Program
1. POTWs AND THE NEED FOR THE
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
The average American uses
roughly 100 to 200 gallons of
water a day, with less than one
percent of that water actually
Chapter 1. Applicable EPA References
Environmental Regulations and Technology: The National Pretreatment Program
National Pretreatment Program: Report to Congress
Report to Congress on the Discharge of Hazardous Wastes to POTWs
being consumed. The rest is
used for activities such as
washing, preparing food, watering
lawns, heating and cooling,
transporting wastes, and fire protection. The public is very conscious about the quality of water that comes out
of their tap each day, quickly notifying authorities of changes in appearance, odor, and taste. These same
Americans, on average, discharge about the same amount of wastewater to local sewage treatment plants
daily.3 This wastewater (commonly referred to as "domestic sewage") receives much less attention than drinking
water, likely the result of an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude.
Most people take it for granted that once down the drain, wastes will be handled appropriately. In fact, this
attitude has carried over to industry as well, as can be seen by reading the labels of many household products.
These labels often recommend that waste or excess product be disposed of down the drain. Other toxic or
hazardous products are actually designed to be disposed of down the drain (e.g., drain clog remover). Recall
the phosphate detergent problems of the late 1960s and early 70s; large doses of phosphate, found in most
detergents at the time, were passing through municipal treatment plants and overloading lakes, causing large
algal blooms to form and subsequently reducing available light, food and oxygen for fish and other aquatic
organisms. While great strides have been taken to address the phosphate problem, it is possible that other
problematic pollutants are being dumped down the drain at the expense of human health and the environment.
SEWAGE TREATMENT
Publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) collect wastewater from homes, commercial buildings, and
industrial facilities and transport it via a series of pipes, known as a collection system, to the treatment plant.
Collection systems may flow entirely by gravity, or may include lift stations that pump the wastewater via a force
main to a higher elevation where the wastewater can then continue on via gravity. Ultimately, the collection
system delivers this sewage to the treatment plant facility. Here, the POTW removes harmful organisms and
other contaminants from the sewage so it can be discharged safely into the receiving stream. Without
treatment, sewage creates bad odors, contaminates water supplies, and spreads disease. Today, more than
16,000 sewage treatment plants exist in the U.S. treating more than 32 billion gallons per day of wastewater.4
Generally, POTWs are designed to treat domestic sewage only. Simply defined, the typical POTW
treatment process consists of primary and secondary treatment, along with some form of solids handling.
Primary treatment is designed to remove large solids (e.g., rags and debris) and smaller inorganic grit. Typical
primary treatment operations include screening and settling. Secondary treatment removes organic
contaminants using microorganisms to consume biodegradable organics. Activated sludge, trickling filters, and
rotating biological contactors are examples of common secondary treatment operations. Depending on effluent
discharge requirements, POTWs may perform other "advanced treatment" operations such as nitrification (to
convert ammonia and nitrite to the less toxic nitrate), denitrification (to convert nitrate to molecular nitrogen),
2 The Nalco Water Handbook, ed. Frank N. Kemmer (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
1988), pp. 35.1.
3 Ibid, p. 36.1.
4 1996 Clean Water Needs Survey Report to Congress: Assessment of Needs for Publicly
Owned Wastewater Treatment Facilities, Correction of Combined Sewer Overflows, and
Management of Stormwater and Nonpoint Source Pollution in the United States.
Chapter 1 -1-
-------
POTWs and the Need for the Pretreatment Program
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
physical-chemical treatment (to remove dissolved metals and organics), and disinfection (to kill any remaining
pathogens). After treatment is complete, effluent is discharged to the receiving stream, typically a creek, river,
lake, estuary or ocean. Some POTWs may apply treated effluent directly to golf courses, parkland, or
croplands.
Both primary and secondary treatment processes generate waste solids, known as sewage sludge or
biosolids. Sludges from the treatment process may be either used productively (i.e., as fertilizer or soil
conditioner) ordisposed of in a landfill or incinerated in a dedicated sewage sludge incinerator with the ash also
disposed of in a landfill.
As described above, POTWs are designed to treat typical
household wastes and biodegradable commercial and biodegradable
industrial wastes. The Clean Water Act (CWA) and EPA define the
contaminants from these sources as conventional pollutants.
Conventional pollutants are identified in Figure 1 and include those
specific pollutants that are expected to be present in domestic
discharges to POTWs. Commercial and industrial facilities may,
however, discharge toxic pollutants that the treatment plant is neither
designed for nor able to remove.
NEED FOR THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Total Suspended Solids
Fecal Coliform
PH
Oil and Grease (O&G)
Figure 1. Conventional Pollutants
As noted above, POTWs are not designed to treat toxics in industrial waste. As such, these discharges,
from both industrial and commercial sources, can cause serious problems. The undesirable outcome of these
discharges can be prevented using treatment techniques or management practices to reduce or eliminate the
discharge of these contaminants. The act of treating wastewater prior to discharge to a POTW is commonly
referred to as "pretreatment." The National Pretreatment Program, published in Title 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 403, provides the regulatory basis to require non-domestic dischargers to comply with
pretreatment standards (effluent limitations) to ensure that the goals of the CWA are attained. As noted in 40
CFR §403.2, the objectives of the National Pretreatment Program are to:
a. Prevent the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which will interfere with the operation of a
POTW, including interference with its use or disposal of municipal sludge;
b. Prevent the introduction of pollutants into POTWs which will pass thro ugh the treatment works or
otherwise be incompatible with such works; and
c. Improve opportunities to recycle and
reclaim municipal and industrial
wastewaters and sludges.
The two key terms used in EPA's objectives for the
National Pretreatment Program, "interference" and
"pass through," are defined in Figure 2.
As outlined in EPA's objectives, toxic pollutants
may pass through the treatment plant into the
receiving stream, posing serious threats to aquatic
life, to human recreation, and to consumption of
fish and shellfish from these waters. Pass through
can make waters unswimmable or unfishable in
direct contrast to the goals of the CWA. Or, these
discharges can interfere with the biological activity
of the treatment plant causing sewage to pass
through the treatment plant untreated or
inadequately treated.
Interference - a discharge which, alone or in conjunction with
a discharge or discharges from other sources, both:
Inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment
processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use
or disposal, and
therefore is a cause of a violation of any NPDES
permit requirement or of the prevention of sewage
sludge use or disposal in compliance with any
applicable requirements.
Pass Through - a discharge which exits the POTW into
waters of the U.S. in quantities or concentrations which,
alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from
other sources, is a cause of a violation of any NPDES permit
requirement.
Figure 2. Interference and Pass Through
-2-
Chapter 1
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
POTWs and the Need for the Pretreatment Program
Even where the POTW has the capability to remove these toxics, the pollutants may end up in the sewage
sludge, thereby limiting sludge disposal options or escalating the cost of disposal. Incinerated contaminated
sludge may release toxic emissions into the atmosphere. Toxic metals removed in primary treatment, while
itself not an inhibitory process, can impact sludge digestion, a process that does utilize bacteria to stabilize
sludge solids. For example, chromium can inhibit reproduction of aerobic digestion microorganisms, thereby
disrupting sludge treatment and producing sludges that must be disposed of with special treatment.
Uncontaminated sludge, on the other hand, can be used as fertilizer or soil conditioner, thereby improving the
productivity of our land. Many municipalities apply sewage sludge to pastureland or parkland, that they could
not do if the sludge were contaminated.
Volatile organics discharged to sewers can accumulate in the head space of sewers, increasing the
likelihood of explosions that can cause significant damage. Probably the most well known impact from industrial
discharges to POTWs in the U.S. is the explosion in Louisville, KY that occurred in 1981 as the result of
excessive discharges of hexane into the collection system, eventually igniting and destroying more than 3 miles
of sewers and causing $20 million in damage. Discharge limitations and management practices to control slug
discharges have significantly reduced the likelihood of future catastrophes such as the explosion in Louisville.
Discharges of toxic organics can also result in the release of poisonous gas. This occurs most often when
acidic wastes react with other wastes in the discharge. For example, cyanide and acid, both present in many
electroplating operations, react to form highly toxic hydrogen cyanide gas. Similarly, sulfides from leather
tanning can combine with acid to form hydrogen sulfide, another toxic gas. These can be highly dangerous to
POTW collection system operators exposed to such conditions in the performance of their duties. Other
problems associated with toxic discharges are summarized in Figure 3 and further document the urgency of
keeping toxics out of collection systems and POTWs.
The National Pretreatment Program is charged with
controlling the 126 Priority Pollutants from industries
that discharge into sewer systems as described in the
CWA (see Figure 4). These pollutants fall into two
categories; metals and organics:
- Metals, including lead, mercury, chromium, and
cadmium cannot be destroyed or broken down
through treatment or environmental
degradation. Toxic metals can cause different
human health problems such as lead poisoning
and cancer. Additionally, consumption of
contaminated seafood and agricultural food
crops has resulted in exposures exceeding
recommended safe levels.
- air pollution can occur from volatilization of toxic
chemicals in the POTW collection system or
treatment plant, or through incineration of sewage
sludge
- corrosion of collection system and treatment plant
from acidic discharges or discharges containing
elevated levels of sulfate (forming toxic and corrosive
hydrogen sulfide)
- groundwater pollution can occur from leaks in the
collection system or pollutants from contaminated
sewage sludge.
Figure 3. Problems Associated With Toxic Discharges
- Toxic organics, including solvents, pesticides,
dioxins, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) can be cancer-causing and lead to other serious
ailments, such as kidney and liverdamage, anemia, and heart failure. In 1996, EPA's Office of Science
and Technology (OST) identified 2,193 waterbodies with fish and wildlife advisories, up more than 25
percent from 1995.5
Reductions in pollutants can ensure that industrial development vital to the economic well-being of a
community is compatible with a healthy environment. As will be noted in Chapter 2, many POTWs are
responsible for ensuring that industrial and commercial facilities do not cause problems resulting from their
discharges. In 1991, EPA estimated that 190 to 204 million pounds of metals and 30 to 108 million pounds of
organics were removed each year as a result of pretreatment program requirements.6 This is substantiated by
EPA Office of Science and Technology, Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories (LFWA)
database, 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Pretreatment Program: Report to
Congress, 1991.
Chapter 1
-3-
-------
POTWs and the Need for the Pretreatment Program
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
many POTWs that report significant reductions in the loadings of toxics to their treatment plants that is directly
attributable to implementation of the National Pretreatment Program.
Figure 4. Priority Pollutants
001 Acenaphthene
002 Acrolein
003 Acrylonitrile
004 Benzene
005 Benzidine
006 Carbon tetrachloride
007 Chlorobenzene
008 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
009 Hexachlorobenzene
010 1,2-dichloroethane
Oil 1,1,1 -trichloreothane
012 Hexachloroethane
013 1,1-dichloroethane
014 1,1,2-trichloroethane
015 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
016 Chloroethane
018 Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
019 2-chloroethyl vinyl ethers
020 2-chloronaphthalene
021 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
022 Parachlorometa cresol
023 Chloroform
024 2-chlorophenol
025 1,2-dichlorobenzene
026 1,3-dichlorobenzene
027 1,4-dichlorobenzene
028 3,3-dichlorobenzidine
029 1,1-dichloroethylene
030 1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
031 2,4-dichlorophenol
032 1,2-dichloropropane
033 1,2-dichloropropylene
034 2,4-dimethylphenol
035 2,4-dinitrotoluene
036 2,6-dinitrotoluene
037 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
038 Ethylbenzene
039 Fluoranthene
040 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
041 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
042 Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
043 Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
044 Methylene chloride
045 Methyl chloride
046 Methyl bromide
047 Bromoform
048 Dichlorobromomethane
051 Chlorodibromomethane
052 Hexachlorobutadiene
053 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
054 Isophorone
055 Naphthalene
056 Nitrobenzene
057 2-nitrophenol
058 4-nitrophenol
059 2,4-dinitrophenol
060 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
061 N-nitrosodimethylamine
062 N-nitrosodiphenylamine
063 N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
064 Pentachlorophenol
065 Phenol
066 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
067 Butyl benzyl phthalate
068 Di-N-Butyl Phthalate
069 Di-n-octyl phthalate
070 Diethyl Phthalate
071 Dimethyl phthalate
072 benzo(a) anthracene
073 Benzo(a)pyrene
074 Benzo(b) fluoranthene
075 Benzo(b) fluoranthene
076 Chrysene
077 Acenaphthylene
078 Anthracene
079 Benzo(ghi) perylene
080 Fluorene
081 Phenanthrene
082 Dibenzo(,h) anthracene
083 Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
084 Pyrene
085 Tetrachloroethylene
086 Toluene
087 Trichloroethylene
088 Vinyl chloride
089 Aldrin
090 Dieldrin
091 Chlordane
092 4,4-DDT
093 4,4-DDE
094 4,4-DDD
095 Alpha-endosulfan
096 Beta-endosulfan
097 Endosulfan sulfate
098 Endrin
099 Endrin aldehyde
100 Heptachlor
101 Heptachlor epoxide
102Alpha-BHC
103 Beta-BHC
104 Gamma-BHC
105 Delta-BHC
106PCB-1242
107PCB-1254
108PCB-1221
109PCB-1232
110PCB-1248
111PCB-1260
112PCB-1016
113 Toxaphene
114 Antimony
115 Arsenic
116 Asbestos
117 Beryllium
118 Cadmium
119 Chromium
120 Copper
121 Cyanide, Total
122 Lead
123 Mercury
124 Nickel
125 Selenium
126 Silver
127 Thallium
128 Zinc
129 2,3,7,8-TCDD
Chapter 1
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
2. OVERVIEW OF THE NATIONAL
PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
THE CLEAN WATER ACT
On October 18, 1972, the 92nd
Congress of the United States
passed the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972,
declaring the restoration and
maintenance of the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of
the Nation's water as a National
objective (see Figure 5). While
procedures for implementing this act (more commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act (CWA)) have
been re-evaluated and modified overtime, the 1972 objective has remained unchanged in its 25 year history.
Chapter 2. Applicable EPA Guidance
Control Authority Pretreatment Audit Checklist and Instructions
Guidance for Conducting a Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
Guidance for Reporting and Evaluating POTW Noncompliance with
Pretreatment Implementation Requirements
Guidance Manual for POTW Pretreatment Program Development
Pretreatment Compliance Inspection and Audit Manual For Approval Authorities
Procedures Manual for Reviewing a POTW Pretreatment Program Submission
The 1972 Amendments to the CWA established a water quality regulatory approach along with EPA-
promulgated industry-specific technology-based effluent limitations. The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was established under the CWA to control the discharge of
pollutants from point sources and served as a vehicle to implement the industrial technology-based
standards. To implement pretreatment requirements, EPA promulgated 40 CFR Part 128 in late 1973,
establishing general prohibitions against treatment plant interference and pass through and pretreatment
standards for the discharge of
incompatible
pollutants from
specific industrial categories.
In 1975, several environmental
groups filed suit against EPA
challenging EPA's criteria for
identifying toxic pollutants, EPA's
failure to promulgate effluent
standards, and EPA's failure to
promulgate pretreatment standards
for numerous industrial categories.
As a result of this litigation, EPA
promulgated the General
Pretreatment Regulations at 40
CFR Part 403 on June 26, 1978,
replacing the 40 CFR Part 128
requirements. Additionally, as a
result of the suit, EPA agreed to
regulate the discharge of 65
categories of pollutants (making up
the 126 priority pollutants presented
in Figure 4) from 21 industrial
categories. The list of priority
pollutants is still in effect today (the
original list actually had 129
pollutants, three of which have
since been removed from that list)
while the list of regulated industrial
categories has grown to more than 51
provided in Chapter 3.
To restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters:
(1) it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the
navigable waters be eliminated by 1985;
(2) it is the national goal that wherever attainable, an interim goal of
water quality which provides for the protection and propagation of
fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the
water be achieved by July 1, 1983;
(3) it is the national policy that the discharge of toxic pollutants in
toxic amounts be prohibited;
(4) it is the national policy that Federal financial assistance be provided
to construct publicly owned waste treatment works;
(5) it is the national policy that Area wide waste treatment management
planning processes be developed and implemented to assure
adequate control of sources of pollutants in each State;
(6) it is the national policy that a major research and demonstration
effort be made to develop technology necessary to eliminate the
discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters, waters of the
contiguous zone, and the oceans; and
(7) it is the national policy that programs for the control of nonpoint
sources of pollution be developed and implemented in an
expeditious manner so as to enable the goals of this Chapter to be
met through the control of both point and nonpoint sources of
pollution.
Figure 5. Section 101 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
distinct industries. A discussion of industry specific requirements are
Chapter 2
-5-
-------
Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
THE GENERAL PRETREATMENT REGULATIONS
The General Pretreatment Regulations establish responsibilities of Federal, State, and local government,
industry and the public to implement Pretreatment Standards to control pollutants which pass through or
interfere with POTWtreatment processes or which may contaminate sewage sludge. The regulations, which
have been revised numerous times since originally published in 1978, consist of 18 sections and several
appendices. A copy of the overall framework for the General Pretreatment Regulations is provided in Figure
6.
The General Pretreatment Regulations apply to all nondomestic sources which introduce pollutants into
a POTW. These sources of "indirect discharge" are more commonly referred to as industrial users (IDs).
Since IDs can be as simple as an unmanned coin operated car wash to as complex as an automobile
manufacturing plant or a synthetic
organic chemical producer, EPA
developed four criteria that define a
Significant Industrial User (SIU). Many
of the General Pretreatment
Regulations apply to SlUs as opposed
to lUs, based on the fact that control of
SlUs should provide adequate
protection of the POTW.
These four criteria are as follows:
- an IU that discharges an
average of 25,000 gallons
per day or more of process
wastewaterto the POTW;
- an IU that contributes a
process wastestream
making up 5 percent or
more of the average dry
weather hydraulic or
organic capacity of the
POTWtreatment plant;
- an IU designated by the
Control Authority as such
because of its reasonable
potential to adversely
affect the POTW's
operation or violate any
pretreatment standard or
requirement; or
- an IU subject to Federal
categorical pretreatment
standards.
i 403.1
i 403.2
1403.3
i 403.4
1403.5
1403.6
1403.7
1403.8
1403.9
1403.10
1403.11
1403.12
1403.13
1403.14
1403.15
1403.16
1403.17
1403.18
Purpose and applicability
Objectives of general pretreatment regulations
Definitions
State or local law
National pretreatment standards: Prohibited discharges
National pretreatment standards: Categorical pretreatment
standards
Removal credits
Pretreatment program requirements: Development and
implementation by POTW
POTW pretreatment programs and/or authorization to revise
pretreatment standards: Submission for approval
Development and submission of NPDES State pretreatment
programs
Approval procedures for POTW pretreatment programs and
POTW granting of removal credits
Reporting requirements for POTW's and industrial users
Variances from categorical pretreatment standards for
fundamentally different factors
Confidentiality
Net/Gross calculation
Upset provision
Bypass
Modification of POTW pretreatment programs
Appendix A: Program Guidance Memorandum
Appendix B: [Reserved]
Appendix C: [Reserved]
Appendix D: Selected Industrial Subcategories Considered Dilute for
Purposes of the Combined Wastestream Formula
Appendix E: Sampling Procedures
Appendix F: [Reserved]
Appendix G: Pollutants Eligible for a Removal Credit
Figure 6. The General Pretreatment Regulations
Unlike other environmental programs that rely on Federal or State governments to implement and
enforce specific requirements, the Pretreatment Program places the majority of the responsibility on local
municipalities. Specifically, section 403.8(a) of the General Pretreatment Regulations states that any POTW
(or combination of treatment plants operated by the same authority) with a total design flow greater than 5
million gallons per day (MGD) and smaller POTWs with SlUs must establish a local pretreatment program.
As of early 1998, 1,578 POTWs are required to have local programs. While this represents only about 15
percent of the total treatment plants nationwide, these POTWs account for more than 80 percent (i.e.,
approximately 30 billion gallons a day) of the national wastewater flow.
-6-
Chapter 2
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
The General Pretreatment Regulations define the term "Control Authority" as a POTWthat administers
an approved pretreatment program since it is the entity authorized to control discharges to its system.
Section 403.10(e) provides States authority to implement POTW pretreatment programs in lieu of POTWs.
Five States have elected to assume this responsibility (Vermont, Connecticut, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Nebraska). In these instances, the State is defined as the Control Authority.
As described above, all Control Authorities must establish a local pretreatment program to control
discharges from non-domestic sources. These programs must be approved by the "Approval Authority" who
is also responsible for overseeing implementation and enforcement of these programs. As noted in Figure
7 , a total of 44 States/Territories are authorized to implement State NPDES Permit Programs, but only 27
are authorized to be the Pretreatment Program Approval Authority (i.e, those with approved State
pretreatment programs excluding the five §403.10(e) States). In all other States and Territories (including
the 403.10(e) States), EPA is considered to be the Approval Authority.
POTW PRETREATMENT PROGRAMS
The actual requirement for a POTW to develop and implement a local pretreatment program is a
condition of its NPDES permit. Once the Approval Authority determines that a POTW needs a pretreatment
program, the POTWs NPDES permit is modified to require development of a local program and submission
of the program to the Approval Authority for review and approval. Consistent with §403.8(f), POTW
pretreatment programs must contain the six minimum elements presented in Figure 8.
In addition to the six specific elements, pretreatment program submissions must include:
a statement from the City Solicitor (or the like) declaring the POTW has adequate authority to
carry out program requirements;
copies of statutes, ordinances, regulations, agreements, or other authorities the POTW relies
upon to administerthe pretreatment program including a statement reflecting the endorsement
or approval of the bodies responsible for supervising and/or funding the program;
a brief description and organizational chart of the organization administering the program; and
a description of funding levels and manpower available to implement the program.
Pretreatment program submissions found to be complete proceed to the public notice process, as
described in Chapter 4, Public Participation and POTW Reporting. Upon program approval, the Approval
Authority is responsible for modifying the POTWs NPDES permit to require implementation of the approved
pretreatment program. Once approved, the Approval Authority oversees POTW pretreatment program
implementation via receiving annual reports and conducting periodic audits and inspections. As of early
1998, of the 1,578 POTWs required to develop pretreatment programs, 97 percent (1,535) have been
approved.
The National Pretreatment Program regulates IDs through three types of regulatory entities: EPA,
Approval Authorities, and Control Authorities. As noted above, Approval Authorities oversee Control
Authorities while Control Authorities regulate IDs. General responsibilities of each of these three regulatory
entities are presented in Figure 9.
Chapter 2 -7-
-------
Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
State
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wvomina
* - Denotes 403
Approved State
NPDES Permit Program
10/19/79
11/01/86
05/14/73
03/27/75
09/26/73
04/01/74
05/01/95
06/28/74
11/28/74
10/23/77
01/01/75
08/10/78
06/28/74
09/30/83
08/27/96
09/05/74
10/17/73
06/30/74
05/01/74
10/30/74
06/10/74
06/12/74
09/19/75
04/13/82
10/28/75
10/19/75
06/13/75
03/11/74
11/19/96
09/26/73
06/30/78
09/17/84
06/10/75
12/30/93
12/28/77
09/14/98
07/07/87
03/11/74
06/30/76
03/31/75
11/14/73
05/10/82
02/04/74
01/30/75
10(e) State Approval
Approved State Pretreatment
Program
10/19/79*
11/01/86
09/22/89
-
06/03/81*
-
05/01/95
03/12/81
08/12/83
-
-
06/03/81
-
09/30/83
08/27/96
09/30/85
04/16/85
07/16/79
05/13/82*
06/03/81
-
09/07/84*
-
04/13/82
-
06/14/82
-
07/27/83
11/19/96
03/12/81
-
09/17/84
04/09/82
12/30/93
08/10/83
09/14/98
07/07/87
03/16/82*
-
04/14/89
09/30/86
05/10/82
12/24/80
Figure 7. State Program Approval Status
Chapter 2
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
1. Legal Authority
The POTW must operate pursuant to legal authority enforceable in Federal, State or local courts,
which authorizes or enables the POTW to apply and enforce any pretreatment regulations developed
pursuant to the CWA. At a minimum, the legal authority must enable the POTW to:
I. deny or condition discharges to the POTW;
ii. require compliance with pretreatment standards and requirements;
iii. control IU discharges through permits, orders, or similar means;
iv. require IU compliance schedules when necessary to meet applicable
pretreatment standards and/or requirements and the submission of
reports to demonstrate compliance;
v. inspect and monitor lUs;
vi. Obtain remedies for IU noncompliance; and
vii. comply with confidentiality requirements.
2. Procedures
The POTW must develop and implement procedures to ensure compliance with pretreatment
requirements, including:
I. identify and locate all lUs subject to the pretreatment program;
ii. identify the character and volume of pollutants contributed by such
users;
iii. notify users of applicable pretreatment standards and requirements;
iv. receive and analyze reports from lUs;
v. sample and analyze IU discharges and evaluate the need for IU slug
control plans;
vi. investigate instances of noncompliance; and
vii. comply with public participation requirements.
3. Funding
The POTW must have sufficient resources and qualified personnel to carry out the authorities and
procedures specified in its approved pretreatment program.
4. Local limits
The POTW must develop local limits or demonstrate why these limits are not necessary.
5. Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
The POTW must develop and implement an ERP that contains detailed procedures indicating how the
POTW will investigate and respond to instances of IU noncompliance.
6. List of SIUs
The POTW must prepare, update, and submit to the Approval Authority a list of all Significant
Industrial Users (SIUs).
Figure 8. Six Minimum Pretreatment Program Elements
Chapter 2 -9-
-------
Overview of the National Pretreatment Program
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
EPA
Headquarters
> Oversees program implementation at all levels
> Develops and modifies regulations for the program
> Develops policies to clarify and further define the program
> Develops technical guidance for program implementation
> Initiates enforcement actions as appropriate
Regions
> Fulfill Approval Authority responsibilities for States without
a State pretreatment program
> Oversee State program implementation
> Initiate enforcement actions as appropriate.
Approval Authorities (EPA Regions and delegated States)
> Notify POTWs of their responsibilities
> Review and approve requests for POTW pretreatment
program approval or modification
> Review requests for site-specific modifications to categorical
pretreatment standards
> Oversee POTW program implementation
> Provide technical guidance to POTWs
> Initiate enforcement actions, against noncompliant POTWs or
industries.
Control Authorities (POTWs, States, or EPA Regions)
> Develop, implement, and maintain approved pretreatment
program
> Evaluate compliance of regulated lUs
> Initiate enforcement action against industries as appropriate
> Submit reports to Approval Authorities
> Develop local limits (or demonstrate why they are not
needed)
> Develop and implement enforcement response plan.
Industrial Users
Comply with applicable pretreatment standards and reporting
requirements.
Figure 9. Roles and Responsibilities
-10-
Chapter 2
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Pretreatment Standards
3. PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
As described in Chapters 3 and
4, the National Pretreatment Program
identifies specific requirements that
apply to all IDs, additional
requirements that apply to all SILJs,
and certain requirements that only
apply to CILJs. The objectives of the
National Pretreatment Program are
achieved by applying and enforcing
three types of discharge standards:
- prohibited discharge standards
- categorical standards
- local limits.
PROHIBITED DISCHARGE
STANDARDS
All IDs, whether or not subject to
any other National, State, or local
pretreatment requirements, are
subject to the general and specific
prohibitions identified in 40 CFR
§§403.5(a) and (b), respectively.
General prohibitions forbid the
discharge of any pollutant(s) to a
POTW that cause pass through or
interference (Figure 10). Specific
prohibitions forbid eight categories of
pollutant discharges as follows:
(1) discharges containing pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW, including
but not limited to, wastestreams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140°F (60°C) using the
test methods specified in 40 CFR §261.21;
(2) discharges containing pollutants causing corrosive structural damage to the POTW, but in no
case discharges with a pH lower than 5.0, unless the POTW is specifically designed to
accommodate such discharges;
(3) discharges containing pollutants in amounts causing obstruction to the flow in the POTW
resulting in interference;
(4) discharges of any pollutants released at a flow rate and/or concentration which will cause
interference with the POTW;
(5) discharges of heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in
interference, but in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTWtreatment
plant exceeds 40°C(104°F) unless the Approval Authority, upon request of the POTW, approves
alternative temperature limits;
(6) discharges of petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in
amounts that will cause interference or pass through;
Chapter 3. Applicable EPA Guidance
Guidance Manual For Implementing Total Toxic Organics (TTO) Pretreatment
Standards
Guidance Manual for Preparation and Review of Removal Credit Applications
Guidance Manual for Preventing Interference at POTWs
Guidance Manual for the Identification of Hazardous Wastes Delivered to
Publicly Owned Treatment Works by Truck, Rail, or Dedicated Pipe
Guidance Manual for the Use of Production-Based Pretreatment Standards
and the Combined Wastestream Formula
Guidance Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge
Limitations Under the Pretreatment Program
Guidance to Protect POTW Workers From Toxic And Reactive Gases And
Vapors
Prelim User's Guide, Documentation for the EPA Computer Program/Model
for Developing Local Limits for Industrial Pretreatment Programs at
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Supplemental Manual On the Development And Implementation of Local
Discharge Limitations Under The Pretreatment Program: Residential and
Commercial Toxic Pollutant Loadings And POTW Removal Efficiency
Estimation
Industry-Specific Guides
Aluminum, Copper, And Nonferrous Metals Forming And Metal Powders
Pretreatment Standards: A Guidance Manual
Guidance Manual For Battery Manufacturing Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment
Standard
Guidance Manual For Iron And Steel Manufacturing Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Leather Tanning and Finishing Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and Builders' Paper and
Board Mills Pretreatment Standards
Chapter 3
-11-
-------
Pretreatment Standards Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
(7) discharges which result in the
Pass through - A discharge which exits the POTW into waters of
the US in quantities or concentrations which, alone or in
conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, is a
cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES
permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a
violation.
Interference - A discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a
discharge or discharges from other sources, both (1) inhibits or
presence of toxic gases, vapors,
or fumes within the POTW in a
quantity that may cause acute
worker health and safety
problems; and
(8) discharges of trucked or hauled
pollutants, except at discharge points
designated by the POTW.
uiscnaige o
Compliance with the general and specific dlsmpts the POTW'lts treatment processes or °Peratlons'or lts
...... . . . , .[" . sludge processes, use or disposal; and (2) therefore is a cause of a
prohibitions is mandatory for all ILJs, although ..,.,, . r ,a T,,-.^ ^m^ + *
r , .... . * .. ' , . violation of any requirement of the POTW s NPDES permit or of
a facihty may have an affirmative defense in ,, , f , , , ,
'.'. . . .... the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal.
any action brought against it a egmg a
violation of the general prohibitions or of Figure 10. Interference and Pass Through
certain specific prohibitions [(3), (4), (5), (6)
and (7) above] where the ID can demonstrate
it did not have reason to know that its discharge, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from
other sources, would cause pass through or interference, and the ID was in compliance with a technically-
based local limit developed to prevent pass through or interference.
These prohibited discharge standards are intended to provide general protection for POTWs. However,
their lack of specific pollutant limitations creates the need for additional controls, namely categorical
pretreatment standards and local limits.
CATEGORICAL STANDARDS
Categorical pretreatment standards (i.e., categorical standards) are national, uniform, technology-based
standards that apply to discharges to POTWs from specific industrial categories (i.e., indirect dischargers)
and limit the discharge of specific pollutants. Categorical jDretreatment standards for both existing and new
sources (PSES and PSNS, respectively) are promulgated by EPA pursuant to Section 307(b) and (c) of the
CWA. Limitations developed for indirect discharges are designed to prevent the discharge of pollutants that
could pass through, interfere with, or otherwise be incompatible with POTW operations. Effluent limitations
guidelines (ELGs), developed in conjunction with categorical standards, limit the discharge from facilities
directly to waters of the U.S. (i.e., direct dischargers) and do not apply to indirect dischargers. ELGs
include Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT), Best Conventional Pollutant Control
Technology (BCT), and Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) limitations and New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS). ELGs (i.e., BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS) do not apply to indirect
dischargers. The significant difference between categorical standards and effluent limitations guidelines
is that categorical standards account for any pollutant removal that may be afforded through treatment at
the POTW while effluent limitations guidelines do not.
Industries identified as major sources of toxic pollutants are typically targeted for effluent guideline and
categorical standard development. If limits are deemed necessary, EPA investigates affected IDs and
gathers information regarding process operations and treatment and management practices, accounting for
differences in facility size and age, equipment age, and wastewater characteristics. Subcategorization within
an industrial category is evaluated based on variability in processes employed, raw materials used, types
of items produced, and characteristics of wastes generated. Availability and cost of control technologies,
non-water quality environmental impacts, available pollution prevention measures7, and economic impacts
are then identified prior to EPA's presentation of findings in proposed development documents and
publishing a notice of the proposed regulations in the Federal Register. Based on public comments on the
proposed rule, EPA promulgates (i.e., publishes) the standards (Figure 11).
7 EPA's Considerations of Pollution Prevention in EPA's Effluent Guideline Development
Process may be consulted for more information on this topic.
-12- Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Pretreatment Standards
Data
Collection
Regu
Tas
i
atory
ks
r
Proposed
Development
Document
Proposed
Regulations
'
Public
Comment
L_^^
^-V. Revisions
^\^
Promulgation of
Final
Regulations
Final
Development
Document
i
>-
As noted above, categorical pretreatment
standards are developed both for existing
(PSES) and new sources (PSNS). Facilities are
classified as either PSES or PSNS based on the
definition of "new source" set out in 40 CFR
§403.3(k) of the General Pretreatment
Regulations (see Figure 12). Dischargers
subject to PSES are required to comply with
those standards by a specified date, typically no
more than three years afterthe effective date of
the categorical standard. Users subject to
PSNS, however, are required to achieve
compliance within the shortest feasible time, not Figure 11. Development Process of Effluent Guidelines
to exceed 90 days from commencement of
discharge. PSNS are often more stringent than
PSES based on the opportunity for new sources to install the best available demonstrated technology and
operate the most efficient production processes.
Congress established an initial list of
21 categorical industries under Section
306 of the CWA of 1972. As a result of
various court decrees and settlement
agreements resulting from litigation, and
from EPA's internal work plan devel-
opment process, EPA has developed
effluent guidelines (for direct dischargers)
and/or categorical pretreatment standards
(for indirect dischargers) for 51 industrial
categories. Of these industrial categories,
EPA implements pretreatment standards
for 32 categories, and either requires
compliance solely with 40 CFR Part 403
General Pretreatment Regulations ordoes
not address pretreatment standards forthe
remaining categories. Plans for EPA's
expansion and modification of the list is
detailed in the Effluent Guidelines Plan,
published in the Federal Register
biennially as required in section 304(m) of
the CWA. A list of the industrial
categories that have categorical standards
is provided as Figure 13.
Categorical pretreatment standards
developed can be concentration-based or
mass-based. Concentration-based
standards are expressed as milligrams of
pollutant allowed per liter (mg/l) of wastewater discharged and are issued where production rates for the
particular industrial category do not necessarily correlate with pollutant discharges. Mass-based standards
are generally expressed on a mass per unit of production (e.g., milligrams of pollutant per kilogram of
product produced, pounds of pollutant per million cubic feet of air scrubbed, etc.) and are issued where water
conservation is an important component in the limitation development process. For a few categories where
reducing a facility's flow volume does not provide a significant difference in the pollutant load discharged,
EPA has established both mass- and concentration-based standards. Generally, both a daily maximum
limitation and a long-term average limitation (e.g., average daily values in a calendar month) are established
for every regulated pollutant.
New Source is defined at 40 CFR §403.3 (k)(l) to mean any building, structure, facility
or installation from which there is or may be a discharge of pollutants, the construction of
which commenced after publication of proposed Pretreatment Standards under Section
307(c) of the Act which will be applicable to such source if Standards are thereafter
promulgated in accordance with that section, provided that:
(i) the building, structure, facility, or installation is constructed at a site at which no
other source is located; or
(ii) the building, structure, facility, or installation totally replaces the process or
production equipment that causes the discharge of pollutants at an existing source; or
(iii) the production or wastewater generating processes of the building, structure, facility
or installation are substantially independent of an existing source at the same site. In
determining whether these are substantially independent, factors such as the extent to
which the new facility is integrated with the existing plant, and the extent to which
the new facility is engaged in the same general type of activity as the existing source
should be considered.
(2) Construction on a site at which an existing source is located results in a modification
rather than a new source if the construction does not create a new building, structure,
facility, or installation meeting the criteria of paragraphs (k)(l)(ii), or (k)(l)(iii) of this
section but otherwise alters, replaces, or adds to existing process or production
equipment.
(3) Construction of a new source as defined under this paragraph has commenced if the
owner or operator has:
(i) begun, or caused to begin as part of a continuous onsite construction program:
(ii) any placement, assembly or installation of facilities or equipment, or
(B) significant site preparation work, including clearing, excavation, or removal of
existing buildings, structures, or facilities which is necessary for the placement,
assembly, or installation of new source facilities or equipment; or
(ii) entered into a binding contractual obligation for the purchase of facilities or
equipment which are intended to be used in its operation within a reasonable time.
Options to purchase or contracts which can be terminated or modified without
substantial loss, and contracts for feasibility, engineering, and design studies do not
constitute a contractual obligation under this paragraph.
Figure 12. Definition of New Source (40 CFR 403.3(k))
Chapter 3
-13-
-------
Pretreatment Standards
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Figure 13. Summary of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Category
Aluminum Forming
Battery Manufacturing
Builders' Paper and
Board Mills
Carbon Black
Manufacturing
Coil Coating
Copper Forming
Electrical and Electronic
Components
Electroplating
Feedlots
Fertilizer Manufacturing
Glass Manufacturing
Grain Mills
Ink Formulating
Inorganic Chemicals
Manufacturing
Iron and Steel
Manufacturing
Leather Tanning and
Finishing
Metal Finishing
40CFR
Part
467
461
431
458
465
468
469
413
412
418
426
406
447
415
420
425
433
Subparts
A-F
A-G
A
A-D
A-D
A
A-D
A-B, D-H
B
A-G
H, K-M
A
A
A-BO
A-F, H-J, L
A-l
A
Type of
Standard
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
Overview of Pretreatment Standards
Limits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly averages.
Subpart C prohibits discharges from certain operations.
Limits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly
averages. No discharge is allowed from any process not specifically
dentified in the regulations.
Limits are production-based daily maximums. These facilities may
certify they do not use certain compounds in lieu of performing
nonitoring to demonstrate compliance.
Limits are for Oil & Grease only (no limit duration specified).
Limits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly averages.
Limits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly averages.
Limits are concentration-based, daily maximums and 30 day
averages or monthly averages (varies per subpart and pollutant
Darameter). Certification is allowed in lieu of monitoring for certain
Dollutants when a management plan is approved and implemented.
Limits are concentration-based (or alternative mass-based
equivalents), daily maximums and four consecutive monitoring days
averages. Two sets of limits exist, depending on if facility
discharges more or less than 1 0,000 gallons per day of process
wastewater. Certification is allowed in lieu of monitoring for certain
Dollutants when a management plan is approved and implemented.
Discharge of process wastewater is prohibited, except when there is
an overflow resulting from a chronic or catastrophic rainfall event.
Limits may specify zero discharge of wastewater pollutants (Subpart
A), production-based daily maximums and 30-day averages
(Subparts B-E) or concentration-based (Subparts F-G) with no limit
duration specified.
Limits are either concentration- or production-based, daily
naximums and monthly averages.
Discharge of process wastewater is prohibited at a flow rate or mass
oading rate which is excessive over any time period during the peak
oad at a POTW.
Regulations specify no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
to the POTW.
Limits vary for each subpart with a majority of the limits
concentration-based, daily maximums and 30-day averages, or may
specify no discharge of wastewater pollutants. Numerous subparts
nave no pretreatment standards.
Limits are production-based, daily maximums and 30 day averages.
Limits are concentration-based, daily maximums and monthly
averages. In certain instances, production volume dictates
applicable pretreatment standards.
Limits are concentration-based, daily maximums and monthly
averages. Certification is allowed for certain pollutants where a
nanagement plan is approved and implemented.
-14-
Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Pretreatment Standards
Figure 13. Summary of Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Category
Metal Molding and
Casting
Nonferrous Metals
Forming and Metal
Powders
Nonferrous Metals
Manufacturing
Organic Chemicals,
Plastics, and Synthetic
Fibers
Paint Formulating
Paving and Roofing
Materials (Tars and
Asphalt)
Pesticide Chemicals
Petroleum Refining
Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing
Porcelain Enameling
Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard
Rubber Manufacturing
Soap and Detergent
Manufacturing
Steam Electric Power
Generating
Timber Products
Processing
40CFR
Part
464
471
421
414
446
443
455
419
439
466
430
428
417
423
429
Subparts
A-D
A-J
B-AE
B-H, K
A
A-D
A, C, E
A-E
A-D
A-D
A-G, I-L
E-K
O-R
N/A
F-H
Type of
Standard
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
PSES
PSNS
Overview of Pretreatment Standards
Limits are primarily production-based, daily maximums and monthly
averages. Discharges from certain processes are prohibited
(Subparts A-C).
Jmits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly averages.
In some instances, the regulations prohibit the discharge of
wastewater pollutants.
Jmits are production-based, daily maximums and monthly averages.
The majority of the Subparts have both existing and new source
imits, with others having solely new source requirements.
Limits are mass-based (concentration-based standards multiplied by
Drocess flow), daily maximums and monthly averages. Standards
br metals and cyanide apply only to metal- or cyanide-bearing
wastestreams.
Regulations specify no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
to the POTW.
Limits are for Oil & Grease only (no limit duration specified).
Limits are mass-based (concentration-based standards multiplied by
Drocess flow), daily maximums and monthly averages. Subpart C
specifies no discharge of process wastewater pollutants but provides
for pollution prevention alternatives. Subpart E specifies no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
Limits are concentration-based (or mass based equivalent), daily
naximums.
Limits are concentration-based, daily maximums and monthly
averages. These facilities may certify they do not use or generate
cyanide in lieu of performing monitoring to demonstrate compliance.
Limits are concentration-based (or alternative production-based),
daily maximums and monthly averages. Subpart B prohibits
discharges certain operations.
Jmits are production-based daily maximums and monthly averages.
These facilities may certify they do not use certain compounds in
ieu of performing monitoring to demonstrate compliance. Facilities
subject to Subparts B and E must also implement Best Management
Practices as identified.
Limits are concentration- or production-based, daily maximums and
nonthly averages.
Regulations specify no discharge of process wastewater pollutants
to the POTW.
Jmits are either concentration-based, daily maximums, or
'maximums for any time", or compliance can be demonstrated
through engineering calculations.
All PSNS (and PSES for Subpart F) prohibit the discharge of
wastewater pollutants. PSES for Subparts G and H are
concentration-based, daily maximums (with production-based
alternatives).
Chapter 3
-15-
-------
Pretreatment Standards
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Categorical standards apply to regulated wastewaters, i.e. wastewater from an industrial process that
is regulated for a particular pollutant by a categorical pretreatment standard. Therefore, demonstrating
compliance with categorical pretreatment standards is intended to be based on measurements of
wastestreams containing only the regulated process wastewater. However, recognizing isolation of regulated
wastestreams from nonregulated wastestreams was not always practicable nor desirable, EPA developed
the combined wastestream formula (CWF) and flow
weighted average (FWA) approach for determining
compliance with combined wastestreams.
Pursuant to 40 CFR §403.6(e), the CWF is
applicable where a regulated wastestream combines with
one or more unregulated or dilute wastestreams (Figure
14) prior to treatment. Where nonregulated
wastestreams combine with process streams after
pretreatment, the more stringent approach (whether
CWF or FWA) is used to adjust the limits8 (Figure 15).
The CWF and FWA approaches differ primarily in their
allowances for nonregulated wastestreams. While the
CWF provides a "full credit" (i.e., same pollutant levels
as regulated wastestreams) for unregulated
wastestreams yet no credit for dilute wastestreams, the
FWA requires sampling and analysis of the untreated,
nonregulated wastestreams to determine the credit to be
granted (not to exceed that allowed for the regulated
wastestreams).
Regulated
Unregulated
Dilute
Monitoring^ _
location J
CWF
Figure 14. Combined Wastestream Formula
Regulated Unregulated
Unregulated
Dilute
Application of the CWF and FWA requires proper identification, classification, and quantification of the
three wastestream types (Figure 16.) Note: in circumstances where boiler blowdown, noncontact cooling
water, stormwater, or demineralized wastestreams
contain a significant amount of a regulated pollutant, and
the treatment of the wastewater with the regulated
wastestream results in substantial reduction of the
regulated pollutant, the Control Authority can classify the
wastestream as unregulated rather than as a dilute
wastestream. Clarification on category-specific
wastestream classifications may be provided by
consulting the applicable regulation(s) and associated
development documents, since wastestream types are
addressed in the effluent guideline and categorical
standard development process. When in doubt, the
Control Authority can always require the CIU to monitor
the wastestream(s) in question to quantify the presence
(or lack thereof) of categorically regulated pollutants.
Reasonably accurate flow data must also be obtained for
each wastestream type flowing through the monitoring
point to ensure categorical pretreatment standards are
adjusted accordingly. Proper application of the CWF or
FWA will result in:
Figure 15. CWF vs. FWA
alternative limits being established for each regulated pollutant in each regulated processes;
both daily maximum and long-term average (i.e., 4-day, 30-day, or monthly) alternative limits
being calculated for each regulated pollutant;
Where commingled wastestreams combine with nonregulated wastestreams after
treatment, the CWF adjusted limitations are further adjusted by use of the CWF or FWA to
address the untreated, nonregulated wastestreams (Figure 17.) For more detailed
discussion of FWA, see Federal Register preamble language, 51 FR 21454 (June 12,1986).
-16-
Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Pretreatment Standards
- 4-day average limits being adjusted to equivalent monthly average limits when two or more
categorical pretreatment standards apply to the facility and one of the applicable standards is
40 CFR Part 413; and
- calculated alternative limits remaining above the analytical detection limit for that pollutant.
NOTE: If adjusted limit(s) are below the detection limit, the Control Authority shall instruct the
ID to either:
separate the dilute wastestreams from the regulated wastestreams prior to the combined
treatment facility, or
segregate all wastestreams entirely.
EPA's Guidance Manual for the Use of Production Based Pretreatment Standards and the Combined
Wastestream Formula should be consulted for more information on the proper application and adjustment
of categorical pretreatment standards.
Regulated
Wastewaterfroman
industrial process that is
regulated for a particular
pollutant by a categorical
pretreatment standard
Nonregulated
Unregulated
Wastestreams from an industrial process that are not regulated for a
particular pollutant by a categorical pretreatment standard and are not
defined as a dilute wastestream, e.g.:
a process wastestream for which categorical standards
have been promulgated but for which the deadline for
compliance has not yet been reached
a process wastestream that currently is not subject to
categorical pretreatment standards
a process wastestream that is not regulated for the pollutant
in question but is regulated for other pollutants.
Dilute
Wastestreams which have no more than trace or
non-detectable amounts of the regulated pollutant.
Defined in 40 CFR § 403.6(e)(1) of the General
Pretreatment Regulations to include sanitary wastestreams,
demineralized backwash streams, boiler blowdown,
noncontact cooling water, storm water, and process
wastestreams from certain standards based on the findings
that these wastewaters contained none of the regulated
pollutant or only trace amounts of it.
Figure 16. Wastestream Types
Although categorical standards are established based on a particular industrial category, EPA provides
several options for unique circumstances that justify adjustment of categorical standards for an individual
facility:
Removal Credits 40 CFR §403.7 details the
conditions by which a Control Authority may
demonstrate consistent removal of pollutants
regulated by categorical standards at their
POTW, and in so doing, may extend removal
credits to industries on a pollutant-specific basis
to prevent redundant treatment. Removal
credits are available for a pollutant if the
pollutant is regulated by the sewage sludge use
or disposal option employed by the POTW
making the application request, or if the pollutant
is listed in 40 CFR Part 403, Appendix G. Also,
the availability of removal credits is not limited to
Appendix G pollutants for POTWs that dispose
of sewage sludge in municipal solid waste
landfills. Steps for developing such a request
are detailed in EPA's Guidance Manual for the
Preparation and Review of Removal Credit
Applications.
Regulated
Unregulated
Unregulated
Dilute
Figure 17. Multiple use of the CWF/FWA
Chapter 3
-17-
-------
Pretreatment Standards
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Section 301 (n) of the CWA authorizes adjustments of
categorical pretreatment standards for existing sources who demonstrate they have factors which
are fundamentally different from the factors EPA considered during standards development (40 CFR
§403.13). Variance requests must be based solely on information and data submitted during the
development of the categorical standards (Figure 18) and the adjusted effluent limitations must
neither be more nor less stringent than justified by the fundamental difference nor result in a
nonwater quality environmental impact markedly more adverse than the impact considered by EPA
when developing the categorical standard.
Successful requests must detail factors well outside the range considered by EPA in establishing the
standard and not merely factors deviating from the average. Further, differences must not be similar
to a significant number of other facilities in the category. A facility must request a variance in writing
no later than 180 days after publication of a categorical Pretreatment Standard in the Federal
Register.
Figure 18. Factors to Consider for an FDF Variance Request
Net/Gross Adjustment Categorical pretreatment standards can be adjusted to reflect the presence of
pollutants in a ClU's intake waters (40 CFR §403.15). To obtain a net/gross credit, the CIU must submit
a formal written request to the Control Authority that demonstrates:
- its intake water is drawn from the same body of water that the POTW discharges into (this
can be waived if the Control Authority finds no environmental degradation will result);
- the pollutants present in the intake water will not be entirely removed by the treatment
system operated by the CIU; and
- the pollutants in the intake water do not vary chemically or biologically from the pollutants
limited by the applicable standard.
Inherent in this provision is the requirement that the CIU employ a treatment technology capable of
meeting the categorical pretreatment standard(s). Net/gross adjustments should not be granted to
ClUs that have no treatment. Further, credits are only granted to the extent necessary to meet the
applicable standard(s), up to a maximum value equal to the influent value.
-18-
Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Standards
Innovative Technology In accordance with 307(e) of the CWA, existing CILJs choosing to install an
innovative treatment system may receive approval from the Control Authority for up to a two year
extension to their applicable categorical pretreatment standards compliance deadline, provided:
- the innovative treatment has a reasonable potential to result in significantly greater pollutant
removal or equivalent removal at a substantially lower cost than the technologies
considered by EPA when developing the categorical standard;
- the innovative technique has the potential for industry-wide application; and
- the proposed compliance extension will not cause or contribute to the violation of the
POTWs NPDES permit.
While policy has been established for universal categorical variance requests, occasionally, a Control
Authority may merely need assistance to classify a CIU and/or to determine applicable categorical
limitations. Provisions in the General Pretreatment Regulations allow POTWs and IDs to request an EPA
category determination for a specific ID within 60 days after the effective date of the standard in question
[40 CFR §403.6(a)]. Even afterthe formal timeframe for requesting a categorical determination, EPA (and
states) will assist POTWs and IDs with categorization issues. Such requests, however, do not affect
applicable reporting requirements, including timely requests submitted under 40 CFR §403.6(a).
Additionally, EPA has addressed universal CIU questions posed by Control Authorities in various
memoranda and guidance:
Research and Development (R&D) Facilities Unless specifically addressed in the categorical
regulation or associated development document, R&D facilities where there is no commercial sale
of products from the facility, are not subject to categorical standards.9 Should an R&D facility need
pollution controls to comply with prohibited discharge standards and/or local limits, the development
documents may serve as guidance on the performance of pollution control technologies.
Certification Statements In lieu of requiring self-monitoring, some standards allow ClUs to certify
that they do not use, generate or discharge a regulated pollutant [e.g. Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
facilities can certify that chlorophenolic compounds are not used (40 CFR Part 430) and
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing facilities can certify that cyanide is not used or generated (40 CFR
Part 439)]. Facilities providing such certifications are still considered ClUs, and therefore are subject
to other pretreatment standards and requirements.
Lack of specific categorical effluent limitations lUs subject to PSES or PSNS that merely require
compliance with 40 CFR Part 403 are not considered ClUs. However, these users may still be
classified as SlUs and are still subject to the general and specific prohibitions and any local limits.
Total Toxic Organics (TTO) Seven categorical regulations currently limit the discharge of TTO:
- 40 CFR Part 413 - Electroplating
- 40 CFR Part 433 - Metal Finishing
- 40 CFR Part 464 - Metal Molding and Casting
- 40 CFR Part 465 - Coil Coating
- 40 CFR Part 467 - Aluminum Forming
- 40 CFR Part 468 - Copper Forming
- 40 CFR Part 469 - Electrical and Electronic Components (Phase I and II)
For each of these standards, TTO refers to the sum of the masses or concentrations of certain toxic
organic pollutants found in the regulated discharge at a concentration greater than 0.01 milligrams
per liter (mg/l). However, the toxic organic pollutants regulated by the TTO limit are specific to each
industrial category. Further, industrial categories may provide some flexibility with regard to
monitoring and/or reporting requirements as follows:
9 June 26, 1987 letter from Ms. Rebecca W. Hanmer, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Water.
Chapters ~-
-------
Pretreatment Standards
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
- 40 CFR Parts 413 and 433 allow development and implementation of a Toxic Organic
Management Plan (TOMP) in lieu of routine monitoring while 40 CFR Part 469 allows
development and implementation of a Solvent Management Plan. Upon approval of
these plans by the Control Authority, the CIU can demonstrate compliance with TTO
requirements by certifying that the facility is adhering to this Plan to prevent organics
from being discharged to the POTW. A specific certification statement must be signed
and provided to the Control Authority on a regular basis.
- 40 CFR Parts 464, 465, 467, and 468 allow an option to demonstrate compliance with
an Oil and Grease limit in lieu of demonstrating compliance with a TTO limit. The
option chosen by the CIU must be utilized for all reports required (i.e., BMR, 90-day
compliance report, and periodic compliance reports).
EPA's Guidance Manual for Implementing Total Toxic Organics (TTO) Pretreatment Standards
should be consulted for more information on TTO.
LOCAL LIMITS
Prohibited discharge standards are designed to protect against pass-through and interference generally.
Categorical pretreatment standards, on the other hand, are designed to ensure that lUs implement
technology-based controls to limit the discharge of pollutants. Local limits, however, address the specific
needs and concerns of a POTW and its receiving waters. Federal regulations at 40 CFR §§403.8(f)(4) and
122.21 (j)(4) require Control Authorities to evaluate the need for local limits and, if necessary, implement and
enforce specific limits as part of pretreatment program activities.
Local limits are developed for pollutants (e.g. metals, cyanide, BOD5, TSS, oil and grease, organics) that
may cause interference, pass through, sludge contamination, and/or worker health and safety problems if
discharged in excess of the receiving POTW treatment plant's capabilities and/or receiving water quality
standards. Typically, local limits are developed to regulate the discharge from all lUs, not just to ClUs, and
are usually imposed at the "end-of-pipe" discharge from an IU (i.e., at the point of connection to the POTWs
collection system). In evaluating the need for local limit development, it is recommended that Control
Authorities:
conduct an industrial waste survey to identify
all lUs that might be subject to the
pretreatment program;
determine the character and volume of
pollutants contributed to the POTW by these
industries;
determine which pollutants have a reasonable
potential for pass through, interference, or
sludge contamination;
conduct a technical evaluation to determine
the maximum allowable POTW treatment
plant headworks (influent) loading for at least
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide,
lead, mercury, nickel, silver, and zinc (Figure
19);
identify additional pollutants of concern;
determine contributions from unpermitted sources to determine the maximum allowable treatment plant
headworks loading from "controllable" industrial sources (Figure 20);
implement a system to ensure these loadings will not be exceeded.
Maximum Allowable Headworks Loading Method
(MAHL) Pollutant by pollutant, treatment plant data are
used to calculate removal efficiencies, before applying the
most stringent criteria (i.e., water quality, sludge quality,
NPDES permit, or pollutant inhibition levels) to back
calculate the MAHLs. Subtracting out contributions from
domestic sources, the available industrial loading is then
either evenly distributed among the lUs, or allocated on an
as needed basis to those lUs discharging the pollutant
above background levels.
Figure 19. MAHL
Other local limit approaches available to Control
Authorities include:
Collection System Approach Pollutants found
to be present which may cause fire and
Maximum Allowable Industrial Load (MAIL) The
MAIL is the total daily mass that a POTW can accept from
all permitted lUs and ensure the POTW is protecting
against pass through and interference.
Figure 20. MAIL
-20-
Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Pretreatment Standards
explosion hazards or other worker health and safety concerns, are evaluated for their propensity to
volatilize and are modeled to evaluate their expected concentration in air. Comparisons are made with
worker health exposure criteria and lower explosive limits. Where values are of concern, the Control
Authority may set limits or require development of management practices to control undesirable
discharges. The collection system approach may also considerthe prohibition of pollutants with specific
flashpoints to prevent discharges of ignitable wastes. EPA's Guidance to Protect POTW Workers from
Toxic and Reactive Gases and Vapors details strategies for developing such local limits.
Industrial User Management Practice Plans These plans typically consist of narrative local limits
requiring IDs to develop management practices (e.g., chemical management practices, best
management practices, and spill prevention plans) for the handling of chemicals and wastes. The
need for and suggested contents of such plans may be found in EPA's Control of Slug Loadings to
POTWs: Guidance Manual, and Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Information
Guide.
Case-by-Case Discharge Limits These numeric local limits are based on best professional
judgement (BPJ) and available pollution prevention and treatment technologies which are known
to be economically feasible. This approach is most often used when insufficient data are available
to employ the methods outlined above.
Local Specific Prohibitions POTW specific prohibitions may be imposed in addition to the
prohibitions detailed in 40 CFR § 403.5 (a) & (b) to address hydraulic, pollutant specific, and/or
aesthetic concerns; e.g.:
- noxious or malodorous liquids, gases, or solids creating a public nuisance
- wastestreams which impart color and pass through the POTW treatment plant
- storm water, roof runoff, swimming pool drainage
- wastewaters containing radioactive wastes or isotopes
- removed substances from pretreatment of wastewater.
Regardless of the approaches taken by a Control Authority, local limits should correct existing problems,
prevent potential problems, protect the receiving waters, improve sludge use options, and protect POTW
personnel. Additional existing EPA guidance on the subject includes:
- Guidance for Preventing Interference at POTWs
- Guidance Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations Under
the Pretreatment Program
- Supplemental Manual on the Development and Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations
Under the Pretreatment Program: Residential and Commercial Toxic Pollutant Loadings and
POTW Removal Efficiency Estimation
- Toxicity Identification Evaluation: Characterization of Chronically Toxic Effluents.
Additionally, many EPA Regions and States have developed local limits guidance to address regional and
state issues.
Chapters -21-
-------
Pretreatment Standards
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
SUMMARY OF STANDARDS
A summary of all of the pretreatment standards, including general and specific prohibitions, categorical
pretreatment standards, and local limits, is provided as Figure 21.
General and Specific Prohibitions
Categorical Pretreatment Standards
Local Limits
Oevelopment
established at the Federal level
Established at the Federal level
Developed by Control Authorities
Reference
K) CFR 403.5(a) & (b)
40 CFR Parts 405-471
Requirements for development found in
40 CFR §§403.5(c) & 403.8(f)(4)
Applicability
1 lUs
CIUs
Commonly all lUs or all SIUs, but
depends on allocation method used
when developing limits.
Purpose
-"rovide for general protection of the
'OTW. May be superseded by
nore stringent categorical
)retreatment standards or local
imits.
Minimum standards based on available
treatment technology and pollution prevention
measures for controlling nonconventional and
toxic pollutants that may cause pass through,
interference, etc. at the POTW. May be
superseded by more stringent local limits.
Provide site specific protection for a
POTW and its receiving waters. May
be superseded by more stringent
categorical standards.
411 standards are considered pretreatment standards for the purpose of section 307(d) of the Clean Water Act. A POTW is responsible for
identifying standard(s) applicable to each industrial user and applying the most stringent requirements where multiple provisions exist. Compliance
with imposed standards can be achieved through implementation of best management practices, development of a pollution prevention program,
and/or installation of pretreatment.
Figure 21. Summary of Standards
-22-
Chapter 3
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
4. POTW PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
RESPONSIBILITIES
Chapter 4. Applicable EPA Guidance
CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Guidance Manual
Control of Slug Loadings To POTWs: Guidance Manual
Guidance For Developing Control Authority Enforcement Response
Plans
Guidance Manual for POTWs to Calculate the Economic Benefit of
Noncompliance
Industrial User Inspection and Sampling Manual For POTWs
Industrial User Permitting Guidance Manual
Model Pretreatment Ordinance
Multijurisdictional Pretreatment Programs: Guidance Manual
NPDES Compliance Inspection Manual
POTW Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance Document
Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Guidance
RCRA Information on Hazardous Wastes for Publicly Owned
Treatment Works
U.S. EPA Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
System: Version 3.0, User's Guide
Chapter 2 describes the basis
for POTWs to develop pretreatment
programs that implement Federal
pretreatment standards and
requirements, in addition to
protecting any local concerns. This
Chapter provides an overview of
these POTW programs, highlighting
each of the specific program areas
that are to be addressed.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
As discussed in Chapter 2,
POTWs seeking pretreatment
program approval must develop
policy and procedures for program
implementation and establish the
legal authority to implement and
enforce program requirements. The
General Pretreatment Regulations do not provide Control Authorities with the legal authority to carry out their
pretreatment programs; rather the regulations do set forth the minimum requirements for POTWs with
pretreatment programs.
A Control Authority's legal authority actually derives from State law. Therefore, State law must confer the
minimum Federal legal authority requirements on a Control Authority. Where deficient, State law must be
modified to grant the minimum requirements.
In order to apply regulatory authority provided by State law, it is generally necessary for the Control
Authority to establish local regulations to legally implement and enforce pretreatment requirements. Where the
Control Authority is a municipality, legal authority is detailed in a Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO), which is usually
part of city or county code. Regional Control Authorities frequently adopt similar provisions in the form of "rules
and regulations." Likewise, State agencies implementing a State-wide program under 40 CFR §403.10(e) set
out pretreatment requirements as State regulations, rather than as an SUO. [Local regulations cannot give the
Control Authority greater authority than that
provided by State law.] EPA's 1992 guidance,
EPA Model Pretreatment Ordinance provides
a model for POTWs that are required to
develop pretreatment programs.
As POTW service areas expand, new
contributions may arise from
"extrajurisdictional" lUs located outside of the
Control Authority's legal jurisdiction (see
Figure 22). Multijurisdictional arrangements
require special legal/contractual mechanisms
to ensure adequate authority to implement
and enforce program requirements in these
other jurisdictions. Some state statutes may
provide for general extraterritorial powers
(i.e., a Control Authority is automatically
allowed to regulate extrajurisdictional lUs
City A
CityB
POTW
Figure 22. Multijurisdictional Programs
Chapter 4
-23-
-------
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
contributing to their system). However, the extent to which authorities (i.e., to permit, inspect, enforce, monitor,
etc.) are granted may be somewhat limited, thereby, restricting a Control Authority's ability to implement and
enforce a program. Where obtaining authority from the State to regulate extrajurisdictional IDs is not feasible,
other options may be pursued:
Districts The creation of an independent organization (by affected municipalities orthe State) which
is authorized to administer and enforce an approved pretreatment program for the entire area in
which it provides services is common in areas where multiple POTWs each serve various
jurisdictions.
Agreements Affected Control Authorities may opt to enter into agreements requiring each
municipality to implement and enforce the approved pretreatment program covering all IDs within
their jurisdiction. The Control Authority must retain the means to regulate extrajurisdictional IDs
where the contributing jurisdiction's efforts are inadequate. It is essential that agreements clearly
define the roles of each party.
Annexation Where extrajurisdictional IDs lie in unincorporated areas, a Control Authority may
annex or utility annex the service area.
Contracts A Control Authority may enter into a contract with an extrajurisdictional ID, although
contracts generally limit the enforcement capabilities of the Control Authority. As such, contracts
should only be pursued when all other means fail.
Since procedures for obtaining jurisdiction, creating sanitary districts, annexing service areas, etc. vary
among states, Control Authority personnel should consult with their legal staff to thoroughly examine options
allowed. This may include requesting State legislative changes if necessary. EPA's 1994 Multijurisdictional
Pretreatment Programs - Guidance Manual provides more information on these jurisdictional issues, including
sample language for agreements and contracts.
INDUSTRIAL WASTE SURVEYS
As part of program development and maintenance, the Federal regulations [40 CFR §403.8(f)(2)(l)] require
Control Authorities to identify and locate all lUs that might be subject to the pretreatment program. While the
General Pretreatment Regulations do not specify how a Control Authority is to accomplish this, it is beneficial
to conduct an initial in-depth survey, then institute measures to update the list continuously. Control Authorities
must ensure that the entire service area is reviewed. This may include lUs located outside the jurisdictional
boundaries of the POTW. In these instances, it may be appropriate to solicit assistance from other jurisdictions
in developing the list of potential dischargers. The types of resources that may be consulted in compiling and
updating the master list include:
Water and sewer billing records
Applications for sewer service
Local telephone directories
Chamber of Commerce and local business directories
Business license records
POTW and wastewater collection personnel and field observations
Business associations
Internet
Once lUs are identified, the Control Authority must classify these users to determine if pretreatment
standards and requirements should apply to these facilities. Typically, the Control Authority develops and
distributes an Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) questionnaire to the identified lUs. The IWS questionnaire
requests information regarding IU activities and the nature of wastes discharged. The Control Authority may
opt to send a detailed IWS questionnaire initially or conduct the survey in two phases (i.e., send a screener
requesting basic information to eliminate obvious facilities and then send a detailed IWS to those facilities with
greater potential to be SlUs). Key to the IWS is to identify facilities that are subject to categorical standards
(i.e., ClUs) or otherwise have the potential to impact the POTW (i.e., SlUs).
-24- Chapter 4
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
A POTW's ID inventory should include the name, location, classification, applicable standards, basis for
limits imposed, volume of discharge, control mechanism status, compliance dates and other special
requirements for each ID. The IWS should provide most of the information required to develop the inventory,
although some supplementary information might be required from othersources, such as the permit application
or monitoring data.
The ID inventory must be updated as needed [40 CFR §403.8(f)(2)(l)] and provided to the Approval
Authority as part of the annual report requirement (see POTW Reports section in this Chapter). The on-going
task of maintaining a complete list of IDs requires the Control Authority to implement a system to track existing
ID information and/or classification changes and new user information. Some Control Authorities may
proactively opt to institute a "utility connect questionnaire" program. These types of forms are completed when
a customer applies for new utility service (e.g., water, sewerage, or electricity).
PERMITTING
The General Pretreatment Regulations require all IDs be controlled through permit, order, orsimilar means
to ensure compliance with applicable pretreatment standards and requirements. Section 403.8(f)(1)(iii)(A-E)
clarifies this requirement to specify that all SILJs be issued a permit or equivalent individual control mechanism
which contains, at a minimum:
- statement of duration (not to exceed five years);
- statement of nontransferabililty (unless outlined provisions are met);
- effluent limitations based on applicable standards;
- self-monitoring, sampling, reporting, notification, and record keeping requirements;
- statement of applicable civil and criminal penalties; and
- a schedule of compliance (where appropriate).
EPA's 1989 Industrial User Permitting Guidance Manua/details procedures fordrafting ID discharge permits.
SIU permits issued are site specific and tailored to the unique circumstances of the ID. Permit conditions must
establish clear and explicit requirements for the permittee, to include using such terms such as "shall" and
"must" in lieu of vague terms such as "recommend" or "may". The Control Authority must document its decision-
making process when developing permits to ensure defensibility and enforceability. Adherence to sound,
documented procedures will prevent any arbitrary and capricious claims by the permittee. Whether developing
or reissuing a permit, the permitting process consists of three phases:
- Phase I - Collection and verification of information
- Phase II - Data interpretation and fact sheet development
- Phase III - Permit development and issuance.
As part of Phase I, Control Authorities may review and verify information contained in the permit application,
perform an inspection of the ID for confirmation of facts, tally data, and potentially sample and analyze the ILJ's
wastestream. Knowledgeable Control Authority personnel, effective communication, and SIU cooperation are
essential to collection of complete and accurate information.
Phase II requires that the Control Authority interpret data and other information and document the permit
decision-making rationale, preferably in a permit fact sheet. Although the contents of a fact sheet will vary by
permittee, fact sheets should provide a justification of all permitting decisions. Typical components of a fact
sheet are provided in Figure 23. Completed fact sheets should be included as part of the permit and provided
to the Permittee to document the soundness of permitting decisions.
Chapter 4 -25-
-------
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
After all permitting decisions are made, the Control
Authority must incorporate those decisions into a
permit. The permit, signed by the specified Control
Authority official is provided to the Permittee for
comment and after comments are addressed, a final
permit is issued to the ID. While many comments may
be easily addressed/resolved by the Control Authority,
occasionally resolution must be obtained through a
formal adjudicatory hearing process where both the
Permittee and Control Authority present their case to a
third party.
Many POTWs also control contributions from non-
SILJs using various means, such as through general
permits issued to an entire industrial sector. These
types of control mechanisms may not necessarily
require compliance with specific pollutant limitations.
For example:
- grease trap maintenance and record keeping
requirements for food establishments;
For CIUs:
the basis for the categorical determination(s)
the identity and flow volume of all wastestreams
generated and discharged to the POTW, and classified
accordingly (i.e., regulated, unregulated, or dilution)
data used and/or justification for estimates used to
determine categorical limitations
basis for limits imposed for categorical parameters.
For SIUs/CIUs:
basis for limits imposed for non-categorical parameters
rationale for compliance schedules, special plans
required, special conditions, etc.
basis for monitoring and reporting frequencies.
Figure 23. Components of Permit Fact Sheet
- maintenance and record keeping requirements for photo processors' silver reclamation units;
- best management practices for mercury recovery by hospitals and dentists.
Industrial sector general permitting programs are common where a real or potential POTW problem is linked
to a particular pollutant discharged (e.g., collection system blockages caused by the discharge of excess oils
and grease from food establishments). POTWs do have authority to enforce their SUO or rules or regulations
against non-SIUs without the need for any type of individual control mechanism. Control Authorities do have
the authority to require non-SIUs to comply with pretreatment standards and requirements contained in their
local regulations and then take appropriate actions against IDs as noncompliance is identified.
INSPECTIONS
Control Authorities are required to inspect and
sample all SILJs a minimum of once per year pursuant
to 40 CFR §403.8(f)(2(v). The frequency with which a
Control Authority actually inspects an SIU may vary
depending on issues such as the variability of an SlU's
effluent, the impact of their discharge on the POTW,
and their compliance history. Inspection
considerations (see Figure 24) will hinge upon the type
of inspection performed (i.e., scheduled, unscheduled
or demand). EPA's 1994 Industrial User Inspection
and Sampling Manual for POTWs provides a detailed
reference for inspection procedures and protocols.
Scheduled inspections are useful when the Control
Authority wants to gather specific information from the
facility that necessitates meeting with specific SIU
contacts. However, since scheduled inspections may
interrupt normal operations (e.g., altered production
schedule as a result of preparative work undertaken by
the IU), unscheduled inspections may more accurately
reflect IU compliance status when the inspection is
performed for that reason.
Provide current data on lUs
Confirm or determine IUs' compliance status
Determine completeness and accuracy of the lU's
performance/compliance records
Assess the adequacy of the lU's self-monitoring and
reporting requirements
Assess the adequacy of monitoring locations and lU's
sampling techniques
Assess the adequacy of imposed limitations and
pollutants of concern
Develop rapport with IUs
Evaluate operation and maintenance and overall
performance of an lU's pretreatment system
Assess the potential for spills and slug loadings
Evaluate the effectiveness of slug control plan
Reveal issues requiring action
Identify noncompliance needing resolution
Suggest pollution prevention opportunities
Collect samples
Obtain data to support enforcement actions
Figure 24. Inspection Considerations
-26-
Chapter 4
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
POTWs must evaluate, at least once every two years, whether each SIU needs a plan to control slug
discharges (i.e., a discharge of a non-routine, episodic nature, including but not limited to an accidental spill or
non-customary batch discharge). To accurately evaluate the slug potential, Control Authorities likely will have
to examine the SIU during normal operating conditions. If undetected, slug discharges can have serious
impacts on the POTW. EPA's 1991 Control of Slug Loadings to POTWs Guidance Manual provides a
description of procedures for development, implementation, and review of slug control plans.
Demand inspections are non-routine in nature and occur in response to a concern (e.g., POTW collection
problems downstream from an ID, elevated enforcement actions against an ID, suspicious ID behavior, or an
informer complaint).
Routine Control Authority inspections of SILJs typically consist of three activities; preparation, on-site
assessment, and follow-up.
Preparation - Control Authority personnel should review POTW records for SILJs to be inspected to
familiarize themselves with the facility. Information reviewed may include compliance status, compliance
schedule activities, reports and plans, upcoming report and plan due dates, enforcement activities, permit
applications, waste surveys, previous inspection summaries, categorical regulations, water use/billing
records, and POTW collection system maps. Control Authority personnel should also be familiar with any
specific issues and concerns regarding the POTW treatment plant or collection system problems receiving
the SlU's discharge.
On-site Assessment - Control Authority personnel typically discuss ID operations with ID contacts and
perform a walkthrough of the facility to: update ID information regarding contacts, processes, production
rates, pretreatment, and other waste management activities; review records required to be kept by the ID;
visually verify the need for a slug control plan; and review pretreatment system maintenance, categorical
standards applicable to processes employed, metering and sampling equipment, sampling procedures,
chemicals used, processes employed, management practices, containment structures, locations of floor
drains, etc. Many POTWs have developed a standard inspection questionnaire to facilitate the interview
process and promote consistency during the inspection.
Follow-up - An inspection report should be prepared as soon as possible after the inspector returns to the
office. Unanswered questions, required permit modifications, and/or necessary enforcement actions should
be processed in a timely manner.
Non-routine inspections (e.g., demand) may not encompass all the activities and steps specified above, but,
like routine inspections, these activities may provide the Control Authority an opportunity to collect samples of
the ILJ's discharge.
SAMPLING
The General Pretreatment Regulations require Control Authorities to monitor each SIU at least annually and
each SIU to self-monitor semi-annually. As with inspections, the Control Authority should assess site-specific
issues, such as SIU effluent variability, impact of this effluent on the POTW, and the SlU's compliance history
to determine appropriate sampling frequencies (i.e., if more frequent monitoring is necessary). A more detailed
discussion of IU monitoring requirements is provided in Chapter 5. For more detailed information on sampling
frequencies, consult EPA's 1994 Industrial User Inspection and Sampling Manual for POTWs.
Sampling is the most appropriate method for verifying compliance with pretreatment standards. Monitoring
location(s) are designated by the Control Authority and must be such that compliance with permitted discharge
limits can be determined. Where possible, the Control Authority should not designate monitoring locations that
are confined spaces or that are difficult to access or difficult to place the automated sampling equipment.
Monitoring locations should:
- be appropriate for waste stream conditions;
- be representative of the discharge;
- have no bypass capabilities; and
- allow for unrestricted access at all times.
Chapter 4 -27-
-------
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Control Authorities should measure flow to allow for collection of flow-proportioned composite samples,
which are required, unless flow-proportional sampling is not feasible. Flow-proportional composite samples are
preferred overtime composite samples particularly where the monitored discharge is intermittent or variable.
Desired analyses dictate the preparation protocols, equipment, and collection bottles to use to avoid
contamination of samples or loss of pollutants through improper collection. Sampling for such pollutants as pH,
cyanide, oil and grease, flashpoint, and volatile organic compounds require manual collection of grab samples.
Similarto composite samples, grab samples must be representative of the monitored discharge and are to be
collected from actively flowing wastestreams. Fluctuations in flow or the nature of the discharge may require
collection of and hand-compositing of more than one grab sample to accurately access compliance. To ensure
defensibility of data, Control Authorities should develop and implement standard operating procedures and
policies detailing sample collection and handling protocols in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136.
Adherence to proper sample collection and handling protocols, 40 CFR Part 136 approved analytical
methodologies, and record keeping requirements [40 CFR §403.12(o)(1)] (see Figure 25) can be verified
through review of field measurement records, chain of custodies, and lab reports. Field measurement records
may require information regarding sample location, condition of and programmed settings for sampling
equipment, wastewater meter readings, and information for such parameters as pH and temperature which
require analysis in the field. Chain of custody forms serve as a link between field personnel and the laboratory
and contain information regarding sample matrix, type, and handling. Lab reports should contain the minimum
information specified in 40 CFR §403.12(o)(1)(ii-iv) as well as any additional information necessary to
demonstrate compliance with 40 CFR Part 136 requirements (e.g., analytical methodology, sample preparation
date and time, time of analysis). Use of standardized forms which prompt recording of information necessary
for demonstrating compliance with applicable requirements, will aid in ensuring it can be used as admissible
evidence in enforcement proceedings or in judicial actions.
Figure 25. Sample Collection Techniques
Parameter
PH
BOD
TSS
NH3asN
Oil and Grease
Cyanide, total
Metals (total) excl. Cr+6,
B, andHg
624 (volatiles organics)
625 (semi-volatile
organics)
Sample type
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Grab
Composite
Grab
Composite
Container
Polyethylene or Glass
Polyethylene or Glass
Polyethylene or Glass
Polyethylene or Glass
Glass
Polyethylene or Glass
Polyethylene or Glass
Amber glass, w/ teflon septum
lid and zero headspace
Amber glass w/ teflon lined lid
Preservative
N/A
chilled to 4°C
chilled to 4°C
chilled to 4°C, H2SO4 to pH<2
chilled to 4°C, HC1 or H2SO4 to pH<2
chilled to 4°C, NaOH to a pH >12, and 0.6g
of ascorbic acid if residual chlorine is present
HN03 to pH<2
chilled to 4°C (additional laboratory
preservation required)
chilled to 4°C (additional laboratory
preservation required)
Holding time
analyze immediately
48 hours
7 days
28 days
28 days
14 days
6 months
7 or 14 days, depending on
specific organic
7 days for sample prep; 40
days for extract
ENFORCEMENT
In addition to requirements for permitting, sampling, and inspecting IDs, the General Pretreatment
Regulations also require Control Authorities to review ID reports and plans, and respond to instances of ID
noncompliance in a timely, fair, and consistent manner. Enforcement of pretreatment requirements is a critical
element of the Pretreatment Program, but in the past extenuating circumstances may have prevented POTWs
from taking adequate enforcement. For example, political and economic pressures from local officials could
keep POTW personnel from taking appropriate actions. After this was identified as a major concern, EPA
promulgated regulations in 1990 (55 FR 30082) that require all POTWs with approved pretreatment programs
to adopt and implement an Enforcement Response Plan (ERP). These ERP regulations, at 40 CFR
§403.8(f)(5), establish a framework for POTWs to formalize procedures for investigating and responding to
instances of ID noncompliance. With an approved ERP in place, POTWs can enforce against IDs on a more
objective basis and minimize outside pressures.
-28-
Chapter 4
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
To evaluate ID compliance, Control Authorities must first identify applicable requirements for each ID. In
general, ID reports (discussed in Chapter 5) and POTW monitoring activities are the basis for POTWevaluation
of ID compliance. Discharge permit limit exceedances, discrepancies, deficiencies, and lateness are all
violations that must be resolved.
To ensure enforcement response is appropriate and that the Control Authority actions are not arbitrary or
capricious, EPA strongly recommends that an Enforcement Response Guide (ERG) be included as part of the
approved ERP. The ERG identifies responsible Control Authority officials, general time frame for actions,
expected ID responses, and potential escalated actions based on:
- the nature of the violation
pretreatment standards
reporting (late or deficient)
compliance schedules
- magnitude of the violation
- duration of the violation
- frequency of the violation (isolated or recurring)
- (potential) impact of the violation (e.g., interference, pass through, or POTW worker safety)
- economic benefit gained by the violator
- attitude of the violator
The types of questions that dictate whether an
ERP is adequate are presented in Figure 26.
Factors that should be considered in
determining appropriate enforcement responses
to noncompliance events are discussed in detail
in EPA's 1989 Guidance for Developing Control
Authority Enforcement Response Plans.
The General Pretreatment Regulations set
as an enforcement priority, facilities that meet
the criteria for "Significant Noncompliance
Is a Control Authority response required for all violations
identified?
Is the IU notified by the Control Authority when a violation is
found?
Is the IU required to respond to each violation with an explanation
and, as appropriate, a plan to correct the violation within a
specified time period?
Where noncompliance continues and/or the IU response is
inadequate, does the Control Authority's response become more
formal and commitments (or schedules, as appropriate) for
compliance established in an enforceable document?
Is the enforcement response selected related to the seriousness of
(SNC)" as defined in 40 CFR §403.8(f)(2)(vii) - ^?,viol!'ion? , ,. ... , OM_ .. . . ,.
^ ' ° w\/\/q. Where the violation constitutes SNC, and is ongoing, is the
minimum response an administrative order?
and depicted in Figure 27. A decision to seek
formal enforcement is generally triggered by an
unresolved instance of SNC, failure to achieve Figure 26. How Complete is Your ERG?
compliance in a specified time period through
less formal means, or the advice of legal
counsel. SNC evaluations are to be conducted in six-month increments; names of IDs found to be in SNC must
be published in the local newspaper (see Public Participation in this Chapter).
Formal enforcement must be supported by well-documented records of the violations and of any prior efforts
by the Control Authority to obtain compliance. Where effluent limitations have been exceeded, records must
be reviewed to verify compliance with 40 CFR Part 136 test methods. If the IU has received conflicting
information from the Control Authority regarding its compliance status, its status must be clarified in writing.
Although not required, the Control Authority may consider a "show cause" meeting with the IU before
commencing formal enforcement action. Similarly, the regulations do allow, in certain instances, an affirmative
defense for violations.
The range of enforcement mechanisms available to a Control Authority depends on the specific legal
authorities it has been given by city, county, and State legislatures. These mechanisms may range from a
simple telephone call to suits seeking significant criminal penalties. Common enforcement mechanisms include:
Chapter 4 -29-
-------
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Informal notice to ID - This may consist of
a telephone call or "reminder" letter to an
appropriate ID official to notify them of a
minor violation and to seek an explanation.
Such informal notice may be used to
correct minor instances of noncompliance.
Informal meetings - Used to obtain an
ILJ's commitment to comply with their
pretreatment obligations or to inform the ID
of stronger enforcement mechanisms
available for unresolved and/or continued
noncompliance.
Warning letter or Notice of Violation
(NOV) - Written notice to the IU in
response to a violation of pretreatment
standards or requirements. These notices
should request an explanation of the
noncompliance and measures that will be
taken to eliminate future violations.
Administrative orders and compliance
schedules - These require an ID to "show
cause" to the Control Authority as to why
formal enforcement action should not be
taken and/or sewer service discontinued, or
actions that will be taken to comply with
pretreatment standards or requirements.
Orders as such may be negotiated (i.e.,
Consent Order) or issued at the reasonable
discretion of the Control Authority (i.e.,
Compliance Order). For more egregious or
serious violations, the Control Authority
may issue a Cease and Desist Order.
Administrative fines - Assessed by
Control Authorities against IDs for violations
and intended to recapture partial or full
economic benefit for the noncompliance
and to deter future violations.
Civil suits - Formal process of filing
lawsuits against IDs to correct violations
and to obtain penalties for violations. Civil
penalty amounts are generally limited
through State or municipal laws. However, 40 CFR §403.8(f)(1)(vi) requires that Control Authorities have
the legal authority to seek or assess civil or criminal penalties of at least $1,000 per day for each violation.
A civil suit for injunctive relief may be used when the ID is unlikely to successfully execute the steps that
the Control Authority believes are necessary to achieve or maintain compliance, when the violation is
serious enough to warrant court action to deter future similar violations, or when the danger presented by
an ILJ's lengthy negotiation of a settlement is intolerable.
NOTE: Surcharges are not penalties or fines. Surcharges are intended to recoup the cost of treatment
of wastes by the POTW and must not be used to allow discharges of toxic pollutants that cause
interference or pass through.
An IU is in SNC if its violation meets one or more of
the following criteria (40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(vii):
(A) Chronic violations of wastewater discharge limits, defined
here as those in which sixty-six percent or more of all of the
measurements taken during a six-month period exceed (by any
magnitude) the daily maximum limit or the average limit for the
same pollutant parameter;
(B) Technical Review Criteria (TRC) violations, defined here as
those in which thirty-three percent or more of all of the
measurements for each pollutant parameter taken during a six-
month period equal or exceed the product of the daily maximum or
the average limit multiplied by the applicable TRC (TRC = 1.4 for
BOD5, TSS, fats, oil, and grease, and 1.2 for all other pollutants
except pH);
(C) Any other violation of a pretreatment effluent limit (daily
maximum or longer-term average) that the Control Authority
determines has caused, alone or in combination with other
discharges, interference or pass through (including endangering the
health of POTW personnel or the general public);
(D) Any discharge of a pollutant that has caused imminent
endangerment to human health, welfare or to the environment or
has resulted in the POTW's exercise of its emergency authority
under 40 CFR § 403.8(i)(l)(vi)(B) of this section to halt or prevent
such a discharge;
(E) Failure to meet, within 90 days after the schedule date, a
compliance schedule milestone contained in a local control
mechanism or enforcement order for starting construction,
completing construction, or attaining final compliance;
(F) Failure to provide, within 30 days after the due date, required
reports such as baseline monitoring reports, 90-day compliance
reports, periodic self-monitoring reports, and reports on
compliance with compliance schedules;
(G) Failure to accurately report noncompliance;
(H) Any other violation or group of violations which the Control
Authority determines will adversely affect the operation or
implementation of the local pretreatment program.
Figure 27. Definition of Significant Noncompliance (SNC)
Chapter 4
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
- Criminal prosecution - This type of enforcement is a formal judicial process where sufficient admissible
evidence exists to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person has willfully or negligently violated
pretreatment standards or that a person has knowingly made a false statement regarding any report,
application, record, or otherdocument required by the General Pretreatment Regulations. As noted above,
Control Authorities must have the legal authority to seek or assess civil or criminal penalties of at least
$1,000 per day for each violation. Examples of criminal violations include falsification of data and
tampering with sampling results or equipment.
- Termination of service (revocation of permit) - These actions may be pursued by Control Authorities to
immediately halt an actual or threatened discharge to the POTW that may represent an endangermentto
the public health, the environment, or the POTW. Use of these remedies may also be used in bringing
recalcitrant users into compliance.
Regardless of the response taken, the Control Authority should document and track all contact, notices, and
meetings with IDs and ID responses. Control Authority responses and ID responses (or lack thereof) should be
documented and include a record of any direct contact with the ID to attempt to resolve the noncompliance.
Control Authorities must take timely and effective enforcement against violators. Unresolved ID noncompliance
may result in the Approval Authority enforcing directly against the ID and/or the Control Authority. EPA may
also take enforcement action where it deems action by the State or the Control Authority is inappropriate. An
Approval Authority will routinely review the overall performance of a Control Authority in monitoring IDs,
identifying violations, and in enforcing regulations. Performance will be evaluated based on POTW self-
monitoring data, written enforcement response plans, audits, inspections, and pretreatment program reports.
Therefore, it is essential for Control Authorities to effectively manage program information to demonstrate
proper implementation.
Section 505 of the CWA allows citizens to file suit against a Control Authority that has failed to implement
its approved pretreatment program as required by its NPDES permit. The Control Authority may be fined as
well as required to enforce against violations of pretreatment standards and requirements in a court order.
DATA MANAGEMENT AND RECORD KEEPING
Any ID subject to pretreatment program reporting requirements is required to maintain records resulting from
monitoring in a readily accessible manner for a minimum of 3 years (longer if during periods of any ongoing
litigation). While the means for maintaining files is usually at the discretion of the POTW, all pretreatment
activities should be documented and the documents maintained. Types of ID records that the Control Authority
should maintain are summarized in Figure 28.
Tracking due dates, submissions, deficiencies,
notifications, etc. and calculating effluent limitation
noncompliance may be facilitated by a computerized data
management system. Similarly, many Control Authorities
use standardized forms (e.g., inspection questionnaires,
chains-of-custody, field measurement records) and
procedures (e.g..sampling, periodic compliance report
reviews) to promote consistency and organization of
program data.
In addition to specific ID records, Control
Authorities should also maintain general program files
that document specific program development and
implementation activities that are not ID-specific (see
Figure 29). All information should be filed in an orderly
manner and be readily accessible for inspection and
copying by EPA and State representatives or the
public. The pretreatment regulations specify that all
information submitted to the Control Authority or State
must be available to the public without restriction,
except for confidential business information.
Industrial waste questionnaire
Permit applications, permits and fact sheets
Inspection reports
IU reports
Monitoring data (including laboratory
reports)
Required plans (e.g., slug control, sludge
management, pollution prevention)
.eg
Drograrttlpcwe&pSfldence to and from the IU
Sopy of POTW NPDES pormit(o)
EtgWBraae dypKUpflfeJU Records Retained
ERP
Correspondence to and from EPA/State
Annual reports to the Approval Authority
Public notices
Funding and resource changes
Applicable Federal and State regulations
IU compliance and permitting records
Figure 29. Types of POTW Records Retained
Chapter 4
-31-
-------
POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND POTW REPORTING
Section 101 (e) of the CWA establishes public participation as one of its goals, in the development, revision,
and enforcement of any regulation, standard, effluent limitation, plan, or program established by EPA or any
State. The General Pretreatment Regulations encourage public participation by requiring public notices and/or
hearings for program approval, removal credits, program modifications, local limits development and
modifications, and IDs in SNC.
POTW pretreatment program approval requests
require the Approval Authority to publish a notice
(including a notice for a public hearing) in a newspaper
of general circulation within the jurisdiction served by
the POTW. All comments regarding the request as
well as any request for a public hearing must be filed
with the Approval Authority within the specified
comment period, which generally last 30 days. The
Approval Authority is required to account for all
comments received when deciding to approve or deny
the submission. The decision is then provided to the
POTW and other interested parties, published in the
newspaperwith all comments received available to the
public for inspection and copying.
Once a local pretreatment program is approved,
the Control Authority must implement that program as
approved. Before there is a significant change in the
operation of a POTW pretreatment program, a program
modification must be initiated.
For substantial program modifications (see Figure
30), the Control Authority is required to notify the
Approval Authority of the desire to modify its program
and the basis for the change. These changes become
effective upon approval. Approval Authorities (or
POTWs) are required to public notice the request for a
modification, but are not required to public notice the
decision if no comments are received and the request
is approved without changes.
6.
7.
Modifications that relax POTW legal authorities (as
described in 40 CFR §403.8(f)(l)), except for
modifications that directly reflect a revision to 40
CFR Part 403, and are reported pursuant to 40 CFR
§403.18(d) - Approval procedures for nonsubstantial
modifications;
Modifications that relax local limits, except for
modifications to local limits for pH and reallocations
of the Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading of a
pollutant that do not increase the total industrial
loadings for a pollutant, which are reported pursuant
to 40 CFR §403.18(d) - Approval procedures for
nonsubstantial modifications;
Changes to POTWs control mechanism, as
described in 40 CFR §403.(f)(l)(iii);
A decrease in the frequency of self-monitoring or
reporting required of industrial users;
A decrease in the frequency of industrial user
inspections or sampling by the POTW;
Changes to the POTWs confidentiality procedures;
and
Other modifications designated as substantial
modifications by the Approval Authority on the basis
that the modification could have a significant impact
on the operation of the POTWs Pretreatment
Program; could result in an increase in pollutant
loadings at the POTW; or could result in less
stringent requirements being imposed on Industrial
users of the POTW.
Figure 30. Substantial Modifications of POTW
Pretreatment Programs (40 CFR §403.18)
Nonsubstantial modifications must also be
submitted to the Approval Authority for review and
approval, but these changes do not require public notice. And unlike substantial modifications, nonsubstantial
modifications become effective 45 days after submission unless the Approval Authority notifies the POTW
otherwise.
The POTW is also required to provide annual publication, in the largest daily newspaper in the municipality
in which the POTW is located, of IDs that at any time during the previous twelve months were in SNC.
In accordance with 40 CFR §403.12(1), Control Authorities are required to submit annual reports to the
Approval Authority documenting program status and activities performed during the previous calendar year.
At a minimum, these reports must contain the following information:
-32-
Chapter 4
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program POTW Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
1. List of all POTWs IDs including names, addresses, pretreatment standards applicable to each user,
IDs subject to categorical pretreatment standards or a brief explanation of deletions and a list of
additions (with the aforementioned information) keyed to a previously submitted list;
2. A summary of the status of the ID compliance during the reporting period;
3. A summary of compliance and enforcement activities (including inspections) conducted by the
POTW during the reporting period;
4. A summary of changes to the POTWs pretreatment program that have not been previously
reported to the Approval Authority; and
5. Any other relevant information requested by the Approval Authority.
The first report is due within one year after program approval and at least annually thereafter. Approval
Authorities may require additional information, or require that the reports be submitted in a specific format
and/or at an increased frequency (e.g., semi-annually).
Chapter 4 -33-
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
5. INDUSTRIAL USER PRETREATMENT
PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES
Chapters. Applicable EPA Guidance
Guidance Manual For Implementing Total Toxic Organics (TTO)
Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for the Identification of Hazardous Wastes Delivered
to Publicly Owned Treatment Works by Truck, Rail, or Dedicated
Pipe
Guidance Manual for the Use of Production-Based Pretreatment
Standards and the Combined Wastestream Formula
Industrial User Inspection and Sampling Manual for POTWs
RCRA Information on Hazardous Wastes for Publicly Owned Treatment
Works
Industry-Specific Guides
Aluminum, Copper, And Nonferrous Metals Forming And Metal Powders
Pretreatment Standards: A Guidance Manual
Guidance Manual For Battery Manufacturing Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment
Standard
Guidance Manual For Iron And Steel Manufacturing Pretreatment
Standards
Guidance Manual for Leather Tanning and Finishing Pretreatment
Standards
Guidance Manual for Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and Builders' Paper
and Board Mills Pretreatment Standards
Industrial Users (IDs) are required to
comply with all applicable pretreatment
standards and requirements.
Demonstration of compliance requires
certain IDs to submit reports, self-
monitor, and maintain records. A
summary of the reporting requirements
are provided in Figure 32, with details of
each of these requirements discussed
below.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Minimum Federal Pretreatment
Program reporting requirements for IDs
are specified in 40 CFR §403.12. Since
Control Authorities are responsible for
communicating applicable standards and
requirements to IDs and for receiving and
analyzing reports, it is essential for
Control Authority personnel to understand
ID reporting and notification requirements
contained in the General Pretreatment
Regulations. These requirements are
summarized below.
Categorical Industrial User (CIU) Reporting Requirements
Baseline Monitoring Report (BMR) [40 CFR §403.12(b)1
Each existing ID that is subject to a categorical pretreatment standard (identified as a Categorical
Industrial User, or CIU) is required to submit a BMR within 180 days after the effective date of the standard.
If a category determination has been requested, the BMR is not due until 180 days after a final administrative
decision has been made concerning the industry's inclusion in the category. The BMR must contain the
following information:
- name and address of the facility and names of the operator and owners
- list of all environmental control permits held by or for the facility
- description of operations, including the average rate of production, applicable Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) codes, schematic process diagrams, and points of discharge to the POTWfrom
regulated processes
- flow measurements (average daily and maximum daily) for regulated process wastestreams and
nonregulated wastestreams, where necessary
- pollutant measurements [daily maximum, average concentration, and mass (where applicable)]and
applicable standards
- certification, by a qualified professional, reviewed by a representative of the CIU, of whether
applicable pretreatment standards are being met and, if not, a description of the additional operation
and maintenance (O&M) or pretreatment facilities that are needed to comply with the standards
- a schedule by which the IU will provide the additional O&M or pretreatment needed to comply with
the applicable pretreatment standards.
Chapter 5
-35-
-------
Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
In addition to the certification noted above, BMRs must be signed and certified as detailed in 40 CFR
§403.12(1) and as described later in this Chapter. If a CIU has already submitted the specific information
required in a permit application or data disclosure form and this information is still current, it need not be
reproduced and resubmitted in the BMR. The BMR is a one-time report, unless changed Federal categorical
standards require submission of a new BMR.
At least 90 days prior to commencement of discharge, new sources are required to submit the above
information, excluding the certification and compliance schedule, and information on the method that the
source intends to use to meet the applicable pretreatment standards.
Compliance Schedule Progress Report [40 CFR §403.12(c)(3)1
A CIU that is not in compliance with applicable categorical standards by the time the standards are
effective often will have to modify process operations and/or install end-of-pipe treatment to comply. Federal
regulations require that the Control Authority develop and impose a compliance schedule for the CIU to
install technology to meet applicable standards. As part of the BMR, a CIU that is unable to comply with
the categorical standards must include a schedule for attaining compliance with the discharge standards.
In no case can the final or completion date in the schedule be later than the final compliance date specified
in the categorical standards. If deemed appropriate, the Control Authority may require compliance earlier
than the final compliance date specified in the Federal regulations.
Compliance schedules are to contain increments of progress in the form of dates (not to exceed nine
months per event) for commencement and completion of major actions leading to construction and operation
of a pretreatment system and/or in-plant process modifications. Major activities could include hiring an
engineer, completing preliminary analysis and evaluation, finalizing plans, executing a contract for major
components, commencing construction, completion of construction, or testing operation.
In addition, the CIU must submit progress reports to the Control Authority no laterthan 14 days following
each date in the compliance schedule (and final date for compliance), that include:
- a statement of the ClU's status with respect to the compliance schedule
- a statement of when the CIU expects to be back on schedule if it is falling behind, and the reason
for the delay and steps being taken by the IU to return to the established schedule.
The Control Authority should review these reports as quickly as possible. When a CIU is falling behind
schedule, the Control Authority should maintain close contact with the CIU. If the CIU fails to demonstrate
good faith in meeting the schedule, the Control Authority may consider initiating appropriate enforcement
action to correct the problem(s).
90-Day Compliance Reports [40 CFR §403.12(d)
Section 403.12(d) of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires a CIU to submit a final compliance
report to the Control Authority. An existing source must file a final compliance report within 90 days following
the final compliance date specified in a categorical regulation or within 90 days of the compliance date
specified by the Control Authority, whichever is earlier. A new source must file a compliance report within
90 days from commencement of discharge to the POTW. These reports must contain:
- flow measurements (average daily and maximum daily) for regulated process wastestreams and
nonregulated wastestreams, where necessary
- pollutant measurements [daily maximum, average concentration, and mass (where applicable)] and
applicable standards
- certification, by a qualified professional, reviewed by a representative of the CIU, of whether
applicable pretreatment standards are being met and, if not, a description of the additional operation
and maintenance (O&M) or pretreatment facilities that are needed to comply with the standards.
In addition to the certification noted above, 90-day final compliance reports must be signed and
certified as detailed in 40 CFR §403.12(1) and as described later in this Chapter.
Upset Reports [40 CFR §403.161
-36- Chapter 5
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Upset is defined as an exceptional incident in which there
is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
categorical standards due to factors beyond the reasonable
control of the CIU. An upset does not include
noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error,
improperly designed or inadequate treatment facilities, lack
of preventative maintenance, or careless or improper
operation.
CILJs are allowed an affirmative defense for
noncompliance with categorical standards if they
can demonstrate that the noncompliance was the
result of an upset (Figure 31). Conditions
necessary to demonstrate an upset has occurred
are detailed in 40 CFR §403.16 and require the CIU
to submit at least an oral report to the Control
Authority within 24 hours of becoming aware of the
upset and containing the following information:
Figure 31. Definition of Upset (40 CFR §403.16)
- a description of the indirect discharge and
the cause of the noncompliance
- the date(s) and times of the noncompliance
- steps being taken and/or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the
noncompliance.
If this notification is provided orally, a written report must also be submitted within five days. In any
enforcement action, the ID has the burden of proof in establishing that an upset has occurred. EPA is
responsible for determining the technical validity of this claim.
Categorical and Significant Industrial User (SIU) Reporting Requirements
Periodic Compliance Reports [40 CFR §403.12 (e) & (h)1
After the final compliance date, CILJs are required to report, during the months of June and December,
the self-monitoring results of their wastewater discharge(s). The Control Authority must also require
semi-annual reporting from SILJs not subject to categorical standards. EPA established a minimum
frequency of once every six months, determining this to be adequate for small SILJs or other facilities that
have little potential to cause pass-through or interference or to contaminate the sewage sludge. EPA
assumed that larger ILJs and those that have more potential to cause problems would be required by the
Control Authority to sample and report more often. All results for self-monitoring performed must be reported
to the Control Authority, even if the ILJ is monitoring more frequently than required. Periodic compliance
reports must include:
- nature and concentration of pollutants limited by applicable categorical standards or required by the
Control Authority
- flow data (average and maximum daily) as required by the Control Authority
- mass of pollutants discharged (applicable to CILJs where mass limits have been imposed)
- production rates (applicable to CILJs where equivalent limits have been imposed or where limits
imposed are expressed in allowable pollutant discharged per unit of production).
A Control Authority may choose to monitor ILJs in lieu of the ILJ performing the self-monitoring.
Additionally, 40 CFR §403.12(e) and (h) require compliance with 40 CFR Part 136 (Guidelines for
Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants). To demonstrate compliance with these
requirements, ILJs may have to submit information regarding sample handling and analytical procedures to
the Control Authority. Development of standardized forms for use by ILJs and theirtesting labs can facilitate
documentation and submission of all required information and can streamline the ILJ and Control Authority
review process.
Bypass [40 CFR §403.171
The General Pretreatment Regulations define "bypass" as the intentional diversion of wastestreams from
any portion of a users treatment facility. If a bypass results in noncompliance, even if it was due to essential
maintenance, the ILJ must provide a report to the Control Authority detailing a description of the bypass and
the cause, the duration of the bypass, and the steps being taken and/or planned to reduce, eliminate, and
prevent reoccurrence of the bypass.
Chapters -37-
-------
Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Oral notice must be provided to the Control Authority within 24 hours of the detection of an unanticipated
bypass, with a written follow-up due within 5 days. For an anticipated bypass, the ID must submit notice to
the Control Authority, preferably 10 days prior to the intent to bypass.
Notification of Potential Problems [40 CFR §403.12(f)1
All IDs are required to notify the Control Authority immediately of any discharges which may cause
potential problems. These discharges include spills, slug loads, or any other discharge which may cause a
potential problem to the POTW.
Noncompliance Notification [40 CFR §403.12 (g) (2)1
If monitoring performed by an ID indicates noncompliance, the ID is required to notify the Control
Authority within 24 hours of becoming aware of the violation. In addition, the ID must repeat sampling and
analysis and report results of the resampling within 30 days. The repeat sampling is not required if the
Control Authority samples the ID at least once per month or if the Control Authority samples the ID between
the time of the original sample and the time the results of the sampling are received.
Notification of Changed Discharge [40 CFR §403.12(i)1
All IDs are required to promptly notify the Control Authority in advance of any substantial changes in the
volume or character of pollutants in their discharge.
Notification of Discharge of Hazardous Wastes [40 CFR §403.12(p)1
IDs discharging more than 15 kilograms per month of a waste, which if otherwise disposed of, would be
a hazardous waste pursuant to the RCRA requirements under 40 CFR Part 261 are required to provide a one
time written notification of such discharge to the Control Authority, State, and EPA. IDs discharging any
amount of waste, which if disposed of otherwise, would be an acutely hazardous waste pursuant to RCRA
must also provide this notification. This written notification must contain the EPA hazardous waste number
and the type of discharge (i.e., batch, continuous). If the ID discharges more than 100 kilograms per month
of the hazardous waste, the written notification must also include:
- an identification of the hazardous constituent in the ILJ's discharge,
- an estimate of the mass and concentration of the constituents in the ILJ's discharge, and
- an estimate of the mass and concentration of constituents in the ILJ's discharge in a year.
ILJs must also provide a certification accompanying this notification that a waste reduction program is in
place to reduce the volume and toxicity of hazardous wastes to the greatest degree economically practical.
Within 90 days of the effective date of the listing of any additional hazardous wastes pursuant to RCRA, ILJs
must provide a notification of the discharge of such wastes.
Signatory and Certification Requirements [40 CFR §403.12(1)1
Pursuant to 40 CFR §403.12(1), BMRs, 90-day compliance reports and periodic compliance reports from
CILJs must be signed by an authorized representative of the facility and contain a certification statement
attesting to the integrity of the information reported. The reports should be signed by one of the following:
- a responsible corporate officer if the ILJ is a corporation
- a general partner or proprietor if the ILJ is a partnership or sole proprietorship
- a duly authorized representative of the above specified persons if such authorization is in writing,
submitted to the Control Authority and specifies a person or position having overall responsibility for
the facility where the discharge originates or having overall responsibility of environmental matters
for the facility.
As required in 40 CFR §403.6(a)(2)(ii), the certification statement must read as follows:
-38- Chapters
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
"I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible forgathering the information,
the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete.
I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."
While Federal regulations only require Control Authorities to require these signatures and certifications from
CILJs, many POTWs have found it important to impose these requirements for all ID reports. To facilitate
compliance, many Control Authorities have developed forms that include the certification statement and
signatory requirements for use by all IDs.
SELF-MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
All SILJs, including CILJs must conduct self-monitoring as part of several different reporting requirements
as noted above. For CILJs, this includes the BMR, 90-day compliance report and periodic compliance reports
(40 CFR §§403.12(b),(d), and (e), respectively). Non-categorical SILJs are required to self-monitor as part
of the periodic reporting requirements (40 CFR §403.12(h)). As noted in 40 CFR §§403.12(g)(4), sample
collection and analysis for all required pretreatment program reports must be conducted using 40 CFR Part
136 procedures and amendments thereto. Refer to Chapter 4 of this manual and EPA's 1994 Industrial User
Inspection and Sampling Manual for POTWs for additional information on sample collection and analysis
procedures.
Based on the specific pollutants regulated by categorical standards, different types of samples may have
to be collected. For BMR and 90-day compliance reports, a minimum of four grab samples must be
collected for pH, cyanide, total phenols, oil and grease, sulfide, and volatile organics. If these pollutants are
not regulated by the specific categorical standard, monitoring is not required. Twenty-four hour flow-
proportional composite samples must be collected for all other pollutants. The Control Authority may waive
flow-proportional composite sampling if an ILJ demonstrates that flow-proportional is not feasible. In these
cases, time-proportional composite samples may be collected.
Self-monitoring for periodic compliance reports must be conducted in accordance with the ILJ's discharge
permit requirements. The Control Authority must ensure that these permits specify sampling location(s),
required sampling frequencies, sample types to be collected, sampling and analytical procedures (40 CFR
Part 136), and associated reporting requirements. At a minimum, CILJs must monitor for all categorically
regulated pollutants at least once every six months, although, permits issued by the local Control Authority
may require more frequent monitoring.
In certain instances, CILJs subject to TTO standards may implement alternatives in lieu of monitoring
all regulated toxic organic compounds. A listing of categories that contain TTO standards is provided in
Chapters. For example, the electroplating and metal finishing standards allow ILJsto monitor only forthose
toxic organic compounds that are reasonably expected to be present. Additional TTO guidance related to
the electroplating and metal finishing categories can be found in EPA's 1984 Guidance Manual for
Electroplating and Metal Finishing Pretreatment Standards.
For certain industries (i.e., electroplating, metal finishing, and electrical and electronic components)
Control Authorities have the option of allowing the CIU to prepare and implement a Toxic Organic
Management Plan (TOMP) in lieu of periodic monitoring. In those instances, the TOMP should identify all
potential sources from which toxic organic materials could enter the wastestream and propose control
measures to eliminate the possibility. Where a TOMP is allowed, an ILJ can demonstrate compliance through
adherence to the TOMP and submission of periodic certification statements attesting to the fact that:
"no dumping of concentrated toxic organic pollutants has occurred and that the facility's
TOMP is being implemented."
Chapters -39-
-------
Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
TOMPs cannot be used in lieu of monitoring for BMRs and 90-day compliance reporting requirements.
The categorical standards forsome industries (i.e., aluminum forming, copperforming, coil coating, and
metal molding and casting) allow IDs to monitor oil and grease (O&G) as an alternative to TTO monitoring.
This option may be used to fulfill TTO monitoring requirements of the BMR, 90-day compliance report, and
periodic compliance reports and allows the ID to determine whether it wants to demonstrate compliance with
the TTO orthe O&G standards. A detailed description of TTO monitoring requirements is provided in EPA's
1985 Guidance Manual for Implementing Total Toxic Organics (TTO) Pretreatment Standards.
RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
IDs are required to maintain records of their monitoring activities [40CFR§403.12(o)]. Information, at
a minimum, shall include the following:
- sampling methods, dates and times
- identity of the person(s) collecting the samples and of the sampling location(s)
- the dates the analyses were performed and the methods used
- the identity of the person(s) performing the analyses and the results of the analyses.
These records shall be retained for at least 3 years, or longer in cases where there is pending litigation
involving the Control Authority or ID, or when requested by the Approval Authority. These records must be
available to the Control Authority and Approval Authority for review and copying. Historically, most Control
Authorities do not dispose of any records, rather older records are archived at an off-site location.
-40- Chapters
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Industrial User Pretreatment Program Responsibilities
Figure 32. Industrial User Reporting Requirements
REQUIRED REPORT AND
CITATION
Baseline Monitoring Report
(BMR)
40CFR§403.12(b)(l-7)
Compliance Schedule Progress
Reports
40 CFR §403. 1 2(c) (1 -3)
90-Day Compliance Report
40CFR§403.12(d)
Periodic Compliance Report
40 CFR § 403.12(e)
Notice of Potential Problems
40CFR§403.12(f)
Noncompliance Notification
40 CFR §403.1 2(g)(2)
Periodic Compliance Reports
for Noncategorical Users
40CFR§403.12(h)
Notification of Changed
Discharge
40CFR§403.12(j)
Notification of Hazardous
Wastes Discharge
40CFR§403.12(p)
Upset
40 CFR §403. 16
Bypass
40 CFR §403. 17
APPLY
TO
CIUs
All lUs
CIUs
CIUs
All lUs
All lUs
Non-Cat.
SIUs
All lUs
All lUs
CIUs
All lUs
REPORT DUE DATE
Existing Source - Within 180 days of
effective date of the regulation or an
administrative decision on category
determination.
New Source - At least 90 days prior to
commencement of discharge.
Within 14 days of each milestone date on
the compliance schedule; at least every 9
months.
Within 90 days of the date for final
compliance with applicable categorical
pretreatment standard; for new sources, the
compliance report is due within 90 days
following commencement of wastewater
discharge to the POTW.
Every June and December after the final
compliance date (or after commencement
of a discharge for new sources) unless
frequency is increased by the Control
Authority.
Notification of POTW immediately after
occurrence of slug load, or any other
discharge that may cause problems to the
POTW.
Notification of POTW within 24 hours of
becoming aware of violation.
Every six months on dates specified by the
Control Authority.
In advance of any substantial changes in
the volume or character of pollutants in the
discharge.
For new discharges, within 1 80 days after
commencement of discharge.
24 hours of becoming aware of the upset
(5 days where notification was provided
orally)
10 days prior to date of the bypass or oral
notice within 24 hours of the IU becoming
aware of the bypass with written
notification within 5 day
PURPOSE OF REPORT
- To provide baseline information on
industrial facility to Control Authority
- To determine wastewater discharge
sampling points
- To determine compliance status with
categorical pretreatment standards
- To track progress of the industrial
facility through the duration of a
compliance schedule.
- To notify Control Authority as to
whether compliance with the applicable
categorical pretreatment standards has
been achieved
- If facility is noncompliant, to specify
how compliance will be achieved.
- To provide the Control Authority with
current information on the discharge of
pollutants to the POTW from
categorical industries.
- To alert the POTW to the potential
hazards of the discharge.
- To alert the POTW of a known
violation and potential problems which
may occur.
- To provide the POTW with current
information on the discharge of
pollutants to the POTW from industrial
users not regulated by categorical
standards.
- To notify POTW of anticipated changes
in wastewater characteristics and flow
which may affect the POTW.
- To notify POTW, EPA, and State of
discharges of hazardous wastes under
40 CFR Part 261.
- To notify the POTW of unintentional
and temporary noncompliance with
categorical standards.
- To notify the POTW of noncompliance
and potential problems which may
occur
Chapter 5
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Hauled Wastes
6. HAULED WASTES
Chapter 6. Applicable EPA Guidance
CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Guidance Manual
Guidance Manual for the Identification of Hazardous Wastes
Delivered to Publicly Owned Treatment Works by
Truck, Rail, or Dedicated Pipe
Industrial User Inspection and Sampling Manual for POTWs
Industrial User Permitting Guidance Manual
RCRA Information on Hazardous Wastes to Publicly Owned
Treatment Works
Guidance Manual for the Control of Waste Hauled to
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
In addition to receiving wastes through the
collection system, many POTWs accept trucked
wastes, and in a few instances, wastes received
via train. As specified in 40 CFR §403.1(b)(1),
pollutants from non-domestic sources which are
transported to the POTW by truck or rail are also
subject to the General Pretreatment Regulations.
Hauled wastes, like wastes received through the
collection system, have the potential to impact the
POTW, making regulatory control of these wastes
necessary. Recent studies have shown an
increasing frequency of uncontrolled discharges to
POTWs from waste haulers. Because of their
unique nature, waste haulers are not regulated in the same way as other types of IDs. Since no specific
Federal regulatory controls exist, some POTWs have developed hauled waste control programs. For more
information on hauled waste, refer to EPA's 1998 Guidance Manual for the Control of Waste Hauled to
Publicly Owned Treatment Works.
NATURE OF HAULED WASTES
Wastes are hauled to POTWs for several reasons. By far, the majority of hauled waste is domestic
septage (Figure 33). Since these wastes are domestic in nature, treatment at a POTW is the most
appropriate disposal method. Other types of wastes are also regularly hauled to POTWs for a variety of
reasons, such as:
the facility is located outside the
jurisdictional boundaries of the POTW (e.g.,
located in rural areas) and is not connected
to the collection system,
the wastes may be known to cause
collection system problems, but can be
treated at the POTW (e.g., grease trap
cleanout wastes),
Domestic septage is defined as either the liquid or solid
material removed from a septic tank, cesspool, portable
toilet, Type III marine sanitation device, or similar
treatment works that holds only domestic sewage.
Domestic septage does not include liquid or solid material
removed from these systems that receives either
commercial wastewater or industrial wastewater and does
not include grease removed from a restaurant grease trap.
[40 CFR Part 503.9(f)]
Figure 33. Definition of Domestic Septage
- the facility is connected to the sewer but
does not have the capacity to discharge the volume of waste generated (e.g., groundwater
remediation activities at an IU),
- a POTW rejects acceptance of a waste from an IU forcing the IU to haul the waste to a different
POTW that agrees to accept the waste.
Common to all these wastes is the fact that the POTW does not know for certain the nature and
concentration of these wastes, as hauled, without implementing some type of control or surveillance
program.
CONTROL PROGRAMS
Section 403.5(b)(8) of the General Pretreatment Regulations specifically prohibits the introduction of any
trucked or hauled pollutants to the POTW, except at discharge points designated by the POTW. This is the
Chapter 6
-------
Hauled Wastes Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
only pretreatment requirement specifically addressing hauled wastes. However, many POTWs have
determined that additional controls are necessary to further limit these discharges and to prevent adverse
impacts from these discharges. These control programs include practices such as permitting, sampling,
manifesting, surveillance, and other forms of hauler documentation. In many instances, these control
programs have shifted the hauling of waste from one POTWto other POTWs that are not implementing such
a program. Most often, it is the smaller POTWs that do not have hauler control programs, including many
POTWs that are not even required to implement Pretreatment Programs. The effect of this change from
larger to smaller POTWs and from more to less control is that there has been an increase in negative
impacts to POTWs and receiving streams. Two apparent options for addressing this concern are for: (1)the
smaller and non-pretreatment POTWs to initiate waste hauler control programs; or (2) the larger POTWs
to institute sound control programs that will adequately regulate these wastes yet not drive these haulers to
search for other less sound disposal alternatives. POTWwaste hauler control programs should address the
following six elements:
Impact to POTW - Prior to acceptance of a new waste from a hauler, the POTW needs to evaluate the
potential impacts to the POTW from this waste. POTWs may require haulers or generators of hauled waste
to perform a treatability study to demonstrate the effectiveness of treatment on this waste. POTWs must
evaluate the impacts of these waste when evaluating the adequacy of local limits as well as when developing
or revising local limits.
Permitting - A permit is the most direct and efficient method of regulating waste haulers. Permits
provide the opportunity to monitor and regulate haulers based on the nature of the hauled waste and the
potential impacts of that waste on the POTW. Unique permit conditions may include: right of refusal, daily
flow limitations, discharge time limitations, and manifesting requirements.
Discharge Point - As specified in the General Pretreatment Regulations, hauled waste can only be
discharged at points designated by the POTW. This option is to provide the POTWwith the ability to control
and observe these discharges at specified locations thereby minimizing the potential for adverse impacts.
Monitoring - The POTWshould institute a monitoring program to evaluate the nature and concentration
of discharges. Both POTW monitoring and hauler self-monitoring may be appropriate. Many POTWs
require that all loads of hauled waste must be sampled, but analyses are only performed on a predetermined
percentage of these wastes or when problems occur. Unanalyzed samples are refrigerated and kept for
several weeks or months until the POTW is certain that the waste has not impacted the POTW. The
frequency of sampling may also be dependent on the variability of the waste. Each load from a haulerthat
delivers highly variable loads may have to be sampled and analyzed; whereas, a much smaller percentage
may be appropriate for more consistent waste types. As noted earlier, all Federal, State, and local discharge
limitations apply to these wastes. The POTW may also consider inspecting the waste generators to confirm
the source of these wastes.
Hauler Documentation - The POTWshould require waste haulers to document the source of wastes
being discharged, potentially including manifests. Manifests should include general hauler information,
information on the waste generator (e.g., name, address, and phone number), the type of wastes collected,
volumes, known or suspected pollutants, and certification that the load is not a hazardous waste. A useful
technique is to contact the waste generators to verify the information on the manifest.
Legal Authority - If not already in place, the POTWs local ordinance (and approved pretreatment
program) should be modified to add language specifying all of the controls that are applicable to waste
haulers. This will ensure that waste haulers and POTW personnel will know the procedures, expectations,
liabilities, etc. associated with the control program.
In addition to the specific controls described above, POTWs should implement procedures to identify
and eliminate illegal discharges. Procedures may include periodic sewer line sampling, surveillance of
suspected illegal discharge points, education of industries regarding hauled waste, increased enforcement,
and public awareness of illegal dumping.
Chapter 6
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Hauled Wastes
CONCERNS
Every hauled waste discharge has the potential to impact the POTW. Unlike discharges from IDs
connected to the POTW, the makeup of a load of hauled waste is virtually unknown without some type of
monitoring, be it visual or analytical. Even loads of domestic septage can cause problems at a POTW. The
majority of waste haulers are reputable business people who provide a valuable service to the public and
industry; however, the unique attributes of hauled waste can be devastating when unethical haulers dump
incompatible wastes at POTWs. Domestic septage can be partially digested, higher in metals concentrations
than normal domestic wastes, or contain small amounts of household contaminants (e.g., cleaners).
Similarly, disinfectants used in portable toilets have the potential to impact POTW operations.
Receipt of hauled hazardous waste (as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA))
may not only impact POTW operations, but subject the POTW to additional reporting requirements. The
Domestic Sewage Exclusion, specified in 40 CFR §261.4(a)(1)(ii), provides that hazardous wastes mixed
with domestic sewage are exempt from the RCRA waste regulations. However, hazardous wastes received
by truck or rail (or dedicated pipe) are not exempt from the regulations. POTWs that accept hazardous
wastes from these sources are granted "permit by rule" status under RCRA (40 CFR §270.60(c)) provided
that certain requirements are met. The two most significant conditions are that the POTW must be in
compliance with all of its NPDES permit requirements and the waste must comply with all Federal, State,
and local pretreatment requirements. Nationwide, very few POTWs are knowingly accepting hauled
hazardous waste.
POTWs should be aware that hauled process wastes from facilities subject to Federal categorical
pretreatment standards are still subject to those standards. This condition highlights the need for POTWs
to have a clear understanding of the source of the waste since applicable standards may be based on the
origin of that waste.
Another potential problematic waste is that from remedial site clean-up operations. Groundwater
contaminated with gasoline or diesel fuel is by far the most common type of waste from these operations.
While these wastes may contain flammable and toxic compounds (e.g., benzene and toluene), another
concern is that large volumes of this waste at a small POTW may actually "flush" the treatment plant,
thereby interfering with treatment operations. Similar concerns also exist for landfill leachate, another
commonly hauled wastestream. Remedial wastes may also come from Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites, also known as Superfund sites. ForCERCLA
guidance, refer to EPA's 1990 CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Guidance Manual.
Other concerns for POTWs that accept hauled wastes include:
- Illegal dischargers may be discharging toxic pollutants that can pass through or interfere with the
POTW ope rations;
- Grease trap wastes can coat and inhibit POTW treatment operations;
- Local limits may not account for pollutants in hauled wastes;
- Hauled wastes may contain pollutants for which local limits do not exist; thus, the impacts of this
waste are not readily identifiable;
- Hauled wastes may be unmixed and/or highly concentrated.
For further information on the acceptance of hazardous waste at POTWs, refer to the Guidance Manual for
the Identification of Hazardous Wastes Delivered to Publicly Owned Treatment Works by Truck, Rail, or
Dedicated Pipe.
Chapter 6 -45-
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Pollution Prevention
7. POLLUTION PREVENTION
Chapter 7. Applicable EPA Guidance
Guides to Pollution Prevention: Municipal Pretreatment Program
NPDES Compliance Inspection Manual
As the nation's environmental laws and
regulations have developed over the past
three decades, a new paradigm has shifted
the approach to waste management. Initially,
EPA focused on managing the pollution
generated through treatment and disposal in
an environmentally safe manner. However, we have learned that conventional treatment and disposal can
transfer pollutants from one medium to another with no net reduction.10 In striving to meet new and often
more stringent environmental laws, industries have found ways to reduce or prevent pollution at the source.
Recognizing that source reduction is more desirable than treatment and disposal, EPA now emphasizes
preventing or eliminating the generation of waste. The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA) established
pollution prevention (referred to as "P2") as a national objective.
Pollution prevention is indirectly defined in the PPA as source reduction. Source reduction is any
practice that reduces or eliminates the creation of pollutants. Thus, the amount of any hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant entering any waste stream or otherwise released into the environment (including
fugitive emissions) is reduced priorto recycling, treatment, or disposal. Source reduction can be achieved
through equipment or technology modifications, process or procedural modifications, reformulation or
redesign of products, substitution of raw materials, or improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training,
or inventory control.
The PPA established a pollution prevention hierarchy as national policy, declaring that:
- Pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source.
- Pollution that cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environmentally safe manner.
- Pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should be treated in an environmentally safe manner.
- Disposal or other release into the environment should be employed only as a last resort and should
be conducted in an environmentally safe manner.
Thus, under the Pollution Prevention Act, recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal are not
included within the definition of pollution prevention. However, some practices commonly described as "in-
process recycling" may qualify as pollution prevention. Although recycling is not pollution prevention, as
indicated in the hierarchy, it is the next desirable practice where pollution cannot be prevented or reduced.
Recycling conducted in an environmentally sound manner shares many of the advantages of prevention for
it can reduce the need for treatment or disposal and conserve energy and resources.
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) developed a pollution prevention
strategy for incorporating pollution prevention concepts into EPA's ongoing environmental protection efforts.
The specific objectives of the strategy are to provide guidance and direction for efforts to incorporate
pollution prevention within EPA's existing regulatory and nonregulatory programs, and to set forth an
initiative to achieve specific objectives in pollution prevention within a reasonable time frame. EPA's
numerous activities include the following:
10 For example, a wet scrubber is used to remove most of the metal emissions to the air. The
metals are captured in the scrubber water. This water must be treated to remove the metals
prior to discharge. The treatment process produces a sludge that contains most of the metals
that were once in the water. The sludge is disposed in a landfill. The metals have been
dispersed to the air, water, and land.
Chapter 7 -47-
-------
Pollution Prevention Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
- Coordinating development of regulations that will help identify the potential for multi-media
prevention strategies and that reduce end of pipe compliance costs
- Examining the use of pollution prevention in enforcement actions and negotiations
- Investigating the feasibility of overcoming identified regulatory barriers to encourage cost
effective(source reduction) strategies
- Working with State and local governments and trade associations to promote pollution prevention
among small and medium size business that often lack the capital to make changes
- Investing in outside programs, usually States, by providing grant funds for the reduction of target
chemicals, the agricultural and transportation industry, etc.
- Providing scientific and technical knowledge necessary to implement pollution prevention initiatives
on a cross media basis, pursuant to the Pollution Prevention Research Strategic Plan.
POLLUTION PREVENTION AND THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM
Although pollution prevention is not a required element of the National Pretreatment Program, source
reduction is not new to the Program. The Pretreatment Program is designed to prevent toxic pollutants from
being discharged to POTWs through controls on the sources that discharge these pollutants. Thus, pollution
prevention may be considered an extension of current pretreatment program implementation activities. For
example, Pretreatment Programs have the authority to require and enforce waste management practices
in order to meet NPDES permit requirements and eliminate interference with treatment facilities. Requiring
slug control plans and developing compliance schedules for improved operation and maintenance (O&M
procedures are examples of pollution prevention activities that have long been required by many Control
Authorities. Other pretreatment program implementation tools available to make pollution prevention a more
integral part of a pretreatment program include:
- Inspections - Pretreatment personnel are usually quite familiar with processes performed at their
local industrial facilities and have exposure to a variety of industries performing the same or similar
processes; therefore, they can easily disseminate (nonconfidential) information about actual pollution
prevention measures implemented as well as identify new P2 opportunities.
- Permits - Where local regulations allow, questions about pollution prevention measures and plans
can be made part of the permit application process. Also, a permittee may be required to undergo
a pollution prevention assessment and /or develop a pollution prevention plan as a condition of the
permit.
- Local limits- POTWs near or above maximum allowable headworks loadings may institute POTW
wide-pollution prevention programs to reduce specific pollutants.
- Enforcement negotiations - A pollution prevention audit may be required through a consent or
compliance order, or implementation of pollution prevention measures may be required as part of
a settlement.
Several Control Authorities have implemented these pollution prevention activities. For example, the
City of Palo Alto, CA established a silver local limit for photoprocessors and Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for automotive facilities. To reduce mercury loadings from dental offices, Western Lake Superior
Sanitary Sewer District (WLSSD) in Duluth, MN developed and implemented pollution prevention BMPs.
These and many other POTWs that have successfully integrated pollution prevention into their pretreatment
programs have become recognized environmental leaders in their communities.
While pollution prevention activities can be unique to each POTW, the following are key elements of
successful pollution prevention programs:
- Integrate pollution prevention into existing activities - POTWs that view pollution prevention
as an enhancement (instead of an additional requirement) to their existing pretreatment programs
make small modifications to existing pretreatment activities efficiently and effectively.
- Start small - POTWs that slowly phase in new pollution prevention activities overcome impediments
such as limited resources and resistance. Implementing small changes gradually can be done with
-48- Chapter 7
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Pollution Prevention
minimal resources. This approach enables pollution prevention activities to become an accepted
integral part of the pretreatment program.
- Define attainable goals and measure success - Short-term, narrowly focused efforts have a
greater chance of succeeding. For example, POTWs have targeted a specific pollutant and group
of industries, established specific pollution prevention activities, and monitored the progress and
success of these activities. With each new success recorded, the benefits of pollution prevention
are illustrated and the demand for further activities will grow.
- Provide incentives - Incentives are effective tools for persuading users to investigate pollution
prevention opportunities. POTWs have used a wide range of tools such as public recognition of
pollution prevention achievements and reduction of regulatory requirements.
BENEFITS OF POLLUTION PREVENTION
For both IDs and POTWs, pollution prevention has many benefits (Figures 34 and 35) that can be
broadly categorized under tangible economic rewards and public goodwill and support. For example,
pollution prevention:
Creates cost savings
Enhances process efficiency
Avoids or reduces regulatory costs
Improves protection of worker health
Improves public image.
Decrease pollutant loadings to water, air, and sludge
Decrease pollutant loadings to POTW that result in lower
O&M costs and reduces or eliminates need for capital
_ . , .. ...... expenditures for POTW treatment plant expansions
Keduces future liabilities Enableg contmued or expanded growth m me commumty
without harm to the environment.
Figure 34. Benefits of Pollution Prevention to POTWs
Although the numerous benefits make
pursuing pollution prevention attractive, implementation of source reduction in some situations may not be
possible. Before implementing a pollution prevention practice, the benefits and barriers of the potential
opportunity must be evaluated. Common impediments include the following:
- Technology
Decrease product quality
Unable to change raw materials because of currently available technology
- Financial
Incur high costs associated with implementing alternatives (i.e., new equipment or materials,
or personnel and training)
Loss due to downtime during switch overs and start ups
Foreign competitors may have an economic advantage if they are not obligated to comply with
US regulations
Binding contracts with existing waste haulers and Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD)
facilities may exist
- Organizational
Lack of or poor communication between persons possessing the knowledge and ideas for
improvements and those that can actually implement the changes
Limited personnel or internal resources available to investigate and/or make changes
Lack of coordination and cooperation among divisions in the corporation
Behavioral
Alternatives may be considered inconvenient by personnel (e.g., dry sweeping then a wet wash
down as opposed to just a wet wash down)
Chapter 7 -49-
-------
" Regulatory
Concentrating a pollutant for recycling
may classify it as a hazardous waste
(e.g., silver). As such, an industrial
user may choose to discharge the
pollutant rather than be subject to
regulations regarding the handling,
treatment and disposal of a hazardous
waste.
POLLUTION PREVENTION ASSISTANCE
With the creation of the PPA came an
abundance of pollution prevention related
assistance. This includes direct technical
assistance, training courses, and a variety of
publications. POTWs can find further information
on integrating pollution prevention into their
pretreatment programs in EPA's 1993 Guides to
Pollution Prevention - Municipal Pretreatment
Programs. Specific industry trade associations and
university technology transfer and outreach
departments usually are aware of pollution
prevention assistance materials, specific pollution
prevention opportunities, and the costs and
success of implementing these. Some further
sources that disseminate pollution prevention
information include:
- Pollution Prevention Information
Clearinghouse (PPIC) - a free, nonregulatory
clearinghouse available to the public which
focuses on source reduction and recycling for
industrial toxic wastes.
- State Programs-provide technical assistance
to conduct pollution prevention assessments,
develop guidance manuals on conducting
Regulatory
- Elimination of regulated wastewater discharges, and
hence, monitoring requirements
- Reduced paperwork requirements for waste hauling
and treatment
- Compliance with RCRA reports on waste reduction
(i.e., companies generating RCRA wastes are required
to certify that they have a program to reduce the
volume and toxicity of hazardous waste generated)
- Compliance with land disposal restrictions and bans
Environmental
- Minimization of material emissions to all media
resulting in reduced health risks to workers and the
community
Financial
- Reduced landfill and treatment costs due to less waste
being generated (includes reduced transportation costs
as well)
- Reduced raw material and manufacturing costs (e.g.,
by preventing spills or leaks, improving equipment
maintenance and inventory control techniques, reuse,
etc. raw materials are handled more efficiently and do
not have the chance to become waste. With a greater
percentage of raw material going into process, raw
material use goes down in relation to volume of
product produced)
- Increased manufacturing efficiency and productivity
and improved product quality with fewer offspec
products
Compliance and public relations
- Achieving compliance with local limits and categorical
standards
- Reducing waste and implementing best management
practices can improve public and community relations.
Figure 35. Benefits of Pollution Prevention to Ills
these assessments, actually conduct these assessments, provide assistance in developing POTW-wide
pollution prevention plans, provide training for industry, State and POTW personnel, and offer grants
for pollution prevention projects.
Envirosense - an on-line computer system (internet address: es.inel.gov) of summary information for
PPIC documents, includes pollution prevention news, upcoming events, and mini-exchanges (discrete
pollution prevention topic areas, pollution prevention databases, and message center).
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) - an office of the Department of Commerce,
NIST develops technology to improve product quality, modernize manufacturing processes, ensure
product reliability, and facilitate rapid commercialization of products based on new scientific discoveries.
NIST web sites for different industry sectors are available. For example, the metal finishing web site
(i.e., the National Metal Finishing Resource Center) is found at "www.nmfrc.org."
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY
-50-
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
Bibliography
TITLE
Aluminum, Copper, And Nonferrous Metals Forming And
Metal Powders Pretreatment Standards: A Guidance
Manual
CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Guidance Manual
Control Authority Pretreatment Audit Checklist and
Instructions
Control of Slug Loadings To POTWs: Guidance Manual
Environmental Regulations and Technology: The
National Pretreatment Program
Guidance for Conducting a Pretreatment Compliance
Inspection
Guidance For Developing Control Authority Enforcement
Response Plans
Guidance for Reporting and Evaluating POTW
Noncompliance with Pretreatment Implementation
Requirements
Guidance Manual For Battery Manufacturing
Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Electroplating and Metal Finishing
Pretreatment Standard
Guidance Manual For Implementing Total Toxic
Organics (TTO) Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual For Iron And Steel Manufacturing
Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for Leather Tanning and Finishing
Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for POTW Pretreatment Program
Development
Guidance Manual for POTWs to Calculate the Economic
Benefit of Noncompliance
Guidance Manual for Preparation and Review of
Removal Credit Applications
Guidance Manual for Preventing Interference at POTWs
Guidance Manual for Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and
Builders' Paper and Board Mills Pretreatment Standards
Guidance Manual for the Identification of Hazardous
Wastes Delivered to Publicly Owned Treatment Works
by Truck, Rail, or Dedicated Pipe
Guidance Manual for the Use of Production-Based
Pretreatment Standards and the Combined Wastestream
Formula
Guidance Manual on the Development and
Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations Under the
Pretreatment Program
Guidance on Evaluation, Resolution, and Documentation
of Analytical Problems Associated with Compliance
Monitoring
Guidance to Protect POTW Workers From Toxic And
Reactive Gases And Vapors
Guides to Pollution Prevention: Municipal Pretreatment
Programs
DATE
December 1989
August 1990
May 1992
February 1991
July 1986
September 1991
September 1989
September 1987
August 1987
February 1984
September 1985
September 1985
September 1986
October 1 983
September 1990
July 1985
September 1987
July 1984
June 1987
September 1985
December 1987
June 1993
June 1992
October 1 993
EPA Number
800-B-89-001
540-G-90-005
-
21W-4001
625-10-86-005
300-R-92-009
-
-
440-1-87-014
440-1 -84-09 1-G
440-1 -85-009-T
821-B-85-001
800-R-86-001
-
833-B-93-007
833-B-85-200
833-B-87-201
-
-
833-B-85-201
833-B-87-202
821-B-93-001
812-B-92-001
625-R-93-006
NTIS Number
PB91 -145441
PB90-274531
-
-
PB90-246521
PB94-1 20631
PB90-185083/AS
PB95-1 57764
PB92-1 17951
PB87-1 92597
PB93-1 67005
PB92-1 14388
PB92-232024
PB93-186112
-
-
PB92-1 17969
PB92-231638
PB92-1 49251
PB92-232024
PB92-129188
-
PB92-1 73236
-
ERIC Number
W119
W150
-
-
W350
W273
-
W304
W195
W118
W339
W103
W117
W639
-
-
W106
W196
W202
U095
W107
-
W115
-
Chapter 8
-51-
-------
Bibliography
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program
TITLE
Industrial User Inspection and Sampling Manual For
POTWs
Industrial User Permitting Guidance Manual
Model Pretreatment Ordinance
Multijurisdictional Pretreatment Programs: Guidance
Manual
National Pretreatment Program: Report to Congress
NPDES Compliance Inspection Manual
POTW Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance
Document
Prelim User's Guide, Documentation for the EPA
Computer Program/Model for Developing Local Limits for
Industrial Pretreatment Programs at Publicly Owned
Treatment Works, Version 5.0
Pretreatment Compliance Inspection and Audit Manual
For Approval Authorities
Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
Guidance and Software (Version 3.0)
Procedures Manual for Reviewing a POTW Pretreatment
Program Submission
RCRA Information on Hazardous Wastes for Publicly
Owned Treatment Works
Report to Congress on the Discharge of Hazardous
Wastes to Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Supplemental Manual On the Development And
Implementation of Local Discharge Limitations Under
The Pretreatment Program: Residential and Commercial
Toxic Pollutant Loadings And POTW Removal Efficiency
Estimation
DATE
April 1994
September 1989
June 1992
June 1994
July 1991
September 1994
August 1989
January 1997
July 1986
(Manual)
September 1986
(Software)
September 1992
October 1 983
September 1985
February 1986
May 1991
EPA Number
831-B-94-001
833-B-89-001
833-B-92-003
833-B-94-005
21-W-4004
300-B-94-014
833-B-89-100
~~
833-B-86-100
(Software)
831-F-92-001
833-B-83-200
833-B-85-202
530-SW-86-004
21W-4002
NTIS Number
PB94-1 70271
PB92-123017
PB93-122414
PB94-203544
PB91 -228726
-
-
~~
PB90-1 83625
(Software)
PB94-1 18577
PB93-209880
PB92-1 14396
PB86-184017&
PB95-1 57228
PB93-209872
ERIC Number
W305
W109
W108
W607
W694
-
-
~~
W277
(Software)
W269
W137
W351
W922&
W692
W113
-52-
Chapter 8
-------
Introduction to the National Pretreatment Program Bibliography
OTHER REFERENCE MATERIAL
CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs CERCLA Site Sampling Program: Detailed Data Report, EPA 540-2-90-008
CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Treatability Manual, EPA 540-2-90-007
Considerations of Pollution Prevention in EPA's Effluent Guideline Development Process, EPA 820-R-95-008
Domestic Septage Regulatory Guidance: A Guide to the EPA 503 Rule, EPA 832-B-92-005
Effluent Guidelines, Leather Tanning, and Pollution Prevention: A Retrospective Study, EPA 820-R-95-006
Environmental Regulations and Technology: The Electroplating Industry, EPA 625/10-80-001
Environmental Regulations and Technology: The Electroplating Industry, EPA/625/10-85/001
EPA'S Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Control Policy (Information Sheet and Nonpoint Source Bulletin Board System
Instructions), EPA 833-F-94-005
Everything You Wanted to Know About Environmental Regulations...But Were Afraid to Ask: A Guide for Small
Communities, Region 7 EPA 907-R-92-002
Fact Sheet: Effluent Guidelines: Protecting Our Nation's Waters from Industrial Discharges, EPA 821-F-93-005
Guidance on Evaluation, Resolution, and Documentation of Analytical Problems Associated with Compliance
Monitoring, EPA 821-B-93-001
Guidance to POTWs for Enforcement of Categorical Standards (Memorandum), November 5, 1984, EPA
Introduction to Water Quality-Based Toxic Control for the NPDES Program, EPA 831-S-92-002
NPDES Basic Permits Writer's Course Manual, EPA 833-B-97-001
Plain English Guide to the EPA Part 503 Biosolids Rule, EPA 832-R-93-003
Pretreatment Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Guidance, September 1986, EPA
Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force: Final Report to the Administrator, January 30, 1985, EPA
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Information Guide, EPA 903-B-93-001
State and Local Government Guide to Environmental Program Funding Alternatives, EPA 841-K-94-001
Toxicity Identification Evaluation: Characterization of Chronically Toxic Effluents, Phase 1, EPA 600-6-91-005-F
U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writers' Manual, EPA-833-B-96-003
User Documentation: POTW Expert, Version 1.1, EPA 625-1-19-000-1
Utility Manager's Guide to Water and Wastewater Budgeting, EPA 832-B-94-010
Chapter 8 -53-
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Waste
Management
Evaluation Model
(IWEM) Technical
Background
Document
-------
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5305W)
Washington, DC 20460
EPA530-R-02-012
August 2002
www.epa.gov/osw
-------
EPA530-R-02-012
August 2002
Industrial Waste Management
Evaluation Model (IWEM)
Technical Background
Document
-------
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5305W)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Numerous individuals have contributed to this work. Ms. Ann Johnson and Mr. David
Cozzie of the U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste (EPA/OSW) provided overall project
coordination and review throughout this work. Ms. Shen-Yi Yang and Mr. Timothy
Taylor of EPA provided specific technical guidance. This report was prepared by the
staffs of Resource Management Concepts, Inc (RMC) and HydroGeoLogic, Inc (HGL)
under EPA Contract Number 68-W-01-004. Chapter 5 and Appendix E were prepared by
Research Triangle Institute under Contract 68-W-98-085.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Acknowledgments i
Executive Summary x
1.0 Introduction 1-1
1.1 Guide For Industrial Waste Management And IWEM 1-1
1.2 IWEM Design 1-3
1.2.1 What Does the Software Do? 1-3
1.2.2 IWEM Components 1-3
1.3 About This Document 1-5
2.0 Overview of the Tier 1 And Tier 2 Approach 2-1
2.1 Purpose of The Tier 1 And Tier 2 Tools 2-1
2.2 Approach Used to Develop Tier 1 And Tier 2 Tools 2-2
2.2.1 Tier 1 2-3
3.0 What Is The EPACMTP Model? 3-1
3.1 WMU Source Module 3-4
3.1.1 How EPACMTP Determines Releases From a Source 3-4
3.1.2 How EPACMTP Determines Infiltration Rate for Surface
Impoundments 3-6
3.2 EPACMTP Unsaturated Zone Module 3-7
3.3 Saturated Zone Module 3-10
3.4 Conducting Probabilistic Analyses Using EPACMTP 3-13
3.5 EPACMTP Assumptions and Limitations 3-16
4.0 How EPA Developed the Tier 1 and Tier 2 IWEM Evaluations 4-1
4.1 Overview 4-1
4.1.1 EPACMTP Modeling Options and Parameters 4-2
4.2 EPACMTP Input Parameters Used to Develop Tier 1 and
Tier 2 Tools 4-8
4.2.1 WMU Parameters 4-9
4.2.1.1 WMU Types 4-9
4.2.1.2 WMU Data Sources 4-11
4.2.1.3 WMU Parameters Used in Developing the Tier 1
and Tier 2 Tools 4-17
4.2.2 Infiltration and Recharge Rates 4-21
11
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Section Page
4.2.2.1 Using the HELP Model to Develop Recharge and
Infiltration Rates 4-22
4.2.2.2 Infiltration Rates for Unlined Units 4-31
4.2.2.3 Single-Lined Waste Units 4-34
4.2.2.4 Infiltration Rates for Composite-Lined Units ....4-38
4.2.2.5 Determination of Recharge Rates 4-42
4.2.3 Parameters Used to Describe the Unsaturated and
Saturated Zones 4-42
4.2.3.1 Subsurface Parameters 4-42
4.2.3.2 Unsaturated Zone Parameters 4-44
4.2.3.3 Saturated Zone Parameters 4-48
4.2.4 Parameters Used to Characterize the Chemical Fate
of Constituents 4-50
4.2.4.1 Constituent Transformation 4-51
4.2.4.2 Other Constituent Degradation Processes 4-53
4.2.4.3 Constituent Sorption 4-53
4.2.4.3.1 Sorption Modeling for
Organic Constituents 4-54
4.2.4.3.2 Sorption Modeling for Inorganic
Constituents (Metals) 4-54
4.2.4.4 Partition Coefficient and Degradation Rate Threshold
Criteria EPA Used to Define Conservative Constituents
in Developing the Tier 1 Evaluation 4-60
4.2.5 Well Location Parameters 4-60
4.2.6 Screening Procedures EPA Used to Eliminate Unrealistic
Parameter Combinations in the Monte Carlo Process 4-61
5.0 Establishing Reference Ground-water Concentrations 5-1
5.1 Ingestion HBNs 5-3
5.1.1 Ingestion HBNs for Constituents That Cause Cancer 5-4
5.1.2 Ingestion HBNs for Constituents that Cause Noncancer
Health Effects 5-6
5.2 Inhalation HBNs 5-7
5.2.1 Calculation of Exposure Concentrations from Showering .... 5-8
5.2.2 Calculating Inhalation HBNs 5-8
5.2.2.1 Inhalation HBNs for Constituents that
Cause Cancer 5-9
in
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Section
Page
5.2.2.2 Inhalation HBNs for Constituents that Causes Non-
Cancer Health Effects 5-11
6.0 How Does IWEM Calculate LCTVs and Make Liner Recommendations? ... 6-1
6.1 Determining Liner Recommendations Corresponding to a 90th
Percentile Exposure Concentration 6-1
6.1.1 Calculating LCTVs for Organic Constituents 6-3
6.1.2 Determining LCTVs for Metals 6-5
6.2 Capping the LCTVs 6-6
6.2.1 Hydrolysis Transformation Products 6-6
6.2.2 1,000 mg/L /Cap 6-11
6.2.3 TC Rule Cap 6-11
6.3 Making Liner Recommendations 6-11
6.3.1 Use and Interpretation of Tier 1 Evaluation 6-12
6.3.2 Use and Interpretation of Tier 2 Evaluation 6-14
7.0 REFERENCES 7-1
Appendix A: Glossary
Appendix B: List of IWEM Waste Constituents and Default Chemical Property Data
Appendix C: Tier 1 Input Parameters
Appendix D: Infiltration Rate Data
Appendix E: Background Information for the Development of Reference Ground-water
Concentration Values
Appendix F: Tier 1 LCTV Tables
IV
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure EX-1 Conceptual Cross-Section View of the Subsurface System
Simulated by EPACMTP xv
Figure 2.1 Three Liner Scenarios Considered in IWEM 2-2
Figure 3.1 Conceptual Cross-Section View of the Subsurface System Simulated
by EPACMTP 3-2
Figure 3.2 Conceptual Relationship Between Leachate Concentration (a)
and Ground-Water Exposure Concentration (b) 3-3
Figure 3.3 Leachate Concentration Versus Time for Pulse Source and Depleting
Source Conditions 3-5
Figure 3.4 Surface Impoundment Infiltration Module 3-6
Figure 3.5 Graphical Representation of the EPACMTP Monte Carlo Process . . 3-16
Figure 4.1 WMU Types Modeled in IWEM 4-10
Figure 4.2 Geographic Locations of Landfill WMUs 4-13
Figure 4.3 Geographic Locations of Surface Impoundment WMUs 4-14
Figure 4.4 Geographic Locations of Waste Pile WMUs 4-15
Figure 4.5 Geographic Locations of Land Application Unit WMUs 4-16
Figure 4.6 WMU with Base Elevation below Ground Surface 4-19
Figure 4.7 Locations of HELP Climate Stations 4-27
Figure 4.8 Ground-water Temperature Distribution for Shallow Aquifers in the
United States (from Todd, 1980) 4-47
Figure 4.9 Example Unsaturated Zone Isotherm for Cr(VI) Corresponding to
Low LOA, Medium FeOx, High POM, pH-6.3 4-59
Figure 4.10 Position of the Modeled Ground-water Well Relative to the WMU . . 4-62
Figure 4.11 Flowchart Describing the Infiltration Screening Procedure 4-66
Figure 4.12 Infiltration Screening Criteria 4-67
Figure 6.1 Determination of Time-Averaged Ground-Water Well Concentration . 6-2
Figure 6.2 Relationship Between Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of
Well Concentrations and Dilution and Attenuation Factors (DAFs) . . . 6-4
v
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table EX-1 IWEM WMU and Liner Combinations xi
Table 1.1 IWEM WMU and Liner Combinations 1-3
Table 1.2 IWEM Constituents 1-6
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters 4-4
Table 4.2 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for LFs 4-23
Table 4.3 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for Sis 4-24
Table 4.4 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for WPs 4-25
Table 4.5 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for LAUs 4-26
Table 4.6 Grouping of Climate Stations by Average Annual Precipitation
and Pan Evaporation (ABB, 1995) 4-29
Table 4.7 Hydraulic Parameters for the Modeled Soils 4-31
Table 4.8 Moisture Retention Parameters for the Modeled WP Materials 4-33
Table 4.9 Sensitivity Analysis of Tier 1 LCTVs for Clay-lined LFs to Regional
Versus Location-specific Infiltration Rates for 17 Climate Stations . . 4-36
Table 4.10 Sensitivity Analysis of Tier 1 LCTVs for Clay-lined WPs to Regional
Versus Location-specific Infiltration Rates for 17 Climate Stations . . 4-38
Table 4.11 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Infiltration Rate for Composite-
Lined LFs and WPs 4-40
Table 4.12 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Leak Density for Composite-
Lined Sis 4-41
Table 4.13 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Infiltration Rate for Composite-
Lined Sis 4-41
Table 4.14 HGDB Subsurface Environments (from Newell et al, 1989) 4-43
Table 4.15 Nationwide Distribution of Soil Types Represented in IWEM 4-44
Table 4.16 Statistical Parameters for Soil Properties for Three Soil Types Used in
IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 Development (Carsel and Parrish, 1988) . . . 4-45
Table 4.17 Probability Distribution of Soil and Aquifer pH 4-47
Table 4.18 Empirical Distribution of Mean Aquifer Particle Diameter
(from Shea, 1974) 4-49
Table 4.19 Ratio Between Effective and Total Porosity as a Function of Particle
Diameter (after McWorther and Sunada, 1977) 4-49
Table 4.20 Cumulative Probability Distribution of Longitudinal Dispersivity at
Reference Distance of 152.4 m (500 ft) 4-50
Table 5.1 Exposure Parameter Values for Ingestion HBNs - Carcinogens 5-5
Table 5.2 Exposure Parameter Values for Ingestion HBNs - Noncarcinogens .. 5-7
Table 5.3 Exposure Parameter Values for Inhalation HBNs 5-10
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs 5-12
VI
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page
Table 6.1 IWEM Constituents with Toxic Hydrolysis Transformation Products . 6-9
Table 6.2 IWEM Daughter Constituents Without RGC Values 6-10
Table 6.3 Toxicity Characteristic Regulatory Levels (U.S. EPA, 1990) 6-12
vn
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
1-D One-dimensional
3-D Three-dimensional
API American Petroleum Institute
CDF Cumulative (Probability) Density Function
cm/sec centimeters per second
CQA Construction Quality Assurance
CSF Cancer Slope Factor
CSFi Inhalation Cancer Slope Factor
CSFo Oral Cancer Slope Factor
DAF Dilution and Attenuation Factor
DOM Dissolved Organic Matter
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EPACMTP EPA-Composite Model for Leachate Migration with Transformation
Products
FeOOH Goethite
FeOx Ferric oxide
GUI Graphical User Interface
HBN Health-Based Number
HOPE High-Density Polyethylene
HELP Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance
HGDB Hydrogeologic Database for Ground-Water Modeling
HQ Hazard Quotient
HWIR Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
in/yr inches per year
IWEM Industrial Waste Management Evaluation Model
kd Soil-Water Partition Coefficient
kg/m3 kilograms per cubic meter
Koc Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient
L/kg Liters per kilogram
LAI Leaf Area Index
LAU Land Application Unit
LCTV Leachate Concentration Threshold Value
LDS Leak Detection System
Vlll
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (continued)
LF Landfill
LOA Leachate organic acids
m2/yr meters squared per year
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
mg/kg/day milligram per kilogram per day
mg/L Milligrams per liter
MINTEQA2 EPA's geochemical equilibrium speciation model for dilute aqueous
systems
mm2 Millimeters squared
Mton Mega-ton
POM Particulate Organic Matter
RfC Reference Concentration
RfD Reference Dose
RGC Reference Ground-Water Concentration
SCL Silly Clay Loam
SCS Soil Conservation Service
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SI Surface Impoundment
SLT Silt Loam
SNL Sandy Loam
SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure
TC Toxicity Characteristic
TC Rule Toxicity Characteristic Rule
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TOC Total Organic Carbon
URF Unit Risk Factor
WMU Waste Management Unit
WP Waste Pile
IX
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Objectives
This document provides technical background on the assumptions, methodologies
and data used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop Tier 1 and
Tier 2 ground-water impact evaluation tools as part of the Agency's Guide for Industrial
Waste Management (hereafter, the Guide). The evaluation tools are combined in the
Industrial Waste Management Evaluation Model (IWEM).
The EPA and representatives from 12 state environmental agencies have
developed a voluntary Guide to recommend a baseline of protective design and operating
practices to manage nonhazardous industrial waste throughout the country. The guidance
was designed for facility managers, regulatory agency staff, and the public, and it reflects
four underlying objectives:
Adopt a multimedia approach to protect human health and the
environment;
Tailor management practices to risk using the innovative, user-friendly
modeling tools provided in the Guide;
Affirm state and tribal leadership in ensuring protective industrial waste
management, and use the Guide to complement state and tribal programs;
and
Foster partnerships among facility managers, the public, and regulatory
agencies.
The Guide recommends best management practices and key factors to consider to
protect ground water, surface water, and ambient air quality in siting, operating, and
designing waste management units (WMUs); monitoring WMUs' impact on the
environment; determining necessary corrective action; closing WMUs; and providing
post-closure care. In particular, the Guide recommends risk-based approaches to design
liner systems, determine waste application rates for ground-water protection, and
evaluate the need for air controls. The CD-ROM version of the Guide includes user-
friendly air and ground-water models to conduct these risk evaluations. The IWEM
software described in this Background Document is the ground-water tool that was
developed to support the Guide.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Executive Summary
The IWEM software helps determine the most appropriate WMU design to
minimize or avoid adverse ground-water impacts, by evaluating one or more types of
liners, the hydrogeologic conditions of the site, and the toxicity and expected leachate
concentrations of the anticipated waste constituents.
For the ground-water pathway, the Guide recommends a tiered approach that is
based on modeling the fate and transport of waste constituents through subsurface soils to
a ground-water well1 to produce a liner recommendation (or a recommendation
concerning land application) that protects human health and the environment. The
successive tiers in the analysis incorporate more site-specific data to tailor protective
management practices to the particular circumstances at the modeled site:
Tier 1: A screening analysis based upon national distributions of
data;
Tier 2: A location-adjusted analysis using a limited set of the most
sensitive waste- and site-specific data; and
Tier 3: A comprehensive and detailed site assessment
The IWEM software is designed to support the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses. The
IWEM tool compares the expected leachate concentration for each waste constituent
entered by the user with leachate concentration threshold values (LCTVs) calculated by
a ground-water fate and transport model for three standard liner types. The IWEM
software compiles the results for all constituents expected in the leachate and then reports
the minimum liner scenario that is protective for all constituents. Table EX-1 shows the
WMU types and liner types that are evaluated in IWEM.
Table EX-1 IWEM WMU and Liner Combinations
WMU Type
Landfill
Surface Impoundment
Waste Pile
Land Application Unit
Liner Type
No Liner (in-situ soil)
Single Clay Liner
N/A
Composite Liner
N/A
N/A = Not Applicable
For land application units (LAUs) only the No Liner scenario is evaluated because
liners are not typically used for this type of unit.
1 In IWEM, the term "well" is used to represent an actual or hypothetical ground-water
monitoring well or drinking-water well, located downgradient from a WMU.
XI
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
Waste Management Units
Four WMUs are represented in the IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 tool and have the
following key characteristics:
Landfill (LF). IWEM considers closed LFs with an earthen cover and
either no-liner, a single clay liner, or a composite, clay-geomembrane
liner. The release of waste constituents into the soil and ground water
underneath the LF is caused by dissolution and leaching of the
constituents due to precipitation which percolates through the LF. The
type of liner which is present controls, to a large extent, the amount of
leachate which is released from the unit. Because the LF is closed, the
concentration of the waste constituents will diminish with time due to
depletion of LF wastes. The leachate concentration value which is used
an IWEM input is the expected initial leachate concentration, when the
waste is "fresh".
Waste Pile (WP). WPs are typically used as temporary storage units for
solid wastes. Due to their temporary nature, they typically will not be
covered. IWEM does allow liners to be present, similar to LFs. In Tier 1
analyses, IWEM assumes that WPs have a fixed operational life of 40
years, after which the WP is removed. IWEM therefore models WPs as a
temporary source.
Surface Impoundment (SI). In IWEM, Sis are ground level or below-
ground level, flow-through units, which may be unlined, have a single
clay liner, or a composite liner. Release of leachate is driven by the
ponding of water in the impoundment, which creates a hydraulic head
gradient with the ground water underneath the unit.
Land Application Unit (LAU). LAUs (or land treatment units) are areas
of land which received regular applications of waste that can be either
tilled or sprayed directly onto the soil and subsequently mixed with the
soil. IWEM models the leaching of wastes after tilling with soil. IWEM
does not account for the losses due to volatilization during or after waste
application. Only the no-liner scenario is evaluated for LAUs because
liners typically are not used for this type of unit.
xn
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
Tier 1 and Tier 2 Evaluations
Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations in IWEM can be summarized as follows:
Tier 1: Using only the expected leachate concentrations of constituents in a
waste, generic tables provide WMU design recommendations (liner system or maximum
allowable leachate concentration). If the waste contains several constituents, the Tier 1
evaluation will choose the most protective design indicated for any of the constituents.
This tier of the analysis uses national data and generally will recommend more stringent
controls. The Tier 1 evaluation is designed to be protective for 90% of the potential
waste sites across the United States.
Tier 2 : In Tier 2, site-specific data for up to twenty of the most sensitive WMU
and hydrogeologic characteristics can be entered to assess whether a particular design
will be protective. In addition, some default constituent fate parameters can be modified,
including adding biodegradation. This tier is generally more representative because it
allows the user to incorporate some site-specific information in the analysis.
In Tier 1, the only required IWEM inputs are the type of WMU to be evaluated,
the waste constituents present in the leachate, and the expected leachate concentration
value of each constituent.
In Tier 2, there are a small number of required site-specific user-input parameters
in addition to the Tier 1 inputs, as well as a number of optional site-specific user-input
parameters. The additional required site-specific Tier 2 parameters are:
WMU Area
WMU Depth (LF and SI)
WMU location (to select the appropriate climate parameters)
Optional site-specific Tier 2 inputs are:
Distance to the nearest surface water body (SI)
Depth of the base of the WMU below ground surface (LF, SI, and WP)
Operational Life of the WMU (SI, WP, and LAU)
Sludge Thickness (SI)
Waste Type (WP)
Leakage (infiltration) rate from the WMU
Distance to the nearest down-gradient well
Unsaturated zone soil type
Xlll
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
Hydrogeologic Environment, and/or individual values of:
Depth from the base of the WMU to the water table
Saturated thickness of the upper aquifer
Hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone
Regional hydraulic gradient in the saturated zone
Ground-water pH
Constituent fate parameters:
sorption coefficient (Kd)
(bio-)degradation rate
Constituent-specific reference ground water concentrations, and
corresponding exposure durations.
EPACMTP Ground Water Fate and Transport Model
IWEM uses the EPA's Composite Model for Leachate Migration with
Transformation Products (EPACMTP) to model the fate and transport of constituents in
the subsurface as they migrate through the subsurface. Figure EX. 1 shows a conceptual,
cross-sectional view of the aquifer system modeled by EPACMTP.
EPACMTP simulates fate and transport in both the unsaturated zone and the
saturated zone (ground water) using the advection-dispersion equation with terms to
account for equilibrium sorption and first-order transformation. The source of
constituents is a WMU located at the ground surface overlying an unconfmed aquifer.
The base of the WMU can be below the actual ground surface. Waste constituents leach
from the base of the WMU into the underlying soil. They migrate vertically downward
until they reach the water table. As the leachate enters the ground water, it will mix with
ambient ground water (which is assumed to be free of pollutants) and a ground-water
plume will develop which extends in the direction of downgradient ground-water flow.
EPACMTP accounts for the spreading of the plume in all three dimensions.
Leachate generation is driven by the infiltration of precipitation that has
percolated through the waste unit, from the base of the WMU into the soil. Different
liner designs control the rate of infiltration that can occur. EPACMTP models flow in the
unsaturated zone, and in the saturated zone as steady-state processes, that is, representing
long-term average conditions.
xiv
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Executive Summary
LEACHATE CONCENTRATION
WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT
Figure EX.1 Conceptual Cross-Section View of the Subsurface System Simulated by
EPACMTP.
In addition to dilution of the constituent concentration caused by the mixing of
the leachate with ground water, EPACMTP accounts for attenuation due to sorption of
waste constituents in the leachate onto soil and aquifer solids, and for bio-chemical
transformation (degradation) processes in the unsaturated and saturated zone. In Tier 1,
and by default in Tier 2, EPACMTP only accounts for chemical transformations caused
by hydrolysis reactions. In Tier 2 analyses, however, you can use site-specific
biodegradation rates. EPACMTP simulates all transformation processes as first-order
reactions, that is, as processes that can be characterized with a half-life.
For organic constituents, EPACMTP models sorption between the constituents
and the organic matter in the soil or aquifer, based on constituent-specific organic carbon
partition coefficients, and a site-specific organic carbon fraction in the soil and aquifer.
In the case of metals, EPACMTP accounts for more complex geochemical reactions by
using effective sorption isotherms for a range of aquifer geochemical conditions,
generated using EPA's geochemical equilibrium speciation model for dilute aqueous
systems (MINTEQA2).
The output from EPACMTP is the predicted maximum ground-water exposure
concentration, measured at a well situated down-gradient from a WMU. In Tier 1 the
well is always located on the plume centerline at a fixed distance of 150 meters from the
downgradient edge of the WMU. In Tier 2, the well is also restricted to be on the plume
centerline, but the distance (up to one mile) can be entered as a site-specific value.
xv
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
Monte Carlo Implementation
In developing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluation, EPA uses Monte Carlo simulation
to determine the probability distribution of predicted ground-water concentrations, as a
function of the variability of modeling input parameters. The Monte Carlo technique is
based on the repeated random sampling of input parameters from their respective
frequency distribution, executing the EPACMTP fate and transport model for each
realization of input parameter values. At the conclusion of the Monte Carlo analysis, it is
then possible to construct a probability distribution of ground-water concentration values
and associated ground-water dilution and attenuation factors (DAFs). Tier 1 and Tier 2
results are based on Monte Carlo analyses of 10,000 realizations.
For Tier 1, we used a series of databases that describe the expected nationwide
variations in climate, soil, and hydrogeological conditions. In order to determine Tier 1
WMU design recommendations, we used the 90th percentile of the predicted nationwide
distribution of ground-water concentration values. Tier 1 results are therefore designed
to be protective of 90% of waste sites in the United States. The advantage of a Tier 1
evaluation is that it is very rapid and does not require site-specific information. The
trade-off is that while the Tier 1 evaluation will provide a protective screening
assessment for the majority of waste sites, it is not possible to guarantee that it will be
protective at all sites.
A Tier 2 evaluation uses information on waste site location and other site-specific
data, to perform a more precise (less uncertain) assessment. If appropriate for site
conditions (e.g., an arid climate), it may be possible to avoid unnecessarily costly WMU
designs. It may also provide an additional level of certainty that liner designs are
protective of sites in vulnerable settings, such as high rainfall and shallow ground water.
If site-specific data for ground-water modeling parameters are not available, values are
drawn randomly (except for the required parameters that the user must input). The
underlying assumption at Tier 2 is that if a site-specific parameter value is not available,
the uncertainty in the value of the parameter is captured by the nationwide range in
values of that parameter. The resulting location-specific Tier 2 predicted ground-water
concentrations therefore represent a 90th percentile protection level for the specified site
conditions.
Reference Ground-Water Concentrations
Reference Ground-Water Concentrations (RGCs) are maximum allowable
concentrations of constituents in ground water. The IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations
incorporate two types of RGCs:
xvi
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
1) Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs are available for some IWEM
constituents. MCLs are maximum permissible constituent concentrations allowed
in public drinking water and are established under the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). In developing MCLs, EPA considers not only a constituent's health
effects, but also additional factors, such as the cost of treatment.
2) Health-based numbers (HBNs). EPA developed HBNs for residential exposures
via ingestion and inhalation routes of exposure. HBNs are the maximum
constituent concentrations in ground water that we expect will not usually cause
adverse noncancer health effects in the general population (including sensitive
subgroups), or that will not result in an additional incidence of cancer in more
than approximately one in one million individuals exposed to the constituent.
HBNs were developed for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects. In the case
of inhalation, this exposure route was evaluated for volatile organic constituents and
mercury. HBN values were calculated by "rearranging" standard EPA risk equations to
calculate constituent concentration, rather than cancer risk or noncancer hazard. The
IWEM HBNs correspond to a "target risk" and a "target hazard quotient (HQ)." The
target risk for carcinogens is 1 x 10"6 (one in one million). The target HQ for
noncarcinogens is 1 (unitless). A HQ of 1 indicates that the estimated dose is equal to the
Reference Dose (RfD) and, therefore, a HQ of 1 is frequently EPA's threshold of concern
for noncancer effects. These targets were used to calculate separate HBNs for each
constituent of concern, and separate HBNs for each exposure route of concern (ingestion
or inhalation). The Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations do not consider combined exposure
from ground-water ingestion (from drinking water) and ground-water inhalation (from
showering), nor do they consider the potential for additive exposure to multiple
constituents.
Leachate Concentration Threshold Values and Liner Recommendations
The IWEM tool provides recommendations for waste management in terms of
LCTVs and type of liner. LCTVs represent the highest concentration in leachate that is
protective of human health for a particular WMU and liner scenario. In Tier 1, the liner
recommendations are based on comparing expected waste leachate concentrations to
tabulated LCTVs. In Tier 2, IWEM uses ground-water modeling to predict expected
waste- and site-specific ground-water exposure concentrations for all waste constituents.
IWEM then compares the exposure concentrations to RGCs to determine whether or not
a liner design is protective. In the Tier 2 analysis, IWEM calculates LCTVs to help users
determine whether waste minimization may be appropriate to meet a specific liner
design. Because the Tier 2 analysis includes site-specific considerations, LCTVs from
this analysis are not applicable to other sites. The basic calculation of LCTVs can be
summarized as follows:
xvn
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Executive Summary
where:
LCTV =
DAF =
RGC =
LCTV = DAF x RGC
Leachate Concentration Threshold Value
Dilution and Attenuation Factor
Reference Ground-Water Concentration
In this relationship, DAF represents the reduction in constituent concentration
between the WMU leachate, and the eventual ground-water exposure concentration at a
downgradient ground-water receptor well. The DAF is chemical- and site-specific and is
calculated using EPACMTP. DAF values used in IWEM represent 90th percentile levels.
In other words, the LCTVs are designed to be protective with a 90% certainty.
The RGC accounts for a constituent's regulatory (MCL) or risk-based (HBN)
standard. As expressed in the relationship above, the LCTV is directly proportional to
the RGC. Thus, LCTVs for constituents with similar DAFs will differ based on the
difference in the regulatory or risk-based standards.
For some constituents, the LCTVs are based not only on toxicity and DAFs, but
also on other criteria that are applied to cap the model-calculated values. IWEM caps
leachate concentrations from an industrial solid WMU at a level no higher than 1000
mg/1 for any single constituent. Concentrations higher than this level may indicate the
pressure of free-product conditions which are outside the validity of IWEM.
The 39 hazardous waste toxicity characteristic (TC) constituents are capped at
their TC levels because concentrations above those levels are hazardous waste. For the
18 constituents that hydrolyze, LCTVs may be capped by toxic daughter products. The
final LCTVs are then calculated such that they accommodate both the parent constituent
as well as any toxic daughter products. For instance, if a parent waste constituent rapidly
hydrolyzes into a persistent daughter product, the ground-water exposure caused by the
parent itself may be minimal (it has already degraded before it reaches the well), but the
final LCTV and liner recommendation generated by IWEM would be based on the
exposure caused by the daughter product, under the assumption that the parent compound
fully transforms into the daughter product. If a IWEM constituent has more than one
toxic daughter product, the final LCTV and liner recommendation take all daughter
products into account.
xvin
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Executive Summary
The final IWEM liner recommendations are based on the minimum liner design
that is protective for all constituents. In applying the IWEM tool, a Tier 1 screening
evaluation is typically performed first. If the expected leachate concentrations of all
waste constituents are lower than their respective no-liner LCTVs, the proposed WMU
does not need a liner to protect ground water. If any constituent concentration is higher
than the corresponding no-liner LCTV, than a single or composite liner would be
recommended. If any constituent is higher than the corresponding single liner LCTV,
than the recommendation is at least a composite liner. Because a Tier 1 evaluation is
designed to be protective of sites across the United States, if the analysis indicates that no
liner is recommended, it is generally not necessary to proceed to a Tier 2 evaluation. On
the other hand, if the Tier 1 analysis indicates a liner is recommended, a user may wish to
confirm this recommendation by proceeding to a Tier 2 (or Tier 3) analysis for at least
those constituents whose expected leachate concentrations indicate that a liner is
recommended.
xix
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 1.0
1.0 Introduction
This document provides technical background information on the Industrial
Waste Management Evaluation Model (IWEM). A companion document, the IWEM
User's Guide provides detailed information on how to install and use the IWEM software
that is distributed as part of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Industrial
Waste Management Guide.
1.1 Guide For Industrial Waste Management And IWEM
The EPA and representatives from 12 state environmental agencies have
developed a voluntary Guide for Industrial Waste Management (hereafter, the Guide) to
recommend a baseline of protective design and operating practices to manage
nonhazardous industrial waste throughout the country. The guidance was designed for
facility managers, regulatory agency staff, and the public, and it reflects four underlying
objectives:
Adopt a multimedia approach to protect human health and the
environment;
Tailor management practices to risk using the innovative, user-friendly
modeling tools provided in the Guide;
Affirm state and tribal leadership in ensuring protective industrial waste
management, and use the Guide to complement state and tribal programs;
and
Foster partnerships among facility managers, the public, and regulatory
agencies.
The Guide recommends best management practices and key factors to consider to
protect ground-water, surface water, and ambient air quality in siting, operating, and
designing waste management units (WMUs); monitoring WMUs' impact on the
environment; determining necessary corrective action; closing WMUs; and providing
postclosure care. In particular, the guidance recommends risk-based approaches to
design liner systems and determine waste application rates for ground-water protection,
and evaluate the need for air controls. The CD-ROM version of the Guide includes user-
friendly air and ground-water models to conduct these risk evaluations. The IWEM
model described in this document, is the ground-water tool that was developed to support
the Guide.
1-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 1.0
The IWEM software helps determine the most appropriate WMU design to
minimize or avoid adverse ground-water impacts by evaluating one or more types of
liners, the hydrogeologic conditions of the site, and the toxicity and expected leachate
concentrations of the anticipated waste constituents. The software can help compare the
ground-water protection afforded by various liner systems with the anticipated waste
leachate concentrations, so that you can determine the minimum recommended liner
system that will be protective of human health and ground-water resources.
The anticipated users of the IWEM software are managers of proposed or existing
units, state regulators, interested private citizens, and community groups. For example:
Managers of a proposed unit may use the software to determine what
type of liner would be appropriate for the particular type of waste that is
expected at the WMU and the particular hydrogeologic characteristics of
the site.
Managers of an existing unit may use the software to determine whether
or not to accept a particular waste at that WMU by evaluating the
performance of the existing liner design.
State regulators may use the software in developing permit conditions for
a WMU.
Interested members of the public or community groups may use the
software to evaluate a particular WMU and participate during the
permitting process.
In an effort to meet the needs of the various stakeholders, the guidance for the
ground-water pathway recommends a tiered approach that is based on modeling the fate
and transport of waste constituents through subsurface soils to a well2 to produce a liner
recommendation. The successive tiers in the analysis incorporate more site-specific data
to tailor protective management practices to the particular circumstances at the site:
Tier 1: A screening analysis based upon national distributions of
data;
Tier 2: A location-adjusted analysis using a limited set of the most
sensitive waste- and site-specific data; and
Tier 3: A comprehensive and detailed site assessment
2 In IWEM, the term "well" is used to represent an actual or hypothetical ground-water
monitoring well or drinking water well, located downgradient from a WMU.
"U2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 1.0
The IWEM software is designed to support the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses. The
unique aspect of the IWEM software is that it allows the user to perform Tier 1 and Tier
2 analyses and obtain liner recommendations with minimal data requirements. Users
interested in a Tier 3 analysis are directed to the Guide for information regarding the
selection of an appropriate ground-water fate and transport model.
1.2 IWEM Design
1.2.1 What Does the Software Do?
IWEM helps you determine a recommended liner design for different types of
Subtitle D WMUs that will minimize the potential for adverse ground-water impacts
caused by the leaching of waste constituents. The IWEM tool compares the expected
leachate concentration for each waste constituent that is entered by the user with the
leachate concentration threshold value (LCTV) or exposure concentration calculated by a
ground-water fate and transport model for three standard liner types. The IWEM
software compiles the results for all constituents expected in the leachate and then reports
the minimum liner scenario that is protective for all constituents. Table 1.1 shows the
WMU types and liner types that are evaluated in IWEM.
Table 1.1 IWEM WMU and Liner Combinations
WMU Type
Landfill
Surface Impoundment
Waste Pile
Land Application Unit
Liner Type
No Liner (in-situ soil)
Single Clay Liner
N/A
Composite Liner
N/A
N/A = Not Applicable
For Land Application Units (LAUs) only the No Liner scenario is evaluated
because liners are not typically used at this type of facility.
1.2.2 IWEM Components
The IWEM software consists of three main components (7) A graphical user
interface (GUI) which guides you through a series of user-friendly screens to perform
Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations; (2) the EPACMTP computational engine and integrated
Monte Carlo processor that performs the ground-water fate and transport simulations for
Tier 2 evaluations; and (3) a series of data bases that contain waste constituent
1-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 1.0
characteristics and WMU and ground-water modeling parameters. Each of these three
components is discussed briefly below.
1. Graphical User Interface (GUI)
The IWEM GUI consists of a series of data input and display screens which allow
you to define all aspects of a Tier 1 or Tier 2 evaluation. The user interface
provides a tailored front-end to the EPACMTP computational engine and built-in
databases for Tier 1 and Tier 2. The user interface module is described in detail
in the IWEM User's Guide (U.S. EPA, 2002c).
2. EPACMTP Ground-Water Fate and Transport Simulation Model
EPACMTP is the computational engine of IWEM. EPACMTP simulates the
migration of chemical waste constituents in leachate from land disposal units,
through soil and ground water. Tier 1 leachate concentration thresholds were
generated using EPACMTP. In a Tier 2 evaluation, the fate and transport
simulation is performed directly inside the IWEM tool. EPACMTP is described
in detail in the EPACMTP Technical Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a).
This document discusses the application of EPACMTP as part of IWEM.
3. Databases
The third component of IWEM is an integrated set of databases that include Tier
1 lookup tables, as well as waste constituent properties and ground-water
modeling parameters for Tier 2 evaluations. The waste constituent database
includes 206 organics and 20 metals. Table 1.2 provides a list of the constituents
in the database. The constituent databases includes physical and chemical data
needed for ground-water transport modeling, as well as reference ground-water
concentrations (RGCs), in the form of maximum constituent levels (MCLs) and
cancer and non-cancer health-based numbers (HBNs) for ingestion of drinking
water, and inhalation of volatiles during showering. Appendix B provides a
complete list of all constituent property data.
In addition to constituent data, the IWEM tool includes a comprehensive database
of ground-water modeling parameters, including infiltration rates for different
WMU types and liner designs for a range of locations and climatic conditions
throughout the United States, and soil and hydrogeological data for different soil
types and aquifer conditions. Details of the databases are provided in this
background document, and in the EPACMTP Parameters/Data Background
Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
1-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 1.0
1.3 About This Document
The remainder of this document is organized as follows:
Section 2.0; Overview of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 Approach, presents the purpose of,
and the methodology behind the Tier 1 and Tier 2 tools;
Section 3.0; What is the EPACMTP Model, provides an overview of the
EPACMTP ground-water simulation model;
Section 4.0; How EPA Developed the Tier 1 and Tier 2 IWEM Tools, describes
the application of EPACMTP for the development of the IWEM tools, in particular the
input parameters used for Tier 1 and Tier 2;
Section 5.0; Establishing Reference Ground-water Concentrations, describes how
we developed health-based reference concentrations (RfCs) based on ingestion and
inhalation risks;
Section 6; How Does IWEM Calculate LCTVs and Make Liner Recommendations,
describes the calculation of leachate concentration thresholds, including the development
ofRGCs;
Section 7.0; References, lists literature references;
Appendix A presents a glossary of technical terms used in this document;
Appendix B presents the list of waste constituents included in IWEM and the
default values for the constituent-specific inputs (decay coefficient and organic carbon
partition coefficient [Koc]);
Appendix C presents tables of EPACMTP input parameters used in developing
the Tier 1 LCTVs;
Appendix D presents infiltration rate data for each WMU and liner design
combination;
Appendix E presents detailed information on the methodology we used to develop
inhalation and ingestion HBNs; and
Appendix F presents the Tier 1 LCTV tables.
1-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 1.0
Table 1.2 IWEM Constituents
CAS Number
Constituent Name
CAS Number
Constituent Name
Organics
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
10061-02-6
60-57-1
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Benz {a} anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene, 1, 3-
Butanol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Dichloropropene trans- 1,3-
Dieldrin
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
218-01-9
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
156-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
206-44-0
50-00-0
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene, 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chrysene
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT, p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropanel,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1 ,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1 ,4-
Dichlorobenzidine3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene l,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Fluoranthene
Formaldehyde
1-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 1.0
Table 1.2 IWEM Constituents (continued)
CAS Number
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
91-20-3
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
Constituent Name
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine, 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
CAS Number
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
110-49-6
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
Constituent Name
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indeno {1,2,3-cd} pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
1-7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 1.0
Table 1.2 IWEM Constituents (continued)
CAS Number
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
Constituent Name
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
CAS Number
3689-24-5
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
Constituent Name
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro- 1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichloro benzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 1.0
Table 1.2 IWEM Constituents (continued)
CAS Number
Constituent Name
CAS Number
Constituent Name
Metals
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-41-7
7440-43-9
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
16984-48-8
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (III)
Chromium (VI)
Cobalt
Copper
Fluoride
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
7439-98-7
7440-02-0
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
7440-28-0
7440-62-2
7440-66-6
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
1-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 2.0
2.0 Overview of the Tier 1 And Tier 2 Approach
This section provides an overview of the methodology we used to develop the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 tools. Section 2.1 discusses the purpose of the tools in terms of waste
management scenarios addressed by IWEM. Section 2.2 presents the approach and
parameters used for a Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluation.
2.1 Purpose of The Tier 1 And Tier 2 Tools
IWEM analyzes the potential ground-water impacts of four types of WMU; LF,
SI, waste pile (WP), and LAUs; and three liner scenarios: no liner, single clay liner, and
composite liner. The purpose of both the Tier 1 and the Tier 2 evaluation is to determine
the minimum recommended liner design that is protective of ground water for the waste
of concern.
The primary method of controlling the release of waste constituents to the
subsurface is to install a low permeability liner at the base of a WMU. A liner generally
consists of a layer of clay or other material with a low hydraulic conductivity that is used
to prevent or mitigate the flow of liquids from a WMU. However, the type of liner that is
appropriate for a specific WMU is highly dependent upon a number of location-specific
parameters, such as climate and hydrogeology. In addition, the amount of liquid that
migrates into the subsurface from a WMU has been shown to be a highly sensitive
parameter in predicting the release of constituents to ground-water. Therefore, one of the
main objectives of the tiered modeling approach is to evaluate the appropriateness of a
proposed liner design in the context of other location-specific parameters such as
precipitation, evaporation, and the hydrogeologic characteristics of the soil and aquifer
beneath a facility.
EPA chose to evaluate three types of liner designs, the no-liner, single-liner, and
composite-liner designs. The no-liner design (Figure 2. la) represents a WMU that is
relying upon location-specific conditions such as low permeability native soils beneath
the unit or low annual precipitation rates to mitigate the release of constituents to ground-
water. The single-liner design represents a 3 foot thick clay liner with a low hydraulic
conductivity (1 x 10"7 centimeters per second [cm/sec]) beneath a WMU (Figure 2. Ib). A
composite liner in IWEM consists of a 60 mil (1.5 millimeter) high-density polyethylene
(HDPE) layer underlain by either a geosynthetic clay liner with a maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 5x 10"9 cm/sec or a three-fool compacted clay liner with a maximum
hydraulic conductivity of IxlO"7 cm/sec. (Figure 2.1c).
2-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 2.0
Waste Waste
:vj:.:,Nativ.e;Spijr':;;::f Compacted Clay l Compacted Clay
a) No-Liner Scenario b) Single Liner Scenario c} Composite Liner Scenario
Figure 2.1 Three Liner Scenarios Considered in IWEM.
For a given waste management scenario and waste leachate concentration, IWEM
uses ground-water modeling to predict the exposure concentration at a well located
downgradient from the WMU, and then compares the predicted exposure concentration
to established regulatory or health-based RGCs. The recommended liner design is the
minimum liner for which the predicted ground-water concentration of all constituents is
less than their RGC. For land application, the model evaluates whether wastes can be
protectively land applied, based on leachate constituent concentrations. The Tier 1 and
Tier 2 evaluations can be summarized as follows:
Tier 1: Using only expected leachate concentrations of constituents in a waste,
generic tables provide design recommendations (liner system or maximum allowable
leachate concentrations). If the waste contains several constituents, choose the most
protective design indicated for any of the constituents. This tier of analysis uses national
data and is designed to be protective for 90% of the possible combinations of waste sites
and environmental settings across the United States; Tier 1 results will therefore be
protective for the majority of sites.
Tier 2: You can enter site-specific data for up to twenty of the most sensitive
WMU and hydrogeologic characteristics to assess whether an alternative design will be
protective. In addition, you can modify the default constituent fate parameters, including
adding biodegradation. This tier is generally more representative than Tier 1 because it
allows the user to incorporate site-specific information in the analysis.
2.2 Approach Used to Develop Tier 1 And Tier 2 Tools
There are several important concepts that are critical to the understanding of how
IWEM functions. These concepts include 90th percentile exposure concentration, dilution
and attenuations factors (DAFs), reference ground-water concentrations (RGCs), and
leachate concentration threshold values (LCTVs). This section presents how we used
these concepts in developing IWEM, and the similarities and differences between Tier 1
and Tier 2.
2^2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 2.0
2.2.1 Tier 1
We developed Tier 1 of IWEM around the concept of Leachate Concentration
Threshold Values (LCTVs). An LCTV is the maximum leachate concentration that is
protective of ground-water. That is, the LCTV will result in a ground-water exposure
concentration that does not exceed RGCs. The basic calculation that is performed to
develop LCTVs can be summarized as follows:
where:
LCTV=
DAF =
RGC =
LCTV = DAF xRGC
Leachate Concentration Threshold Value
Dilution and Attenuation Factor
Reference Ground-water Concentration
(e.g.,MCLorHBN)
In this relationship, DAF represents the reduction in constituent concentration
between the point of release at the base of the WMU, and the eventual ground-water
exposure concentration at a downgradient well. IWEM uses the EPACMTP ground-
water fate and transport model to calculate expected ground-water well concentrations
from which the DAFs are determined. EPACMTP and its application under IWEM are
discussed in detail in Sections 3 and 4 of this document. The DAF is chemical- and site-
specific and is defined as the ratio of the constituent concentration in the waste leachate
to the concentration at the monitoring well, or:
C,
DAF = -
'RW
where:
CL = is the leachate concentration (milligrams per liter [mg/L])
CRW = is the well concentration (mg/L).
The ground-water exposure is evaluated at a well located downgradient from the
WMU. The distance between the WMU and the well can vary, but IWEM assumes the
well is always located on the centerline of the ground-water plume.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 2.0
The magnitude of a DAF reflects the combined effect of all dilution and
attenuation processes that occur in the unsaturated and saturated zone. The lowest
possible value of DAF is one; a DAF value of one means that there is no dilution or
attenuation at all; the concentration at the well is the same as that in the waste leachate.
High values of DAF on the other hand correspond to a high degree of dilution and
attenuation and mean that the expected concentration at the well will be much lower than
the concentration in the leachate.
IWEM uses EPACMTP in a probabilistic (Monte Carlo) mode to generate a
probability distribution of well concentrations that reflects the variability in the various
modeling parameters, for instance the variation of rainfall rate across the United States.
IWEM uses the 90th percentile exposure concentration to represent the estimated
constituent concentration at a well for a given leachate concentration to determine the
DAF that is used in the calculation of LCTVs. The 90th percentile exposure
concentration is determined by running EPACMTP in a Monte Carlo mode for 10,000
realizations. For each realization, EPACMTP calculates a maximum time-averaged
concentration at a well, depending on the exposure duration of the reference
ground-water concentration (RGC) of interest. For example, IWEM assumes a 30-year
exposure duration for carcinogens, and therefore, the maximum time-averaged
concentration is the highest 30-year average across the modeling horizon. After
calculating the maximum time-averaged concentrations across the 10,000 realizations,
the concentrations are arrayed from lowest to highest and the 90th percentile of this
distribution is selected as the constituent exposure concentration for IWEM. In Tier 1,
the EPACMTP modeling used data on WMUs collected throughout the United States.
LCTVs used in Tier 1 are therefore designed to be protective with a 90% certainty
considering the range of variability associated with waste sites across the United States.
We performed EPACMTP Monte Carlo simulations to determine constituent-
specific DAF values for each combination of WMU type and liner listed in Table 1.1.
We then multiplied these DAFs with constituent-specific RGCs to obtain the Tier 1
LCTVs. The RGCs included Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as established
under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and HBNs, calculated from constituent-
specific toxicity data, using standard exposure assumptions for residential receptors (see
Section 5.2 of this document). IWEM incorporates HBNs for exposures due to drinking
water ingestion and inhalation of volatiles while showering. Constituent-specific HBNs
in IWEM correspond to a cancer risk of 10"6, and non-cancer hazard quotient (HQ) of 1,
respectively. The relationship shown at the beginning of this section expresses how the
LCTV is directly proportional to the RGC and that the LCTV will be lower for
constituents with lower MCLs or HBNs even if they have the same fate and transport
characteristics (same DAF).
2-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 2.0
After calculating the Tier 1 LCTVs as outlined above, we applied a series of caps
that:
Restrict LCTVs to not exceed 1,000 mg/L,
Restrict LCTVs to not exceed Toxicity Characteristic (TC) Rule leachate
levels (for the 39 constituents identified in the TC Rule), and
Account for transformation of leachate constituents into toxic hydrolysis
daughter products.
Section 6 discusses these caps in more detail. The final result is a set of
nationwide leachate screening values. The final Tier 1 LCTVs are listed in Appendix F
of this document. They are also incorporated as a series of lookup tables in the IWEM
software.
To perform a Tier 1 evaluation only the following information is needed:
WMU type;
Constituents present in the leachate; and
Expected leachate concentration of each constituent.
The IWEM software will compare expected leachate concentrations with LCTVs
for each constituent, and determine a minimum recommended liner design that is
protective for all waste constituents.
2.2.2 Tier 2
A Tier 2 evaluation is also based on a 90th percentile ground-water protection
level, but takes into account site-specific factors. If appropriate for site conditions (for
example, an arid climate), it may be possible to avoid unnecessarily costly WMU
designs. It may also provide an additional level of certainty that liner designs are
protective of sites in vulnerable settings, such as high rainfall and shallow ground-water.
In Tier 2, EPACMTP uses site-specific information to determine the expected 90th
percentile exposure concentration for each waste constituent and liner scenario. IWEM
then directly compares these exposure concentrations to RGCs to determine whether a
particular liner scenario is protective or not. If the ground-water exposure concentration
of each constituent is less than its RGC, then the liner scenario being evaluated is
protective. If the exposure concentration of any waste constituent exceeds its RGC, then
the liner scenario is not protective. In the Tier 2 analysis, IWEM also calculates LCTVs.
These are provided to help users determine whether waste minimization may be
appropriate to meet a specific liner design. For example, a facility may find it more cost
effective to reduce the concentration of constituents in waste and design a clay-lined LF
than to dispose of the current waste in a LF with a composite liner. The LCTVs
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 2.0
calculated for the Tier 2 analysis is based on the expected exposure concentration for a
specific site, and LCTVs from this analysis are not applicable to other sites. The trade-
off in performing a Tier 2 evaluation is that although a more site-specific result is
generated, the fate and transport simulations which are performed inside the IWEM
software are computationally very demanding and can take hours to complete, even on
high-speed desk top computers.
For Tier 2, the same inputs as Tier 1 are required. In addition, there are several
more required site-specific parameters, as well as other optional parameters. The
required additional site-specific parameters that a user must input for Tier 2 are:
Geographic location of the WMU;
Footprint area of the WMU, and
Depth of the WMU (LF or SI)
If sufficient site-specific data is available, the user may also provide the following
optional Tier 2 site-specific characteristics:
Distance to the nearest surface waterbody (SI)
Depth of the base of the WMU below ground surface (LF, SI, and WP)
Operational life of the WMU (SI, WP and LAU)
Sludge thickness (SI)
Waste type (WP)
Leakage (infiltration) rate from the WMU
Distance to the nearest down-gradient well
Unsaturated zone soil type
Subsurface environment type, and/or individual of values of:
Depth from ground surface to the water table
Saturated thickness of the upper aquifer
Hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone
Regional hydraulic gradient
Ground water pH
Constituent fate parameters:
Sorption coefficient (kd)
(Bio-) degradation rate
Constituent-specific RGC values and corresponding exposure durations
As in Tier 1, liner recommendations and LCTVs are based not only on toxicity
and DAFs, but also incorporate other criteria to cap the model-calculated values. IWEM
caps leachate concentrations from an industrial solid WMU at a level no higher than 1000
mg/L for any single constituent. The 39 constituents covered by the TC Rule are capped
at their TC levels because concentrations above those levels mean that the waste is
classified as hazardous waste. The final liner recommendations and LCTVs
2-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 2.0
accommodate both the parent constituent as well as any toxic daughter products. For
instance, if a parent waste constituent rapidly hydrolyzes into a persistent daughter
product, the ground-water exposure caused by the parent itself may be minimal (for
example, it has already degraded before it reaches the ground-water well), but the final
liner recommendation and LCTV generated by IWEM would be based on the exposure
caused by the daughter product.
2-7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
3.0 What Is The EPACMTP Model?
EPACMTP is a subsurface fate
and transport model used by EPA to
evaluate migration of waste
constituents through the ground-water
pathway from land disposal units to
wells and establish protective levels in
waste.
Figure 3.1 depicts a cross-
sectional view of the subsurface
system simulated by EPACMTP.
EPACMTP treats the subsurface
aquifer system as a composite domain,
consisting of an unsaturated (vadose)
zone and an underlying saturated
zone. The two zones are separated by
the water table. EPACMTP simulates
one-dimensional (1-D), vertically
downward flow and transport of
constituents in the unsaturated zone
beneath a waste disposal unit as well
as ground-water flow and three-
dimensional (3-D) constituent transport in the underlying saturated zone. The
unsaturated zone and saturated zone modules are computationally linked through
continuity of flow and constituent concentration across the water table directly
underneath the WMU. The model accounts for the following processes affecting
constituent fate and transport: advection, hydrodynamic dispersion and molecular
diffusion; linear or nonlinear equilibrium sorption; first-order decay and zero-order
production reactions (to account for transformation breakdown products); and dilution
from recharge in the saturated zone.
The primary input to the model is the rate of constituent release (leaching) from a
WMU along with WMU design and site hydrogeological characteristics. The output
from EPACMTP is a prediction of the constituent concentration arriving at a
downgradient well. This can be either a steady-state concentration value, corresponding
to a continuous source scenario, or a time-dependent concentration, corresponding to a
finite source scenario. In the latter case, the model can calculate the peak concentration
arriving at the well or a time-averaged concentration corresponding to a specified
exposure duration (for example a 30-year average exposure time).
EPACMTP consists of four major components:
A source module that simulates the rate and
concentration of leachate exiting from
beneath a WMU and entering the unsaturated
zone;
An unsaturated zone module which simulates
1-D vertical flow of water and dissolved
constituent transport in the unsaturated zone;
A saturated zone model which simulates
ground-water flow and dissolved constituent
transport in the saturated zone; and
A Monte Carlo module for randomly
selecting input values to account for the effect
of variations in model parameters on
predicted ground-water well concentrations,
and determining the probability distribution
of predicted ground-water concentrations.
5-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
LEACHATE CONCENTRATION
-WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT
UNSATURATED
ZONE
SATURATED
ZONE LEACHATE PLUMI
Figure 3.1 Conceptual Cross-Section View of the Subsurface System Simulated by
EPACMTP.
The relationship between the constituent concentration leaching from a LF WMU
and the resulting ground-water exposure at a well located down-gradient from the WMU
is depicted in Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2a shows how the leachate concentration emanating
from the LF unit gradually diminishes over time as a result of depletion of the waste mass
remaining in the unit. As seen in Figure 3.2b, the constituent does not arrive at the at the
well until some time after the leaching begins, but eventually the ground-water
concentration will reach a peak value, and then begin to diminish because the leaching
from the waste unit occurs only over a finite period of time. This curve is also called the
breakthrough curve. The maximum constituent concentration at the well will generally
be lower than the original leachate concentration as a result of various dilution and
attenuation processes which occur during the transport through the unsaturated and
saturated zones. EPACMTP has the capability to calculate the maximum average
ground-water concentration over a specified time period, as depicted by the horizontal
dashed line in Figure 3.2b.
The following sections describe the four main components, or modules, of
EPACMTP and the role of each in simulating constituent fate and transport.
3-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
o
z;
TO
8
o
o
o
ra
o
ra
Initial Leachate Concentration,
Time *
(a) Leachate Concentration Versus Time
O)
o
0
o
o
o
1
Peak
Concentration
. Time-averaged well concentration,
Time
Exposure
Averaging Period
(b) Groundwater Well Concentration Versus Time
Figure 3.2 Conceptual Relationship Between Leachate
Concentration (a) and Ground-Water Exposure
Concentration (b).
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
3.1 WMU Source Module
This section describes how EPACMTP models the release of constituents from a
WMU. Section 3.1.1 provides a general overview of the EPACMTP source module;
Section 3.1.2 presents a discussion of how EPACMTP handles infiltration from SI units.
3.1.1 How EPACMTP Determines Releases From a Source
The purposes of the WMU source module in EPACMTP is to provide a leachate
flux and concentration to the unsaturated zone. The source module is a function of both
the design and operational characteristics of the WMU and the waste stream
characteristics (quantity and concentrations) and is defined in terms of four primary
parameters:
1) Area of the waste unit;
2) Leachate flux rate emanating from the waste unit (infiltration rate);
3) Constituent-specific leachate concentration; and
4) Leaching duration.
Based on these parameters, EPACMTP generates a rate of leaching and the
constituent concentration in the leachate as a function of time from the bottom of the
WMU.
Mathematically, EPACMTP regards the source as a rectangular planar area
located between the bottom of the well and the top of the unsaturated zone column,
through which leachate passes. The WMU source module determines the magnitude of
the rate of water infiltration and constituent concentration crossing this plane. The model
does not attempt to account explicitly for the multitude of physical and biochemical
processes inside the waste unit that may control the release of waste constituents to the
subsurface. Instead, the net result of these processes are used as inputs to the model. For
instance, in developing the IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations for LFs, WPs, and
LAUs, we used the Hydrologic Evaluation of LF Performance (HELP) model (Schroeder
et al, 1994) to determine infiltration rates for unlined and single lined units outside of
EPACMTP, and used these infiltration rates as inputs to EPACMTP. Likewise, the
model does not explicitly account for the complex physical, biological, and geochemical
processes that may influence leachate concentration. These processes are typically
estimated outside the EPACMTP model using geochemical modeling software,
equilibrium partitioning models, or analytical procedures such as the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure
(SPLP) test; the resulting leachate concentration is then used as an EPACMTP input.
3-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
EPACMTP models the leaching process in one of two ways: 1) as a depleting
source; or 2) as a pulse source. In the depleting source scenario, the WMU is considered
permanent and leaching continues until all waste that is originally present has been
depleted. In the pulse source scenario, leaching occurs at a constant leachate
concentration for a fixed period of time, after which leaching stops3. EPACMTP uses the
pulse source scenario to model temporary WMUs; usually the leaching period represents
the operational life of the unit. Under this scenario, we assume clean closure conditions
and the leaching stops when the unit is closed.
Figure 3.3 graphically presents the leachate concentration under the depleting
source scenario and the pulse source scenario. In the depleting source scenario, the
leachate concentration gradually decreases over time. The user must provide a value for
the initial leachate concentration (for example, a measured value from a leaching test)
and EPACMTP will calculate the rate of depletion as a function of the infiltration rate
through the unit. The EPACMTP Technical Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a)
provides a detailed discussion of the depleting source scenario. In the pulse source
scenario, the user must provide the value of the leachate concentration (for example, a
measured value from a leaching test), and the duration of the leaching period. Based on
these values, EPACMTP will calculate the leachate pulse.
O)
c
0
1
0
0
Q
S
0
1
_l
Initial Leachate Concentration
^^^
^^ . Pulse Source
*^^ £_
s
v s. Depleting Source
^""-e
"- «,
- ^ _ __
~" ~-
Time » 1
Figure 3.3 Leachate Concentration Versus Time
for Pulse Source and Depleting Source
Conditions.
If the leaching period is set to a very large value, EPACMTP will simulate continuous source
conditions.
5-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
3.1.2 How EPACMTP Determines Infiltration Rate for Surface Impoundments
Because the infiltration rate from Sis is controlled primarily by the unit's
engineering and operational characteristics rather than external climate factors, the
EPACMTP source module includes the capability to calculate SI infiltration rates as a
function of impoundment depth and other SI parameters. In particular, the SI module
calculates the infiltration rate through a zone of reduced permeability materials (which
may or may not included engineered liners) at the base of the impoundment. The various
reduced permeability layers represented in the SI infiltration module are depicted
graphically in Figure 3.4.
Ground
Surface
Elevation
Ground '
Surface
Elevation
Unaffected Native Material
,, Infillration
~ Water
Table
Figure 3.4 Surface Impoundment Infiltration Module.
EPACMTP assumes that while the impoundment is in operation, a layer of fine-
grained sediment ('sludge') naturally accumulates at the bottom of the impoundment as
the result of the settling of suspended solids in the waste liquid. The upper half of this
layer consists of unconsolidated material; the lower half is consolidated (compacted) due
to the weight of the sediment above it. EPACMTP calculates the effective hydraulic
conductivity of the consolidated sediment layer as a function of its porosity, using an
empirical relationship based on work of Lambe and Whitman (1969) which results in a
calculated hydraulic conductivity on the order of 1 x 10"7 to 6x 10"7 cm/s. The module also
takes into account the hydraulic properties of a clay liner (if present) as well as the
properties of the native soil underlying the impoundment. If no liner is present,
EPACMTP assumes that over time, the upper soil layer becomes 'clogged' due to
deposition of solids from the impoundment. The thickness of this clogged layer is always
assigned a value of 0.5 meters, and the hydraulic conductivity of this clogged layer is
assigned a value of 10% of the hydraulic conductivity of the native soil material.
3-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
If a clay liner is present, the liner replaces the 'clogged native material' layer that
is depicted in Figure 3.4. If EPACMTP is used to model a lined SI, the thickness and
hydraulic conductivity of the clay liner are model inputs. The EPACMTP SI module
calculates the steady state infiltration rate through the multi-layer system of sediment-
clogged native soil/clay liner-native soil by applying the 1-D Richards equation (Jury et
al., 1991) with a constant head boundary condition, given by the SI ponding depth.
EPACMTP uses the Richards equation to accommodate partially saturated conditions
which may exist in the multi-layer system. For a detailed description of the solution of
the Richards equation for the system, see the EPACMTP Technical Background
Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a).
3.2 EPACMTP Unsaturated Zone Module
EPACMTP models water flow and solute transport in the unsaturated zone
between the base of the WMU and the water table as a 1-D, vertically downward process.
As shown in Figure 3.1, constituents migrate downward from the WMU through the
unsaturated zone to the water table. EPACMTP assumes the flow rate is steady-state,
that is, it does not change in time. The soil underneath the WMU is assumed to be
uniform with hydraulic properties described by the Mualem-Van Genuchten model (Jury
et al., 1991). The flow rate is determined by the long-term average infiltration rate
through the WMU. Inputs to the unsaturated zone module are the rate of water and
constituent leaching from the disposal facility, as well as soil hydraulic properties.
EPACMTP solves the governing 1-D steady-state Richards flow equation (Jury et al.,
1991) using a semi-numerical technique described in the EPACMTP Technical
Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a).
Constituent transport in the unsaturated zone is assumed to occur by advection
and dispersion4. The unsaturated zone is assumed to be initially constituent-free and
constituents migrate vertically downward from the WMU. EPACMTP can simulate both
steady-state and transient transport in the unsaturated zone with single-species or
multiple-species chain decay reactions. The transport module can also simulate the
effects of both linear and nonlinear sorption reactions. When decay reactions involve the
formation of daughter products, EPACMTP has the capability to perform a multi-species
transport simulation of a decay chain consisting of up to seven members. Mathematically
the transport process is represented by the advection-dispersion equation:
4 In the case of metals which are subject to nonlinear sorption, EPACMTP uses a method-of-
characteristics solution method that does not include dispersion. In this case, transport is dominated by the
nonlinear sorption behavior and dispersion effects are minor.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3. 0
JL D\ - V
dz { dz) dz
QR
dt
Q
(3.1)
here
z
t
c
D
V
R
A
0
Q
Soil depth coordinate (L),
Time (T),
Constituent concentration (M/L3),
Dispersion coefficient, (L2/T),
Darcy velocity (L/T),
Retardation factor (dimensionless),
First-order decay constant (1/T),
Volumetric water content (dimensionless), and
Zero-order production term to account for transformation of parent
constituents (M/(L3-T)).
EPACMTP uses units of meters for L(ength), years for T(ime), and kilograms for
M(ass). Consistent with common practice, EPACMTP uses units of mg/L for constituent
concentration. Numerically, this is the same as kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3).
The dispersion coefficient in the above transport equation accounts for the effects
of hydrodynamic dispersion and molecular diffusion and is defined as:
where
D
a
D
V
D
= Dispersion coefficient (meter squared per year [m2/yr])
= Dispersivity (m)
= Molecular diffusion coefficient (m2/yr)
= Darcy velocity (m/yr)
(3.2)
The effective molecular diffusion coefficient is calculated using the Millington-
Quirk relationship (Jury et al., 1991) as:
D
= D010/3/02
(3.3)
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
where
Dm = Effective molecular diffusion coefficient (m2/yr)
Dw = Free-water diffusion coefficient (m2/yr)
0 = Volumetric water content (dimensionless)
The retardation factor R in the transport equation accounts for the effects of
equilibrium sorption of dissolved constituents onto the solid phase as:
R = l+(pbkd)/0 (3.4)
where
R = Retardation factor (dimensionless)
pb = Bulk density (kg/L)
kd = Constituent-specific soil-water partition coefficient (L/kg)
6 = Volumetric water content (dimensionless)
EPACMTP's unsaturated zone module includes options for both linear and
nonlinear sorption isotherms. In the first case, the partition coefficient, kd is independent
of the constituent concentration. In the second case, the value of the partition coefficient
is a function of concentration. For linear sorption isotherms the partition coefficient can
be entered as a single EPACMTP parameter, or the model can calculate its value from the
fraction organic carbon in the soil and a constituent-specific organic carbon partition
coefficient as:
kd = foe X Koc (3.5)
where:
kd = Partition coefficient (L3/kg)
foc = Fraction organic carbon in the soil (dimensionless)
Koc = Constituent-specific organic carbon partition coefficient (L/kg)
When modeling constituents with non-linear sorption isotherms, the partition
coefficient data are read in by EPACMTP as a table of paired concentration-kd values. In
principle, the user can employ a variety of methods for generating the concentration-kd
values including using measured data. In practice, EPACMTP applications typically use
data generated using the MINTEQA2 geochemical speciation model (see Section
4.2.4.3.2).
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
The parameter A in the transport equation accounts for first-order transformation
processes. Finally, the term Q in the equation is a source term that represents the
production of a constituent species due to the transformation of parent constituents. This
term is zero for parent constituents that are at the beginning of a decay chain, but non-
zero for any transformation daughter products.
The output from the unsaturated zone transport solution is a time history
(breakthrough curve) of the constituent concentration arriving at the water table, which
provides the input for the saturated zone transport simulation.
3.3 Saturated Zone Module
The saturated zone module of EPACMTP is designed to simulate flow and
transport in an unconfined aquifer with constant saturated thickness (see Figure 3.1). The
model simulates regional flow in a horizontal direction with recharge and infiltration
from the overlying unsaturated zone and WMU entering at the water table. The lower
boundary of the aquifer is assumed to be impermeable.
EPACMTP assumes that flow in the saturated zone is steady-state. In other
words, EPACMTP models long-term average flow conditions. EPACMTP accounts for
different recharge rates beneath and outside the WMU area. Ground-water mounding
beneath the source is represented in the flow system by increased head values at the top
of the aquifer. It is important to realize that while EPACMTP calculates the degree of
ground-water mounding that may occur underneath a WMU due to high infiltration rates,
and will restrict the allowable infiltration rate to prevent physically unrealistic input
parameter combinations (see Section 4.2.6), the actual saturated flow and transport
modules in EPACMTP are based on the assumption of a constant saturated thickness, i.e.
fixed water table position, and the only direct effect of ground-water mounding is to
increase simulated ground-water velocities.
EPACMTP incorporates a number of different mathematical solutions for
saturated zone flow and transport. The EPACMTP Technical Background Document
(U.S. EPA, 2002a) discusses these in detail. Because of the high premium on
computational efficiency in the IWEM Tier 2 Monte Carlo tool, we used a pseudo-3-D
modeling approach in IWEM. The pseudo-3-D module simulates ground-water flow
using a 1-D steady-state solution for predicting hydraulic head and Darcy velocities. The
flow solution is formulated based on the Dupuit-Forchheimer's assumption of hydrostatic
pressure distribution (de Marsily, 1986). The hydraulic head is also horizontally
averaged in the cross-gradient direction.
EPACMTP models transport of dissolved constituents in the saturated zone using
the advection-dispersion equation. The aquifer is assumed to be initially constituent-free,
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
and constituents enter the saturated zone only from the unsaturated zone directly beneath
the WMU. In the pseudo-3-D option of EPACMTP used for IWEM, it is assumed that
advection is predominantly along the longitudinal direction (direction along the ambient
ground-water gradient), while dispersion occurs in three dimensions.
The pseudo-3-D transport option is based on the concept that when ground-water
flow is dominantly in one direction, the movement of a dissolved constituent plume can
be approximated as the product of three terms: The first term describes the movement by
advection and dispersion along the direction of ground-water flow (the x-direction); the
second and third terms account for the effect of dispersion in the horizontal transverse
(y-) direction, and the vertical (z-) direction, respectively. The effects of constituent
sorption and transformation are incorporated into the first term of the mathematical
solution. The second (y-direction) and third (z-direction) terms in the solution can be
regarded as adjustment factors that account for the reduction in concentration along the
x-direction, due to dispersion into the y- and z-directions. The y- and z- solution terms
are given by straight-forward error-functions that can be computed very quickly. From a
computational point, the pseudo-3-D solution option therefore requires about the same
effort as a 1-D solution.
The governing equation for transport in the saturated zone can be written as:
where
i,j = Indices to represent different spatial directions; i,j = 1, 2, or 3
x; = Spatial coordinate (L)
t = Time (T)
c = Constituent concentration (M/L3)
Dy = Dispersion coefficient (L2/T),
Vx = Ground-water flow rate in the x-direction (L/T)
A = First-order transformation coefficient (1/T)
R = Retardation coefficient (dimensionless)
cj) = Porosity (dimensionless)
Q = Zero-order production term to account for transformation of parent
constituents (M/L3-T)
EPACMTP uses units of meters for L(ength), years for T(ime), and kilograms for
M(ass). Consistent with common practice, EPACMTP uses units mg/L for constituent
concentration, which numerically is the same as kg/m3.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
The transport processes modeled in the saturated zone module of EPACMTP are
analogous to those in the unsaturated zone, but they are extended to three dimensions,
instead of just one. The spatial coordinate, x;, in equation 3.6 represents the three
dimensions. The coordinate xt (or just x), represents the horizontal coordinate along the
direction of ground-water flow. The coordinate x2 (or y) represents the horizontal
coordinate perpendicular to the flow direction; and the coordinate x3 (or z) represents the
vertical direction. The dispersion coefficient D;j (where i and j can be 1, 2, or 3) is
subscripted to indicate that this coefficient has components in all three directions.
Conversely, the ground-water flow term, Vx, has only a single subscript to indicate the
assumption in the pseudo-3-D option of EPACMTP, that ground-water flow is a 1-D
process. The other terms in equation 3.6 are defined in the same way as in equation 3.1,
except that the porosity, c|), replaces the volumetric water content, Q. By definition, under
fully saturated conditions, the water content of a porous medium is equal to its porosity,
therefore using c|) instead of Q in equation 3.6 is just another way of stating that the
system is water-saturated.
In many aquifers, only a portion of the total pore space is active in the transport
process, so that the effective porosity (cj)e) is less than the total porosity (<$>). EPACMTP
uses the effective porosity in the calculation of ground-water seepage velocity, i.e.:
- (37)
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
where
R = Retardation coefficient (dimensionless)
pb = Saturated zone bulk density (kg/L)
kd = Constituent-specific partition coefficient (L/kg)
cj) = Porosity (dimensionless)
In order to determine the value of c|)e, EPACMTP uses a statistical distribution of
the ratio fyjfy, which is presented in Section 4.2.3.3.
The dispersion coefficient (Dy) in equation 3.6 accounts for hydrodynamic
dispersion and molecular diffusion, and uses separate longitudinal, horizontal transverse
and vertical dispersivities as described by Burnett and Frind (1987). The effect of
molecular diffusion is incorporated using the Millington-Quirk equation, as described in
the preceding section. Likewise, the retardation and transformation terms are modeled in
the same way in the saturated zone module of EPACMTP as they are in the unsaturated
zone module.
A key distinction between the way the saturated zone module handles constituent
fate and transport, as compared to the unsaturated zone module, is the approach for
constituents with nonlinear sorption isotherms. The saturated zone module only
simulates linearized isotherms. For constituents with nonlinear sorption isotherms, the
unsaturated zone module simulates partitioning by using concentration-dependent
partitioning coefficient; the saturated zone module uses a linearized isotherm, based upon
the maximum constituent concentration at the water table (see EPACMTP Technical
Background Document; U.S. EPA, 2002a). The reason is that upon dilution of the
leachate in the ambient ground-water as the leachate enters the saturated zone,
concentrations will be reduced to a range in which constituent isotherms generally are
linear.
3.4 Conducting Probabilistic Analyses Using EPACMTP
The final component of EPACMTP is a Monte Carlo module which allows the
model to perform probabilistic analyses of constituent fate and transport. Monte Carlo
simulation is a statistical technique by which a quantity is calculated repeatedly, using
randomly selected parameter values for each calculation. The results approximate the full
range of possible outcomes, and the likelihood of each. The Monte Carlo module in
EPACMTP makes it possible to incorporate variability into the subsurface pathway
modeling analysis, and to quantify the impact of parameter variability on well
concentrations. In particular, we use Monte Carlo simulation to determine the likelihood,
or probability, that the concentration of a constituent at a well, and hence exposure and
risk, will be either above or below a certain value.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
In a Monte Carlo simulation the values of the various source-specific, chemical-
specific, unsaturated zone-specific and saturated zone-specific model parameters are
represented as probability distributions, reflecting both the range of variation that may be
encountered at different waste sites, as well as our uncertainty about the specific
conditions at each site. Strictly speaking Monte Carlo analysis can accommodate only
parameter variability, not uncertainty. Variability describes parameters whose values are
not constant, but which we can
measure and characterize with relative
precision in terms of a frequency
distribution. An example is annual
rainfall in different parts of the
country. Uncertainty pertains to
parameters whose values we know
only approximately, such as the
hydraulic conductivity of an aquifer.
In practice, we use probability
distributions to describe both
variability and uncertainty, and for the
purpose of the
EPACMTP Monte Carlo module, we
treat them as more or less equivalent.
The Monte Carlo module in
EPACMTP is described in detail in the
EPACMTP Technical Background
Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a), and the
EPACMTP Parameters/Data
Background Document (U.S. EPA,
2002b). A general overview of the
methodology is presented in the
following paragraphs. The specific
methodology we used to determine
LCTVs for IWEM is presented in
Section 6 of this document.
Figure 3.5 presents a graphical
illustration of the Monte Carlo
simulation process. The Monte Carlo
method requires that for each input
parameter, except constant parameters,
a probability distribution be provided
(Figure 3.5a). The method involves
EPACMTP Monte Carlo Bootstrap
Analysis
In a Monte Carlo analysis the output
percentile values depend on the number of
realizations. For instance, if we perform a Monte
Carlo analysis consisting of 10 realizations of
randomly selected model input values, the 90th
percentile of the model output can be determined by
ordering the output values from low to high and then
picking the 9th highest value. This 90th percentile
value is likely to be different if we perform another
Monte Carlo simulation of 10 realizations with
randomly selected inputs, and different still if we
simulate 1,000 realizations to calculate the 90th
percentile output value.
Bootstrap analysis is a technique of
replicated resampling of a large data set for
estimating standard errors, biases, confidence
intervals, or other measures of statistical accuracy. It
can produce accuracy estimates in almost any
situation without requiring subjective statistical
assumptions about the original distribution.
As part of the background for EPA's proposed 1995
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR) we
conducted a bootstrap analysis for the EPACMTP
model to evaluate how Monte Carlo convergence
improves with increasing numbers of realizations.
The analysis was based on a continuous source, LF
disposal scenario in which the 90th percentile DAF
was 10. The bootstrap analysis results suggested
that, with 10,000 realizations, the expected value of
the 90th percentile DAF was 10 with a 95 percent
confidence interval of 10 ± 0.7. Decreasing the
number of realizations to 5,000 increased the
confidence interval to 10 ± 1.0.
3-14
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
the repeated generation of random values of the input variables (drawn from the known
distribution and within the range of any imposed bounds). The EPACMTP model
(Figure 3.5b) is executed for each set of randomly generated model parameters and the
corresponding ground-water well exposure concentration is calculated and stored. Each
set of input values and corresponding well concentration is termed a realization. In using
a Monte Carlo modeling approach, a higher number of realizations usually leads to a
more stable and more accurate result. However, it is generally not possible to determine
beforehand how many realizations are needed to achieve a specified degree of
convergence (that is, stability) because the value can be highly dependent on parameter
distributions. EPA has used an empirical technique called bootstrap analysis to
determine the appropriate number of realizations for EPACMTP Monte Carlo analyses
(see side bar box).
At the conclusion of the Monte Carlo simulation, the realizations are statistically
analyzed to yield a cumulative (probability) density function (CDF) of the ground-water
exposure concentration (Figure 3.5c). The construction of the CDF simply involves
sorting the ground-water well concentrations calculated in each of the individual Monte
Carlo realizations from low to high. In the example used to construct Figure 3.5, we
assumed an EPACMTP input leachate concentration value of 10 mg/L and performed a
Monte Carlo simulation of 10,000 realizations. The well concentration values simulated
in the EPACMTP Monte Carlo process range from very low values to values that
approach the leachate concentration. By examining how many of the 10,000 Monte
Carlo realizations resulted in a high value of the predicted ground-water concentration, it
is possible to assign a probability to these high-end events, or conversely determine what
is the expected ground-water concentration corresponding to a specific probability of
occurrence.
3-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 3.0
Distribution of values Distribution of values Distribution of values Distribution of values
fQf Input Parameter "XT tor Input Parameter "X.y lor Input Paiameter "X.i" lor Inpul Paramoter "X.,1
(A)
100%
(C)
ia
o
V \
EPACMTP
Contaminant Fate and
Transport Equations
10 1O ID 10' 10 1 10
Groundwater Well Concentration
Input parameter vafues
randomly selected for
7,594rh realization of
EPACMTP
Figure 3.5 Graphical Representation of the EPACMTP Monte Carlo
Process.
3.5 EPACMTP Assumptions and Limitations
EPA designed the EPACMTP fate and transport model to be used for regulatory
assessments in a probabilistic framework. The simulation algorithms that are
incorporated into the model are intended to meet the following requirements:
Account for the primary physical and chemical processes that affect
constituent fate and transport in the unsaturated and saturated zone;
Be able to be used with relatively little site input data; and
Be computationally efficient for Monte Carlo analyses.
This section discusses the primary assumptions and limitations of EPACMTP that
EPA made in developing the model to balance these competing requirements. EPACMTP
3-16
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
may not be suitable for all sites, and the user should understand the capabilities and
limitations of the model to ensure it is used appropriately.
Source Module
The EPACMTP source module provides a relatively simple representation of
different types of WMU's. WMU's are represented in terms of a source area, and a
defined rate and duration of leaching. EPACMTP only accounts for the release of
leachate through the base of the WMU, and assumes that the only mechanism of
constituent release is through dissolution of waste constituents in the water that
percolates through the WMU. In the case of Sis, EPACMTP assumes that the leachate
concentration is the same as the constituent concentration in the waste water in the SI.
EPACMTP does not account for the presence of non-aqueous free-phase liquids, such as
an oily phase that might provide an additional release mechanism into the subsurface.
EPACMTP does not account for releases from the WMU via other environmental
pathways, such volatilization or surface run-off. EPACMTP assumes that the rate of
infiltration through the WMU is constant, representing long-term average conditions.
EPACMTP does not account for fluctuations in rainfall rate, or degradation of liner
systems that may cause the rate of infiltration and release of leachate to vary over time.
Unsatumted Zone and Saturated Zone Modules
Uniform Soil and Aquifer Assumption
EPACMTP simulates the unsaturated zone and saturated zone as separate
domains that are connected at the water table. Both the unsaturated zone and saturated
zone are assumed to be uniform porous media. EPACMTP does not explicitly account
for the presence of macro-pores, fractures, solution features, faults or other
heterogeneities in the soil or aquifer that may provide pathways for rapid movement of
constituents. A certain amount of heterogeneity always exists at actual sites and it is not
uncommon in ground-water modeling to use average parameter values. This means that
parameters such as hydraulic conductivity and dispersivity represent effective site-wide
average values. However, EPACMTP may not be appropriate for sites overlying
fractured or very heterogeneous aquifers.
3-17
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
Steady-State Flow Assumption
Flow in the unsaturated zone and saturated zone is assumed to be driven by long-
term average infiltration and recharge; EPACMTP treats flow in the unsaturated zone as
steady state and does not account for fluctuations in the infiltration or recharge rate,
either in time or areally. The use of EPACMTP may not be appropriate at sites with
large seasonal fluctuations in rainfall conditions, or at sites where the recharge rate varies
locally. Examples of the latter include the presence of surface water bodies such as rivers
and lakes or ponds and man-made recharge sources near the WMU.
EPACMTP models ground-water flow based on the assumption that the
contribution of recharge and infiltration from the unsaturated zone are small relative to
the regional ground-water flow, and that the saturated aquifer thickness is large relative
to the head difference that establishes the regional gradient. The implication is that the
saturated zone can be modeled as having a uniform thickness, with mounding underneath
the WMU represented by an increased head distribution along the water table. The
mathematical ground-water flow solutions incorporated in EPACMTP are based on
confined aquifer conditions. While EPACMTP accounts for ground-water mounding
underneath a WMU, the saturated zone module of EPACMTP only accounts for the
effect of mounding on ground-water flow velocities; it does not simulate the actual
physical increase in the thickness of the saturated zone. The assumption of constant and
uniform saturated zone thickness means that EPACMTP may not be suitable at sites with
a non-uniform thickness of the water-bearing zone, or sites with significant seasonal
variations in water table elevation. EPACMTP is designed for relatively simple ground-
water flow systems in which flow is dominated by a regional gradient. EPACMTP does
not account for the presence of ground-water sources or sinks such as pumping or
injection wells. The presence of such man-made or natural features may cause a more
complicated flow field than EPACMTP can handle. EPACMTP does not account for
free-phase flow conditions of an oily or non-aqueous phase liquid.
Constituent Fate and Transport Assumptions
The unsaturated zone and saturated zone modules of EPACMTP account for
constituent fate and transport by advection, hydrodynamic dispersion, molecular
diffusion, sorption and first-order transformation. Advection refers to transport along
with ground-water flow. Hydrodynamic dispersion and molecular diffusion both act as
mixing processes. Hydrodynamic dispersion is caused by local variations in ground-
water flow rate and is usually a significant plume-spreading mechanism. Molecular
diffusion, on the other hand, is usually a very minor mechanism, except when ground-
water flow rates are very low. EPACMTP does not account for matrix-diffusion
processes, which may occur when the aquifer formation is comprised of zones with large
contrast in permeability. In these situations, transport occurs primarily in the more
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
permeable zones, but constituents can move into and out of the low permeability zones
by diffusion.
Leachate constituents can be subject to complex geochemical interactions in soil
and ground water. EPACMTP treats these interactions as equilibrium sorption processes.
The equilibrium assumption means that the sorption process occurs instantaneously, or at
least very quickly relative to the time-scale of constituent transport. Although sorption,
or the attachment of leachate constituents to solid soil or aquifer particles, may result
from multiple chemical processes, EPACMTP lumps these processes together into an
effective soil-water partition coefficient.
For organic constituents, EPACMTP assumes that the partition coefficient is
constant, and equal to the product of the mass fraction of organic carbon in the soil or
aquifer, and a constituent-specific organic carbon partition coefficient. In the case of
metals, EPACMTP allows the partition coefficient to vary as a function of a number of
primary geochemical parameters, including pH, leachate organic matter, soil organic
matter, and the fraction of iron-oxide in the soil or aquifer.
For metals, EPACMTP uses a set of effective sorption isotherms which were
developed by EPA by running the MINTEQA2 geochemical speciation model for each
metal and each combination of geochemical parameters. In modeling metals transport in
the unsaturated zone, EPACMTP uses the complete, nonlinear sorption isotherms. In
modeling metals transport in the saturated zone, EPACMTP uses linearized MINTEQA2
isotherms, based on the assumption that after dilution of the leachate plume in ground-
water, concentration values of metals will typically be in a range where the isotherm is
approximately linear. This assumption may not be valid when metals concentrations in
the leachate are high. Although EPACMTP is able to account for the effect of the
geochemical environment at a site on the mobility of metals, the model assumes that the
geochemical environment at a site is constant and not affected by the presence of the
leachate plume. In reality, the presence of a leachate plume may alter the ambient
geochemical environment.
EPACMTP does not account for colloidal transport or other forms of facilitated
transport. For metals and other constituents that tend to strongly sorb to soil particles,
and which EPACMTP will simulate as relatively immobile, movement as colloidal
particles can be a significant transport mechanism. It is possible to approximate the
effect of these transport processes by using a lower value of the partition coefficient as a
user-input. In the IWEM application of EPACMTP, the model uses the same partition
coefficient for the unsaturated and saturated zone if this parameter is provided as a user-
input in Tier 2 evaluations.
3-19
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 3.0
EPACMTP accounts for biological and chemical transformation processes as
first-order degradation reactions. That is, it assumes that the transformation process can
be described in terms of a constituent-specific half-life. EPACMTP allows the
degradation rate to have different values in the unsaturated zone and the saturated zone,
but the model assumes that the value is uniform throughout the unsaturated zone and
uniform throughout the saturated zone for each constituent. EPA's ground-water
modeling database includes constituent-specific hydrolysis rate coefficients for
constituents that are subject to hydrolysis transformation reactions; for these constituents,
EPACMTP simulates transformation reactions subject to site-specific values of pH and
soil and ground-water temperature, but other types of transformation processes are not
explicitly simulated in EPACMTP.
For many organic constituents, biodegradation can be an important fate
mechanism, but EPACMTP has only limited ability to account for this process. The user
must provide an appropriate value for the effective first-order degradation rate. In the
IWEM application of EPACMTP, the model uses the same degradation rate coefficient
for the unsaturated and saturated zone if this parameter is provided as a user-input in Tier
2 evaluations. In an actual leachate plume, biodegradation rates may be different in
different regions in the plume; for instance in portions of the plume that are anaerobic
some constituents may biodegrade more readily, while other constituents will biodegrade
only in the aerobic fringe of the plume. EPACMTP does not account for these or other
processes that may cause a constituent's rate of transformation to vary in space and time.
Monte Carlo Module
The Monte Carlo module of EPACMTP allows you to take into account the effect
of parameter variability on predicted ground-water concentrations. The resulting
probability distribution of outcomes is valid only to the extent that EPACMTP can
accurately simulate actual constituent fate and transport processes; it does not account for
the uncertainty that results from processes that are not included in EPACMTP, or are
modeled in EPACMTP in a simplified manner. For instance, the Monte Carlo modeling
process can account for the site-to-site variability in the average hydraulic conductivity in
the aquifer, but it does not account for the uncertainty that results from treating each site
as uniform and ignoring aquifer heterogeneity.
3-20
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.0 How EPA Developed the Tier 1 and Tier 2 IWEM
Evaluations
This chapter describes how EPA developed the Tier 1 and Tier 2 IWEM
evaluations using EPACMTP. Section 4.1 provides an overview of the selected
EPACMTP modeling options and parameters to develop the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses.
Section 4.2 provides a detailed discussion of the input data for Tier 1 and Tier 2.
4.1 Overview
To develop the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we linked the EPACMTP model
described in the previous chapter to a series of databases that describe WMU
characteristics, hydrogeological characteristics, and constituent fate and transport data.
We used EPACMTP in a Monte Carlo mode to obtain a probability distribution of model
outcomes, that is, predicted concentration levels at a ground-water well located
downgradient from a WMU.
In Tier 1, the Monte Carlo process reflects the nationwide variations in WMU and
site conditions that might affect the impact of leachate on ground water. In Tier 2, the
user is required to input a few site-specific parameters; the user may also set several more
parameters to site-specific values if these data are available. If site-specific data are not
available, and for the additional parameters which cannot be modified by the user, values
are drawn randomly from national or regional distributions. The underlying assumption
in Tier 2 is that if a site-specific parameter value is not available, the uncertainty in the
value of the parameter is captured by the nationwide range in values of that parameter.
The Tier 2 evaluation also has the capability to reduce the uncertainty in some of the
modeling parameters by using supporting site characterization data even if the actual
value of a parameter is not known. For instance, if the actual value of hydraulic
conductivity in the saturated zone is unknown, but information is available about the type
of subsurface environment at the site (for example, alluvial versus sedimentary rock), the
Tier 2 evaluation will use this information to reduce the uncertainty in the hydraulic
conductivity by selecting only hydraulic conductivity values in the Monte Carlo process
that are representative of alluvial aquifers. This methodology is discussed in detail in
Section 4.2.3.1.
In using a Monte Carlo modeling approach, a higher number of realizations
usually leads to a more stable and more accurate result. The desire to use the most
accurate result possible, however is balanced by the computational demands of running
Monte Carlo simulations with a large number of realizations. Based on the results of a
bootstrap analysis (see Section 3.4), we determined that performing 10,000 Monte Carlo
realizations would achieve the goals for the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analysis. The Tier 1 LCTV
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
tables which are presented in Appendix F and incorporated into the IWEM software, are
based on 10,000 Monte Carlo realizations. Likewise, in a Tier 2 analysis, the IWEM
software evaluation will execute 10,000 realizations of EPACMTP. We used the 90th
percentile of the CDF of predicted ground-water concentrations to determine LCTVs for
the Tier 1 analyses and to compare directly with RGCs in Tier 2 analyses.
For each realization, EPACMTP computes a maximum average constituent
exposure concentration at a well (see Section 3.0). We used the same averaging period
as the exposure period upon which the corresponding RGC is based. For instance, MCLs
are compared against the peak ground-water well concentration; HBNs based on
carcinogenic effects are compared against the maximum 30-year well concentration, and
non-cancer HBNs are compared against the maximum 7-year well concentration. For the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses, EPACMTP used a 10,000 year maximum time horizon to
calculate ground-water well concentrations. This means that EPACMTP determined the
maximum ground-water concentration occurring within a period of 10,000 years after
leaching begins. This does not mean that we ran all EPACMTP simulations out to
10,000 years; in most cases the leachate plume reaches the ground-water well much
sooner. However in certain cases (e.g., low infiltration rate, deep unsaturated zone,
strongly sorbing constituents) it is possible that EPACMTP would predict it takes more
than 10,000 years to reach the well. In these cases the concentration value returned by
the model is the concentration at 10,000 years (or more exact, the average concentration
up to the 10,000 year time horizon for the RGC of concern, for example, the average
concentration between years 9,970 -10,000 in the case of carcinogenic HBNs).
To enable the IWEM Tier 2 evaluation to perform the Monte Carlo analyses on
common desktop computer systems, we implemented EPACMTP using a
computationally efficient pseudo-3-D approximation for modeling saturated zone plume
transport (see Section 3.3 of the document). The resulting computer time requirements
for a Tier 2 evaluation, involving all three liner designs (no-liner, single liner, and
composite liner) is approximately 3 hours per waste constituent.4
4.1.1 EPACMTP Modeling Options and Parameters
In Tier 1, the only required IWEM inputs are the type of WMU to be evaluated,
the waste constituents present in the leachate, and the leachate concentration value for
each constituent. In Tier 2, there are a small number of additional required site-specific
user input parameters, as well as a number of optional site-specific user-input parameters.
The required additional site-specific Tier 2 parameters are:
This estimate is for a 500 MHz, Pentium-Ill or equivalent personal computer.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
WMU Area
WMU Depth (for LF and Sis)
WMU location (to select the appropriate climate parameters)
Optional site-specific Tier 2 inputs are:
Distance to the nearest surface waterbody (for Sis)
Depth of the base of the WMU below ground surface (LFs, WPs, and Sis)
Operational Life of the WMU (for Sis, WPs, and LAUs)
Sludge thickness (SI)
Waste type (WP)
Leakage (infiltration) rate from the WMU
Distance to the nearest down-gradient well
Unsaturated zone soil type
Subsurface environment type, and/or individual values of;
Depth from ground surface to the water table
Saturated thickness of the upper aquifer
Hydraulic conductivity in the saturated zone
Regional hydraulic gradient in the saturated zone
Ground water pH
Constituent-specific sorption coefficient (Kd)
Constituent-specific (bio-) degradation rate
Constituent-specific RGC and corresponding exposure duration
Table 4.1 summarizes the modeling options and parameters we used to developed
the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses. Parameters that are used differently in Tier 1 versus Tier
2 are flagged as such; usually this is the case for Tier 2 parameters that the user may
input as site-specific values.
IWEM parameters can be grouped into five categories: WMU infiltration and
recharge, well location, soil and hydrogeology, and constituent-specific. The required
site-specific parameters are underlined in Table 4.1. The third column in Table 4.1
indicates where you can find a detailed discussion of each parameter in this section. The
IWEM User's Guide provides additional guidance in selecting site-specific values for
these parameters.
4-3
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters
Modeling Element
Description or Value
Section
Reference
WMU Parameters
Waste Management
Scenario
WMU Location (Nearest
Climate Station)
Leachate concentration (mg/L)
Operational Life (Leaching
Duration) (yrs)
WMU Area (m2)
Depth of Waste in WMU (m)
WMU Base Elevation below
Ground Surface (m)
Distance to Nearest Surface
Water Body (m)
SI sediment layer thickness (m)
Waste type permeability
(cm/sec)
LF
SI
WP
LAU
Tier 1: Monte Carlo from nationwide distribution
Tier 2: Required site-specific user input
Tier 1: Required constituent-specific user input
Tier 2: Required constituent-specific user input
LF:
Calculated inside EPACMTP; leaching continues until all
waste depleted.
SI, WP&LAU:
Tier 1: SI = Distribution from SI survey
WP = 20 yrs
LAU = 40 yrs
Tier 2: Optional user input; defaults same as Tier 1
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution from industrial WMU
surveys;
Tier 2: Required site-specific user input
Used for LFs and Sis; not applicable in case of WP or LAU.
Equivalent to ponding depth for Sis.
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution from industrial WMU
surveys;
Tier 2: Required site-specific user input for LF and SI
Tier 1: Distribution for SI. For all other units set to 0.0 (unit
base at ground surface)
Tier 2: Optional user input; default = 0.0
Used to evaluate water table mounding for SI units
Tier 1: 360 m
Tier 2: Optional user input; default = 360 m
Thickness of accumulated sediment (sludge)layer in SI
Tier 1: 0.2 m
Tier 2: Optional user input; default = 0.2 m
Used for WPs only; not applicable to other WMUs
Tier 1: Nationwide, uniform distribution of three waste
types (low-medium-high permeability)
Tier 2: Optional user input; default same as Tier 1
4.2.1
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.1.3
4.2.2.2
4-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters (continued)
Modeling Element
Description or Value
Section
Reference
Infiltration and Recharge Parameters
No Liner Infiltration (m/yr)
LF:
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution derived using HELP model
based on survey of industrial landfill locations
Tier 2: Optional user input; default generated using HELP
model based on site location
SI:
Tier 1: Calculated by EPACMTP based on distribution of
SI ponding depths
Tier 2: Optional user input; default calculated by
EPACMTP based on site-specific ponding depth
WP:
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution derived using HELP model
based on survey of industrial waste pile locations
Tier 2: Optional user input; default generated using HELP
model based on site location
LAU:
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution derived using HELP model
based on survey of industrial LAU locations
Tier 2: Optional user input; default generated using HELP
model based on site location
4.2.2.2
4.2.2.2
4.2.2.2
4.2.2.2
Single Liner Infiltration (m/yr)
LF:
Tier 1:
Tier 2:
SI:
Tier 1:
Tier 2:
WP:
Tier 1:
Tier 2:
LAU:
Nationwide distribution derived using HELP model
with 3 ft. clay liner and survey of industrial landfill
locations
Optional user input; default generated using HELP
model based on site location and 3 ft. clay liner
Calculated by EPACMTP based on SI ponding
depth distribution and 3 ft clay liner
Optional user input; default calculated by
EPACMTP based on site-specific ponding depth
and 3 ft clay liner
Nationwide distribution derived using HELP model
with 3 ft. clay liner and survey of industrial waste
pile locations
Optional user input; default generated using HELP
model based on site location and 3 ft. clay liner
Not Applicable
4.2.2.3
4.2.2.3
4.2.2.3
4-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters (continued)
Modeling Element
Composite Liner Infiltration
(m/yr)
Recharge Rate (m/yr)
Description or Value
LF:
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution of reported leak detection
system flow rates for composite lined units
Tier 2: Optional user input; default same as Tier 1.
SI:
Tier 1: Calculated using Bonaparte (1989) equation for
geomembrane liner using nationwide distribution
of leak densities and unit-specific ponding depths;
Tier 2: Optional user input; default same as Tier 1
WP:
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution of reported leak detection
system flow rates for composite lined units;
Tier 2: Optional user input; default same as Tier 1
LAU: Not Applicable
All WMU types:
Tier 1: Monte Carlo based on nationwide distribution of
WMU locations and regional soil types
Tier 2: Monte Carlo based on distribution of soil types and
location-specific climate conditions
Section
Reference
4.2.2.4
4.2.2.4
4.2.2.4
4.2.2.5
Soil and Hydrogeologic Parameters
Subsurface environment
Depth to ground water (m)
Soil Hydraulic Parameters:
(Hydraulic conductivity;
saturated water content;
residual water content;
moisture retention curve
parameters)
Soil Temperature (°C)
Bulk density (kg/L)
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution of 13 major aquifer types
associated with the locations of WMUs.
Tier 2: Optional user input; default is unknown subsurface
environment
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution, correlated with subsurface
environment
Tier 2: Optional user input; default derived from
subsurface environment if known, otherwise
national average value (5.18 m)
Distribution of values corresponding to three major soil types
(sandy loam, silt loam, and silty clay loam). Probability of
occurrence of each soil type based on nationwide distribution
Assigned based on WMU location
Assigned based on selected soil type (sandy loam, silt loam,
or silty clay loam)
4.2.3.1
4.2.3.1
4.2.3.2
4.2.3.2
4.2.3.2
4-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters (continued)
Modeling Element
Unsaturated Zone Percent
Organic Matter
Unsaturated Zone pH
Saturated Zone Hydraulic
Conductivity (m/yr)
Regional Ground water
Hydraulic Gradient
Saturated Zone Thickness (m)
Saturated Zone Porosity
Saturated Zone Bulk Density
(kg/L)
Saturated Zone pH
Saturated Zone Fraction
Organic Carbon
Saturated Zone Temperature
(°C)
Description or Value
Distribution of values corresponding to three major soil types
(sandy loam, silt loam, and silty clay loam). Probability of
occurrence of each soil type based on nationwide distribution
Assumed to be same as saturated zone pH; nationwide
distribution derived from STORET ground-water quality
database
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution, correlated with subsurface
environment
Tier 2: Optional user input; default derived from
subsurface environment if known, otherwise
national average (1890 m/y)
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution, correlated with subsurface
environment
Tier 2: Optional user input; default derived from
subsurface environment if known, otherwise
national average (0.0057 m/m)
Tier 1: Nationwide distribution, correlated with subsurface
environment
Tier 2: Optional user input; default derived from
subsurface environment if known, otherwise
national average (10.1 m)
Derived from nationwide distribution of mean aquifer
particle diameter
Derived from saturated zone porosity
Nationwide distribution derived from STORET water quality
database
Nationwide distribution derived from STORET water quality
database
Assigned based on WMU location
Section
Reference
4.2.3.2
4.2.3.2
4.2.3.3
4.2.3.1
4.2.3.1
4.2.3.3
4.2.3.3
4.2.3.3
4.2.3.3
4.2.3.3
Constituent Fate and Transport Parameters
Molecular Diffusion
Coefficient (m2/yr)
Accounts for constituent transport via diffusion in soil and
ground water. Calculated from constituent-specific free-
water diffusion coefficients
3.2,3.3
4-7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.1 Summary of EPACMTP Options and Parameters (continued)
Modeling Element
Transformation Parameters
Hydrolysis Rate (yr ')
(Bio-) degradation (yr ')
Sorption Parameters
Organic Carbon Partition
Coefficient (kg/L)
Soil-Water Partition
Coefficient (kg/L)
Description or Value
Tier 1 and Tier 2 account for hydrolysis transformation
reactions using constituent-specific hydrolysis rate constants.
Other types of (bio-) degradation processes can be entered as
optional Tier 2 constituent specific parameters
For organic constituents, equilibrium sorption is taken into
account via constituent-specific organic carbon partition
coefficients; for metals, effective equilibrium partition
coefficients are generated using the MINTEQA2
geochemical speciation model
Section
Reference
4.2.4.1
4.2.4.3
Well Location Parameters
Downgradient Distance from
WMU (m)
Transverse Distance from
Plume Centerline (m)
Depth of Well Intake (m)
Tierl: Set to 150 meters
Tier 2: Optional user input (limited to 1600 meters);
default same as Tier 1
Well always on centerline of plume, transverse distance is
0.0
Uniform distribution from 0 - 10 m below water table
4.2.5
4.2.5
4.2.5
4.2 EPACMTP Input Parameters Used to Develop Tier 1 and Tier 2
Tools
This section describes the parameters we used to develop the Tier 1 and Tier 2
tools, including their data sources, methodologies, and values. Appendix C provides
detailed tables of Tier 1 parameter values. Section 4.2.1 describes WMU parameters.
Section 4.2.2 describes the infiltration and recharge parameters. Section 4.2.3 describes
the unsaturated zone and saturated zone parameters. Section 4.2.4 describes constituent-
specific chemical fate parameters. Section 4.2.5 describes the well location parameters,
and Section 4.2.6 describes the screening procedures we implemented in the Monte Carlo
analysis to eliminate physically unrealistic parameter combinations.
4-8
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.2.1 WMU Parameters
4.2.1.1 WMU Types
IWEM simulates four different types of WMUs. Each of the four IWEM units
reflects waste management practices that are likely to occur at industrial Subtitle D
facilities. The WMU can be a LF, a WP, a SI, or a LAU. The latter is also sometimes
called a land treatment unit. The four WMU types are represented graphically in Figure
4.1. In developing the IWEM tools, we assumed all units contained only one type of
waste so that the entire capacity of the WMU is devoted to a single waste.
Landfill (LF). IWEM only considers closed LFs. A closed LF is
assumed to have an 2-foot soil cover and one of three liner types: no-liner;
a single clay liner; or a composite liner. The LF is filled with waste
during the unit's operational life. Upon closure of the LF, the waste is left
in place, and a final soil cover is installed. The starting point for the
simulation is at the time when the LF is closed, i.e., the unit is at
maximum capacity. The release of waste constituents into the soil and
ground water underneath the LF is caused by dissolution and leaching of
the constituents due to precipitation which percolates through the unit.
The type of liner that is present controls, to a large extent, the amount of
leachate which is released from the unit. We modeled LFs as a permanent
WMU, with a rectangular footprint and a uniform depth. We did not
simulate any loss process that may occur during the unit's active life (for
example, due to leaching, volatilization, runoff or erosion, or biochemical
degradation. We modeled the leaching of waste constituents from LFs as
a depleting source scenario. In the depleting source scenario, the WMU is
considered permanent and leaching continues until all waste that is
originally present has been depleted. In IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2, the
magnitude of the initial leachate concentration is a model input; the rate of
depletion is calculated internally in EPACMTP (see EPACMTP Technical
Background Document) .5 The leachate concentration value which is used
an IWEM input is the expected initial leachate concentration, when the
waste is 'fresh'.
In EPACMTP's finite source module for LFs, the rate of depletion is a function of the ratio
between the waste concentration (Cw) and the leachate concentration (CL). In IWEM, we set this ratio to a
constant, protective value of CW/CL = 10,000.
£9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Cover
\
r
unsaturated zone
V
saturated zone
(A) LANDFILL
unsaturated zone
V
saturated zone
(C) WASTE PILE
jgm V .«
jffij
unsaturated zone
V
saturated zone
(B) IMPOUNDMENT
unsaturated zone
V
saturated zone
(D) LAND APPLICATION UNIT
Figure 4.1 WMU Types Modeled in IWEM.
4-10
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Waste Pile (WP). IWEM models WPs as temporary sources used for
storage of solid wastes. Due to their temporary nature, they typically will
not be covered. IWEM allows liners to be present, similar to LFs. In Tier
1 analyses, IWEM assumes that WPs have a finite operational life after
which the WP is removed. In IWEM, we modeled WPs as a pulse-type
source, with pulse duration equal to the unit's operating life.
Surface Impoundment (SI). In IWEM, Sis are ground level or below-
ground level, flow-through units, which may be unlined, have a single
clay liner, or have a composite clay-geomembrane liner. Release of
leachate is driven by the ponding of water in the impoundment, which
creates a hydraulic head gradient with the ground water underneath the
unit. At the end of the unit's operational life, we assume there is no
further release of waste constituents to the ground water (that is, clean
closure from the SI). We modeled Sis as pulse-type sources; leaching
occurs at a constant leachate concentration over a fixed period of time
which is equal to the unit's operating life. We also assume a constant
ponding depth (depth of waste water in SI) during the operational life.
Land Application Unit (LAU). LAU (or land treatment units) are areas
of land which receive regular applications of waste that can be either tilled
or sprayed directly onto the soil and subsequently mixed with the soil.
IWEM models the leaching of wastes after tilling with soil. IWEM does
not account for the losses due to volatilization during or after waste
application. LAUs are modeled in IWEM as a constant pulse-type
leachate source, with a leaching duration equal to the unit's operational
life. We evaluated only the no-liner scenario for LAUs because liners are
not typically used at this type of unit.
4.2.1.2 WMU Data Sources
In order to develop WMU parameters for IWEM, we used data from two
nationwide EPA surveys of industrial Subtitle D WMUs. Data for LFs, WPs, and LAUs
were obtained from an EPA survey of industrial D facilities conducted in 1986 (U.S.
EPA, 1986). The survey provides a statistical sample design based set of observations of
site specific areas, volumes and locations for industrial Subtitle D facilities in the United
States. In the following description of WMU data, we will refer to this survey as the
"1986 Subtitle D survey." Data for Sis were obtained from a recent Agency survey of
industrial Sis (U.S. EPA, 2001). We will refer to this survey as the "Surface
Impoundment Study."
4-11
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Landfills
The 1986 Subtitle D survey provided LF data consisting of 824 observations of
facility locations, area, number of units in the facility, facility design capacity, total
remaining facility capacity, and the relative weight of each facility. The relative weight
was assigned based on the total number of employees working at the facility and reflects
the quantity of the waste managed in that facility.
We screened the LF data by placing constraints on the WMU depth and volume to
eliminate unrealistic observations. The WMU depth, calculated by dividing the unit
capacity by its area, was constrained to be either greater than or equal to 2 feet (0.67m),
or less than or equal to 33 feet (10m). In addition, the LF volume was constrained to be
greater than the remaining capacity. Ten area observations were reported missing and
none were screened. Ninety-one volume observations were reported missing and 232
additional volume observations were screened.
In cases where the WMU depth or remaining capacity constraints were violated,
we replaced the observed unit volume by generating a random realization from the
volume probability distribution conditioned on area assuming that the unit area value was
more likely to be correctly reported. The joint distribution was derived from the non-
missing unit area/volume pairs that met the unit depth and remaining capacity constraints
and was assumed to be lognormal. Missing values were generated from the joint
area/volume probability if both the area and volume were missing, and from the
corresponding conditional distribution if only one of the two values was missing. Final
depth values were calculated by dividing the unit volume by the area.
Figure 4.2 shows the geographic locations of LF WMUs used in developing the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 tools. A summary of the descriptive statistics of the LF parameters is
provided in Appendix C; additional detailed data is provided in the EPACMTP
Parameters/Data Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
4-12
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Figure 4.2 Geographic Locations of Landfill WMUs.
Surface Impoundments
The IWEM tools incorporate SI parameters from EPA's recent 5-year study of
nonhazardous (Subtitle D) industrial Sis (U.S. EPA, 2001) in the United States. The
Surface Impoundment Study is the product of a national survey of facilities that operate
non-hazardous industrial waste Sis. We used information in the Surface Impoundment
Study to create a database of SI characteristics comprising 503 SI units located at 143
facilities throughout the United States.
The Surface Impoundment Study provided data on impoundment locations, area,
operating depths (depth of ponding in the impoundment), depth of the SI base below the
ground surface, operational life of the impoundment, and proximity of the impoundment
to a surface water body.
4-13
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Figure 4.3 shows the geographic locations of the 143 SI facilities used from the
Surface Impoundment Study. Due to the scale of this map, the individual units at each
facility are not shown. A summary of the descriptive statistics of the SI unit parameters
is provided in Appendix C; additional detailed data are provided in \heEPACMTP
Parameters/Data Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
Figure 4.3 Geographic Locations of Surface Impoundment WMUs.
Waste Piles
The 1986 Subtitle D survey included 847 WP facilities with data on facility area,
number of units, and the total amount of waste placed in the facility (waste volume) in
1985. We obtained unit values by dividing the facility values by the number of units in
the facility. No screening constraints were placed on the WP data other than setting the
114 facility areas and the 30 facility waste volumes reporting zero values to 0.005 acres
(20 m2) and 0.005 mega-tons (Mton), respectively.
Thirty waste volume observations were reported missing. No area observations
were reported missing. We replaced missing volume values by random realizations from
4-14
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
the probability distribution of volume conditioned on area. The conditional distribution
was assumed to be lognormal and was derived from the non-missing unit area/volume
pairs.
Figure 4.4 shows the geographic locations of WP WMUs used in developing the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 tools. A summary of the descriptive statistics of the WP parameters is
provided in Appendix C; additional detailed data is provided in the EPACMTP
Parameters/Data Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
Figure 4.4 Geographic Locations of Waste Pile WMUs.
Land Application Units
The 1986 Subtitle D survey included 352 LAU facilities, with data on location,
area, number of units in each facility, and the total amount of waste managed (waste
volume) in 1985. We obtained unit values obtained by dividing the facility values by the
number of units in the facility. We screened the LAU data by constraining waste
application rates to be less than 10,000 tons/acre/year to eliminate unrealistic values. The
application rate was calculated by dividing the waste managed in 1985 by the site
acreage. (The upper bound was derived by assuming a maximum application rate of 200
dry tons/acre/year with a 2% solids content).
4-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Eight waste volume observations were reported missing; twelve were screened
out due to the application rate constraint. No area observations were reported missing
and none were screened. As in the case of WPs, areas and volumes reported as zero were
replaced with lower bounds. Three reported zero areas and nine reported zero waste
volumes were set to 0.005 acres (20 m2) and 0.005 Mton, respectively.
We replaced missing and screened values by random realizations from the joint
area/volume probability distribution or the corresponding marginal distributions
depending on whether both or only one of either the waste volume or area values were
missing or screened. The joint distribution was assumed to be lognormal and was
derived from the non-missing unit area/volume pairs that met the unit depth constraint.
Figure 4.5 shows the geographic locations of LAU WMUs used in developing the
Tier 1 and Tier 2 tools. A summary of the descriptive statistics of the LAU parameters is
provided in Appendix C; additional detailed data are provided in theEPACMTP
Parameters/Data Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
Figure 4.5 Geographic Locations of Land Application Unit WMUs.
4-16
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.2.1.3 WMU Parameters Used in Developing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 Tools
This section discusses the individual WMU-related parameters used in the IWEM
modeling for Tier 1 and Tier 2. In most cases, the Tier 1 parameters are described by
nationwide probability distributions. Appendix C provides a summary of the parameter
distributions for each WMU type. With the exceptions noted in the following sections,
these same distributions are used as the defaults in Tier 2.
Waste Leachate Concentration (ntg/L)
Values of leachate concentration for all constituents of concern are required Tier
1 and Tier 2 input parameters. This parameter can be an actual measured value, or it can
be an expected or estimated value. The user-provided leachate concentration values are
the basis for IWEM's determination of the minimum protective liner design.
The Tier 1 software compares user-supplied leachate concentration values against
each constituent's aqueous solubility. If the user input value exceeds the aqueous
solubility of that constituent in the IWEM data base, IWEM will display a warning
message. A leachate concentration value above the aqueous solubility value may
indicate a number of conditions: (1) a measurement error, or (2) a case outside the
validity of the EPACMTP fate and transport model. The model is designed to simulate
transport of dissolved aqueous phase constituents, and therefore, the solubility is the
theoretical maximum concentration value that may occur. However, IWEM will not
reject user supplied leachate concentration values.
WMU Location
We obtained WMU locations from the 1986 subtitle D survey and the 2001
Surface Impoundment Study, respectively. The WMU locations are shown in Figures 4.2
- 4.5. In developing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we used information on WMU
locations to assign appropriate site-based climate and hydrogeological parameter values
to each location in the WMU database. Location-specific climate data from 102 climate
stations were used to develop infiltration and recharge rates using the HELP model for
unlined and single-lined WMUs (see Section 4.2.2), and to determine soil and aquifer
temperature in order to calculate hydrolysis transformation rates (see Section 4.2.4). We
also used information on WMU locations to assign location-specific soil and aquifer
hydrogeological parameter values (see Section 4.2.3). In Tier 2, the WMU location is a
required site-specific user input value that is needed by IWEM to assign the appropriate
climate-related parameter values.
4-17
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
WMUArea (m2)
This parameter reflects the footprint area of the WMU (that is, length by width).
Tier 1 values were obtained from EPA's 1986 Subtitle D Survey and the Surface
Impoundment Study. The WMU footprint area is a required site-specific user-input value
for a Tier 2 evaluation. This parameter represents the total surface area over which
infiltration and leachate enter the subsurface.
WMU Waste Depth (m)
The WMU waste depth is used for LF and SI simulations. This parameter is not
used for WPs or LAUs. In the case of LFs, this parameter represents the average waste
thickness in the LF at closure. EPACMTP uses the waste depth as one of the parameters
to calculate the LF source depletion rate (see EPACMTP Technical Background
Document; U.S. EPA, 2002a). The Tier 1 evaluation is based on a nationwide
distribution of LF depths obtained from the 1986 Subtitle D survey. In Tier 2, the user is
required to provide a site-specific value.
For Sis, the waste depth is equal to the ponding depth, or average depth of free
liquid in the impoundment. The SI ponding depth represents the hydraulic head that
drives leakage of water from the SI; EPACMTP uses this parameter in order to calculate
SI infiltration rates (see Section 3.1.2). The Tier 1 evaluation is based on a nationwide
distribution of SI ponding depths obtained from the 2001 Surface Impoundment Study. In
Tier 2, this is a required site-specific user input parameter.
Surface Impoundment Sediment (Sludge) Layer Thickness (m)
This parameter is applicable to Sis only and represents the average thickness of
accumulated sediment (sludge) deposits on the bottom of the impoundment. This layer
of accumulated sediment is different from an engineered liner underneath the
impoundment, but its presence will serve to restrict the leakage of water from an
impoundment, especially in unlined units. EPACMTP uses this parameter to calculate
the rate of infiltration from unlined and single lined Sis. The EPACMTP SI infiltration
module is described in Section 3.1, with a detailed description in the EPACMTP
Technical Background Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a).
To model Sis, we assumed that the accumulated sediment consists of two equally
thick layers, an upper unconsolidated layer and a lower consolidated layer ('filter cake')
that has been compacted due to the weight of the sediment above it, and therefore has a
reduced porosity and permeability. In Tier 1, we used a total (unconsolidated +
consolidated) sediment layer thickness of 0.2 meters. In Tier 2, this is an optional site-
specific user input parameter, with a default value of 0.2 m.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Depth of the WMU Base Below Ground Surface (m)
This parameter represents the depth of the base of the unit below the ground
surface, as schematically depicted in Figure 4.6. The depth of the unit below the ground
surface reduces the travel distance through the unsaturated zone before leachate
constituents reach ground water. The SI characterization data from the EPA's 2001
Surface Impoundment Study provided unit-specific data for Sis that we used in the Tier 1
modeling. This parameter was not included in the EPA's 1986 Industrial Subtitle D
Survey of LFs, WPs, and LAUs. For the Tier 1 analyses of these types of WMUs, we set
this parameter to zero, which is equivalent to assuming the base of the unit is level with
the ground surface.
In Tier 2, this parameter is an optional site-specific user input parameter, with a
default value of zero. If a non-zero value is entered at Tier 2, IWEM will verify that the
entered value, in combination with the depth to the water table, and magnitude of the
unit's infiltration rate, does not lead to a physically infeasible condition (e.g., water table
mound height above the ground surface or above the level of the waste liquid in an
impoundment) in accordance with the infiltration screening methodology presented in
Section 4.2.6.
y WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT
GROUND SURFACE
DEPTH OF THE WMU BASE ''
3ELOW GROUND SURFACE v
WATER TABLE v
\
VL.NER DEPTHT°
1
1
SATURAT
THICK
*
i
WATER TABLE
ED ZONE
NESS
Ill^Iil^li^Iil^ill^ll^ili^ill^li^iii^il/^ill^lil^ll^l/^lll^lii^lil^
Figure 4.6 WMU with Base Elevation below Ground Surface.
4-19
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching Period) (yr)
For LFs, IWEM determines the duration of the leaching period internally, as a
function of the amount of waste in the unit at closure and IWEM does not use an
operational life. Because WPs, Sis and LAUs are modeled as finite duration pulse
sources, we assumed the duration of the leaching period is equal to the unit's operational
life.
In Tier 1, we determined unit-specific operational lives for SI, from information
in the Surface Impoundment Study on present age of the unit and the planned closing
date. If this information was missing, we assigned an operational life of 50 years. For
WPs and LAUs, the 1986 Industrial Subtitle D Survey did not provide information on
operational life. We assigned a life of 20 years for WPs and 40 years for LAUs.
In Tier 2, the operational life is an optional site-specific user input parameter for
Sis, WPs, and LAUs. Tier 2 default values for this parameter are as follows:
LAU = 40 years
WP = 20 years
SI 50 years
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body (m)
For Sis, IWEM uses information on the distance to the nearest permanent surface
water, (that is, a river, pond or lake), in the infiltration screening procedure presented in
Section 4.2.6. In Tier 1, we used reported data from the EPA's Surface Impoundment
Study to assign a distance value to each SI unit in the national database. The data from
the Surface Impoundment Study indicated a distribution of values with a range of 30 to
5,000 meters (3.1 miles), and a median value of 360 meters (see Appendix C).
In Tier 2, this parameter is an optional site-specific user input. Because the exact
distance may not be known in many cases, the input is in terms of whether or not there is
surface water body within 2,000 meters of the unit. If a surface water body is present
within 2,000 meters, IWEM uses the median value of 360 meters as a default. If there is
no water body within 2,000 meters, IWEM will use a value of 5,000 meters in its
calculations.
4-20
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.2.2 Infiltration and Recharge Rates
IWEM requires the input of the rate of downward percolation of water and
leachate through the unsaturated zone to the water table. The model distinguishes
between two types of percolation, infiltration and recharge:
Infiltration (WMU leakage rate) is defined as water percolating through
the WMU - including a liner if present - to the underlying soil.
Recharge is water percolating through the soil to the aquifer outside the
WMU.
Infiltration is one of the key parameters affecting the leaching of waste
constituents into the subsurface. For a given leachate concentration, the mass of
constituents leached is directly proportional to the infiltration rate. In the IWEM Tier 1
and Tier 2 analyses, selecting different liner designs directly correlates to changing the
infiltration rate; more protective liner designs reduce leaching by decreasing the rate of
infiltration.
In contrast, recharge introduces pristine water into the aquifer. Increasing
recharge therefore tends to result in a greater degree of plume dilution and lower
constituent concentrations. High recharge rates may also affect the extent of ground-
water mounding and ground-water velocity. The recharge rate is independent of the type
and design of the WMU; rather it is a function of the climatic and hydrogeological
conditions at the WMU location, such as precipitation, evapotranspiration, surface run-
off, and regional soil type.
We used several methodologies to estimate infiltration and recharge. We used the
HELP model (Schroeder et al, 1994) to compute recharge rates for all units, as well as
infiltration rates for LAUs, and for LFs and WPs with no-liner and single-liner designs.
For LFs and WPs, composite liner infiltration rates were compiled from leak-detection-
system flow rates reported for actual composite-lined waste units (TetraTech, 2001).
For unlined and single-lined Sis, infiltration through the bottom of the
impoundment is calculated internally by EPACMTP, as described in Section 3.1 of this
document. For composite-lined Sis, we used the Bonaparte (1989) equation to calculate
the infiltration rate assuming circular (pin-hole) leaks with a uniform leak size of 6 mm2,
and using the distribution of leak densities (number of leaks per hectare) assembled from
the survey of composite-lined units (TetraTech, 2001).
Tables 4.2 through 4.5 summarize the liner assumptions and infiltration rate
calculations for LFs, WPs, Sis, and LAUs. The remainder of Section 4.2.2 provides
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
background on how we used the HELP model in conjunction with data from climate
stations across the United States to develop nationwide recharge and infiltration rate
distributions and provides detailed discussion of how we developed infiltration rates for
different liner designs for each type of WMU.
4.2.2.1 Using the HELP Model to Develop Recharge and Infiltration Rates
The HELP model is a quasi-two-dimensional hydrologic model for computing
water balances of LFs, cover systems, and other solid waste management facilities
(Schroeder et al., 1994). The primary purpose of the model is to assist in the comparison
of design alternatives. The HELP model uses weather, soil and design data to compute a
water balance for LF systems accounting for the effects of surface storage, snowmelt,
runoff, infiltration, evapotranspiration, vegetative growth, soil moisture storage, lateral
subsurface drainage, leachate recirculation, unsaturated vertical drainage, and leakage
through soil, geomembrane or composite liners. The HELP model can simulate LF
systems consisting of various combinations of vegetation, cover soils, waste cells, lateral
drain layers, low permeability barrier soils, and synthetic geomembrane liners.
For the IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, HELP Versions 3.03 and 3.07 were
used. We started with an existing database of no-liner infiltration for LFs, WPs and
LAUs, and recharge rates for 97 climate stations in the lower 48 contiguous states (ABB,
1995), representing 25 climatic regions, that was developed with HELP version 3.03. To
develop the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we added five climate stations (located in
Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico) to ensure coverage throughout all of the United States.
Figure 4.7 shows the locations of the 102 climate stations.
The current version of HELP (version 3.07) was used for the additional modeling
for the no-liner scenario. We compared the results of Version 3.07 against Version 3.03
and found that the differences in calculated infiltration rates were insignificant. We also
used this comparison to verify a number of counter-intuitive infiltration rates that were
generated with HELP Version 3.03. We had observed that for some climate stations
located in areas of the country with low precipitation rates, the net infiltration for unlined
LFs did not always correlate with the relative permeability of the LF cover. We found
some cases in which a less permeable cover resulted in a higher modeled infiltration rate
as compared to a more permeable cover. Examples can be seen in the detailed listing of
infiltration data in Appendix D. Table D-l shows that for a number of climate stations,
including Albuquerque, Denver, and Las Vegas, the modeled infiltration rate for LFs
with a silty clay loam (SCL) cover is higher than the values corresponding to silt loam
(SLT) and sandy loam (SNL) soil covers. We determined that in all these cases, the
HELP modeling results for unlined LFs were correct and could be explained in terms of
other water balance components, including surface run-off and evapotranspiration.
4-22
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.2 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for LFs
No Liner
Single Liner
Composite Liner
Method
HELP model simulations to
compute an empirical
distribution of infiltration rates
for a 2 ft. thick cover of three
native soil cover types using
nationwide coverage of climate
stations. Soil-type specific
infiltration rates for a specific
site are assigned by using the
infiltration rates for respective
soil types at the nearest climate
station.
HELP model simulations to
compute an empirical
distribution of infiltration rates
through a single clay liner using
nationwide coverage of climate
stations. Infiltration rates for a
specific site were obtained by
using the infiltration rate for the
nearest climate station.
Compiled from literature
sources (TetraTech, 2001) for
composite liners
Final Cover
Monte Carlo selection from
distribution of soil cover types.
2 ft thick native soil (1 of 3 soil
types: silty clay loam, silt loam,
and sandy loam) with a range of
mean hydraulic conductivities
(4.2x105 cm/s to 7.2x104 cm/s).
3 ft thick clay cover with a
hydraulic conductivity of 1x107
cm/sec and a 10 ft thick waste
layer. On top of the cover, a 1
ft layer of loam to support
vegetation and drainage and a 1
ft percolation layer.
No cover modeled; the
composite liner is the limiting
factor in determining infiltration
Liner Design
No liner
3 ft thick clay liner with a
hydraulic conductivity of 1x107
cm/sec. No leachate collection
system. Assumes constant
infiltration rate (assumes no
increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner) over
modeling period.
60 mil HDPE layer with either
an underlying geosynthetic clay
liner with maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 5x109 cm/sec,
or a 3-foot compacted clay liner
with maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 1x107 cm/sec.
Assumes same infiltration rate
(i.e., no increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner) over
modeling period.
IWEM
Infiltration
Rate
Monte Carlo selection from
HELP generated location-
specific values.
Monte Carlo selection from
HELP generated location-
specific values.
Monte Carlo selection from
distribution of leak detection
system flow rates.
4-23
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.3 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for Sis
Method
Ponding
Depth
Liner Design
IWEM
Infiltration
Rate
No Liner
EPACMTP SI module for
infiltration through
consolidated sludge and
native soil layers with a unit-
specific ponding depth from
EPA's SI Study (EPA, 2001).
Unit-specific based on EPA's
SI study.
None. However, barrier to
infiltration is provided by
layer of consolidated sludge
at the bottom of the
impoundment, and a layer of
clogged native soil below the
consolidated sludge. The
sludge thickness is assumed
to be constant over the
modeling period. The
hydraulic conductivity of the
consolidated sludge is
between 1.3x10 7 and 1.8x10 7
cm/sec. The hydraulic
conductivity of the clogged
native material is assumed to
be 0.1 of the unaffected native
material in the vadose zone.
Calculated by EPACMTP
based on Monte Carlo
selection of unit-specific
ponding depth.
Single Liner
EPACMTP module for
infiltration through a layer of
consolidated sludge and a
single clay liner with unit-
specific ponding depth from
EPA's SI study.
Unit-specific based on EPA's
SI study.
3 ft thick clay liner with a
hydraulic conductivity of
1x10 7 cm/sec. No leachate
collection system. Assumes
no increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner over
modeling period. Additional
barrier is provided by a layer
of consolidated sludge at the
bottom of the impoundment,
see no-liner column.
Calculated based on Monte
Carlo selection of unit-
specific ponding depth
Composite Liner
Bonaparte equation (1989) for
pin-hole leaks using
distribution of leak densities
for units installed with formal
CQA programs
Unit-specific based on EPA's
SI study.
60 mil HOPE layer with
either an underlying
geosynthetic clay liner with
maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 5x10 9 cm/sec,
or a 3-foot compacted clay
liner with maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 1x10 7 cm/sec.
Assumptions: 1) constant
infiltration rate (i.e., no
increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner) over
modeling period;
2) geomembrane liner is
limiting factor that determines
infiltration rate.
Calculated based on Monte
Carlo selection of unit-
specific ponding depth and
distribution of leak densities
4-24
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.4 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for WPs
Method
Cover
Liner Design
IWEM
Infiltration
Rate
No Liner
HELP model simulations to
compute distribution of
infiltration rates for a 10 ft.
thick layer of waste, using
three waste permeabilities
(copper slag, coal bottom ash,
coal fly ash) and nationwide
coverage of climate stations.
Waste-type-specific
infiltration rates for a specific
site are obtained by using the
infiltration rates for respective
waste types at the nearest
climate station.
None
No liner.
Monte Carlo selection from
HELP generated location-
specific values.
Single Liner
HELP model simulations to
compute distribution of
infiltration rates through 10 ft.
waste layer using three waste
permeabilities and nationwide
coverage of climate stations.
Infiltration rates for a specific
site were obtained by using
the infiltration rate for the
nearest climate station.
None
3 ft thick clay liner with a
hydraulic conductivity of
1x10 7 cm/sec, no leachate
collection system, and a 10 ft
thick waste layer. Assumes
no increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner over
unit's operational life.
Monte Carlo selection from
HELP generated location-
specific values.
Composite Liner
Compiled from literature
sources (TetraTech, 2001) for
composite liners
None
60 mil HDPE layer with
either an underlying
geosynthetic clay liner with
maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 5x10 9 cm/sec,
or a 3-foot compacted clay
liner with maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 1x10 7 cm/sec.
1) same infiltration rate (i.e.,
no increase in hydraulic
conductivity of liner) over
unit's operational life;
2) geomembrane is limiting
factor in determining
infiltration rate.
Monte Carlo selection from
distribution of leak detection
system flow rates
4-25
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.5 Methodology Used to Compute Infiltration for LAUs
Method
Liner
Design
IWEM
Infiltration
Rate
No Liner
HELP model simulations to
compute an empirical
distribution of infiltration rates
for a 0.5 ft thick sludge layer,
underlain by a 3 ft layer of
three types of native soil using
nationwide coverage of
climate stations. Soil-type
specific infiltration rates for a
specific site are assigned by
using the infiltration rates for
respective soil types at the
nearest climate station.
No liner
Monte Carlo selection from
HELP generated location
specific values.
Single Liner
N/A
N/A
N/A
Composite Liner
N/A
N/A
N/A
4-26
-------
4^
ro
.Caribou
CesWbi
Q-and Island North Omaha
Alaska
Hawaii
TO
8
I
I
b
o
TO
SS
TO
^
o'
Puerto Rico
Figure 4.7 Locations of HELP Climate Stations
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
The first 97 climate stations were grouped into 25 climate regions based on
ranges of average annual precipitation and pan evaporation, as shown in Table 4.6. For
each modeled climate station, HELP provides a database of five years of climatic data.
We used this climatic data, along with data on the regional soil type and WMU design
characteristics, to calculate a water balance for each applicable liner design as a function
of the amount of precipitation that reaches the top surface of the unit, minus the amount
of runoff and evapotranspiration. The HELP model then computed the net amount of
water that infiltrates through the surface, waste, and liner layers, based on the initial
moisture content and the hydraulic conductivity of each layer.
In addition to climate factors and liner designs, the infiltration rates calculated by
HELP are affected by LF cover design, permeability of the waste material in WP, and
LAU soil type. For every climate station and WMU type, we calculated three HELP
infiltration rates. In Tier 1, for a selected WMU type and liner design, we used the
EPACMTP Monte Carlo modeling process to select randomly from among the HELP-
derived infiltration and recharge data, to capture both the nationwide variation in climate
conditions, as well as variations in LF soil cover type and WP waste permeability. In
Tier 2, the WMU location is a required user input, and the climate factors used in HELP
are therefore also fixed; however, Tier 2 still accounts for local variability in LF soil
cover type and WP waste permeability.
The factors related to soil type that affect the HELP-generated infiltration and
recharge rates are the permeability of the soil used in the LF cover, and - in the case of
recharge or for LAU units - the permeability of the soil type in the vicinity of the WMU.
We used a consistent set of soil properties in the infiltration and recharge rate
calculations as we did in the unsaturated zone fate and transport simulations (see Section
4.2.3). We used HELP to calculate infiltration and recharge for sandy loam, silty loam,
and silty clay loam soils.
In the case of WPs, which do not have a cover, the permeability of the waste
material itself plays a role similar to that of a LF cover in regulating infiltration rate. We
modeled WPs with three different waste types, having different waste permeabilities, and
each having equal likelihood of occurrence. The data for the different waste types are
presented in Section 4.2.2.2.
4-28
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.6 Grouping of Climate Stations by Average Annual Precipitation
and Pan Evaporation (ABB, 1995)
City
Boise
Fresno
Bismarck
Denver
Grand Junction
Pocatello
Glasgow
Pullman
Yakima
Cheyenne
Lander
Rapid City
Los Angeles
Sacramento
San Diego
Santa Maria
Ely
Cedar City
Albuquerque
Las Vegas
Phoenix
Tucson
El Paso
Medford
Great Falls
Salt Lake City
State
ID
CA
ND
CO
CO
ID
MX
WA
WA
WY
WY
SD
CA
CA
CA
CA
NV
UT
NM
NV
AZ
AZ
TX
OR
MX
UT
Climate Region
Precipitation
(in/yr)
< 16
< 16
< 16
< 16
< 16
16-24
Evaporation
(in/yr)
<30
30-40
40-50
50-60
>60
30-40
City
Columbia
Put-in-Bay
Madison
Columbus
Cleveland
Des Moines
E. St. Louis
Topeka
Tampa
San Antonio
Portland
Hartford
Syracuse
Worchester
Augusta
Providence
Nashua
Ithaca
Boston
Schenectady
NY City
Lynchburg
Philadelphia
Seabrook
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Bridgeport
State
MO
OH
WI
OH
OH
IA
IL
KS
FL
TX
ME
CT
NY
MA
ME
RI
NH
NY
MA
NY
NY
VA
PA
NJ
IN
OH
CT
Climate Region
Precipitation
(in/yr)
32-40
32-40
32-40
40-48
40-48
Evaporation
(in/yr)
30-40
40-50
50-60
<30
30-40
4-29
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.6 Grouping of Climate Stations by Average Annual Precipitation
and Pan Evaporation (ABB, 1995) (continued)
City
Grand Island
Flagstaff
Dodge City
Midland
St. Cloud
E. Lansing
North Omaha
Dallas
Tulsa
Brownsville
Oklahoma City
Bangor
Concord
Pittsburgh
Portland
Caribou
Chicago
Burlington
Rutland
Seattle
Montpelier
Sault St. Marie
State
NE
AZ
KS
TX
MN
MI
NE
TX
OK
TX
OK
ME
NH
PA
OR
ME
IL
VT
VT
WA
VT
MI
Climate Region
Precipitation
(in/yr)
16-24
16-24
16-24
24-32
24-32
24-32
24-32
24-32
32-40
Evaporation
(in/yr)
40-50
50-60
>60
<30
30-40
40-50
50-60
>60
<30
Citv
Jacksonville
Orlando
Greensboro
Watkinsville
Norfolk
Shreveport
Astoria
New Haven
Plainfield
Nashville
Knoxville
Central Park
Lexington
Edison
Atlanta
Little Rock
Tallahassee
New Orleans
Charleston
W. Palm Beach
Lake Charles
Miami
State
FL
FL
NC
GA
VA
LA
OR
CT
MA
TN
TN
NY
KY
NJ
GA
AK
FL
LA
SC
FL
LA
FL
Climate Region
Precipitation
(in/yr)
40-48
>48
>48
>48
>48
Evaporation
(in/yr)
40-50
<30
30-40
40-50
50-60
4-30
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
4.2.2.2 Infiltration Rates for Unlined Units
Landfill
We used the HELP model to simulate infiltration through closed LFs for each of
the 102 climate station locations shown in Figure 4.7. A 2-foot cover was included as
the minimum Subtitle D requirement. Three different soil cover types were modeled:
sandy loam, silty loam, and silty clay loam soils. Table 4.7 presents the hydraulic
parameters for these three soil types.
Table 4.7 Hydraulic Parameters for the Modeled Soils
Soil Type
Sandy Loam
Silt Loam
Silty Clay Loam
HELP
Soil
Number
6
9
12
Total
Porosity
(vol/vol)
0.453
0.501
0.471
Field
Capacity
(vol/vol)
0.190
0.284
0.342
Wilting
Point
(vol/vol)
0.085
0.135
0.210
Saturated
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(cm/sec)
0.000720
0.000190
0.000042
Other LF design criteria included:
A cover crop of "fair" grass this is the quality of grass cover suggested
by the HELP model for LFs where limitations to root zone penetration and
poor irrigation techniques may limit grass quality.
The evaporation zone thickness selected for each location was generally
the depth suggested by the model for that location for a fair grass crop;
however, the evaporation zone thickness was not allowed to exceed the
soil thickness (24 inches).
The leaf area index (LAI) selected for each location was that of fair grass
(2.0) unless the model indicated a lower maximum for that location.
The LF configuration was based on a one-acre facility with a 2% top slope
and a drainage length of 200 feet (one side of a square acre). Runoff was
assumed to be possible from 100% of the cover.
Appendix D, Table D-l, presents the infiltration rate data for the 102 climate
stations. The unlined LF infiltration rate for each soil type at each of the 102 climate
4-31
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
centers was used as the ambient regional recharge rate for that climatic center and soil
type.
Surface Impoundment
We calculated SI infiltration rates using the built-in SI module in EPACMTP (see
Section 3.1). This means that for EPACMTP, the SI infiltration rate is not really an input
parameter, rather the model calculates infiltration rates "on the fly" during the simulation,
as a function of impoundment ponding depth and other SI characteristics. For unlined
Sis, the primary parameters that control the infiltration rate are the ponding depth in the
impoundment, the thickness and permeability of any accumulated sediment layer at the
base of the impoundment, and the presence of a 'clogged' (i.e., reduced permeability)
layer of native soil underneath the impoundment caused by the migration of solids from
the impoundment. In addition, IWEM checks that the calculated infiltration rate does not
result in an unrealistic degree of ground-water mounding (see Section 4.2.6).
For IWEM, we used unit-specific data on SI ponding depths from EPA's Surface
Impoundment Study (U.S. EPA, 2001). We assumed a fixed sediment layer thickness of
20 cm at the base of the impoundment. The resulting sediment layer permeability has a
relatively narrow range of variation between 1.26x10 7 and 1.77x10 7 cm/s. We
assumed that the depth of clogging underneath the impoundment was 0.5 m in all cases,
and that saturated hydraulic conductivity of the clogged layer is 10% of that of the native
soil underlying the impoundment. The parameters used to calculate SI infiltration rates
are tabulated as part of the Tier 1 parameter tables in Appendix C.
In the event that the SI is reported to have its base below the water table, we
calculated the infiltration using Darcy's law based on the hydraulic gradient across and
the hydraulic conductivity of the consolidated sediment at the bottom of the
impoundment unit.
Waste Pile
For the purpose of estimating leaching rates, we considered WPs to be similar to
non-covered LFs with a total waste thickness of 10 feet. The infiltration rates for unlined
WPs were, therefore, generated with the HELP model using the same general procedures
as for LFs, but with the following modifications:
No cover
We modeled the leachate flux through active, uncovered piles. We
modeled the WP surface as having no vegetation. The evaporative zone
depth was taken as the suggested HELP model value for the "bare"
4-32
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
condition at each climate center. The LAI was set to zero to eliminate
transpiration.
Variable waste permeability
For uncovered WPs, we found that the infiltration rates predicted by
HELP model are sensitive to the permeability of the waste material itself.
Based on these results, we simulated WP infiltration rates for three
different WP materials: relatively high permeability, moderate
permeability, and relatively low permeability. Parameters for the three
waste types are presented in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8 Moisture Retention Parameters for the Modeled WP Materials
Waste Type
Low Permeability
Moderate Permeability
High Permeability
HELP
Soil
Number
30
31
33
Total
Porosity
(vol/vol)
0.541
0.578
0.375
Field
Capacity
(vol/vol)
0.187
0.076
0.055
Wilting
Point
(vol/vol)
0.047
0.025
0.020
Saturated
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(cm/sec)
0.00005
0.00410
0.04100
We calculated WP infiltration rates for all 102 climate stations and waste material
permeabilities. Appendix D, Table D-2, presents the WP infiltration rate values for all
climate stations and waste types.
Land Application Unit
LAUs were modeled with HELP using two soil layers. The top layer was taken
as six inches in thickness and represented the layer into which the waste was applied.
The bottom layer was of the same material type as the top layer and was set at a thickness
of 36 inches. Both of these layers were modeled as vertical percolation layers. The same
three soil types for LFs were also used for LAUs.
We assumed the waste applied to the LAU to be a sludge-type material with a
high water content. We also assumed a waste application rate of 7.25 inches per year
(in/yr) with the waste having a solids content of 20% and a unit weight of 75 lb/ft3.
Assuming that 100% of the water in the waste was available as free water, an excess
water amount of 5.8 in/yr, in addition to precipitation, would be available for percolation.
HELP model analyses showed that the additional water available for percolation
generally would have little effect on the simulated water balance and net infiltration,
except for sites located in arid regions of the United States with very little natural
4-33
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
precipitation. For more representative waste application rates, the effect disappeared
because introducing additional moisture in the simulated water balance results in a
commensurate increase in runoff and removal by evapotranspiration. The LAU
infiltration values are presented in Appendix D, Table D-3.
4.2.2.3 Single-Lined Waste Units
IWEM includes infiltration rates for lined LFs, WPs, and Sis. In the case of LAUs,
only unlined units are considered.
Landfill
We calculated infiltration rates for single-lined LFs using the HELP model. We
modeled the LF as a four-layer system, consisting, from top to bottom of:
1-foot percolation cover layer;
3-foot compacted clay cover with hydraulic conductivity of 1x107 cm/s ;
10-foot thick waste layer; and
3-foot thick compacted clay liner with a hydraulic conductivity of 1 x 107
cm/sec.
We simulated the cover layer as a loam drainage layer supporting a "fair" cover
crop with an evaporative zone depth equal to that associated with a fair cover crop at the
climate center. The remaining conditions were identical to those described in Section
4.2.2.2 for unlined LFs.
In developing infiltration rates for Tier 1, we used the grouping of climate stations
into 25 regions of similar climatic conditions depicted in Table 4.6 in order to reduce the
number of required HELP simulations. Rather than calculating infiltration rates for each
of the 102 individual climate stations, we calculated infiltration rates for the 25 climate
regions, and then assigned the same value to each climate station in one group. To
ensure a protective result, we chose the climate center with the highest average
precipitation in each climate region as representative of that region. Appendix D, Table
D-4, shows the infiltration rate values for clay-lined LFs that we used in developing the
Tier 1 LCTVs. The actual climate stations that were used in the HELP simulations for
each climate region are shown in bold face in the table. We calculated individual
infiltration rates for the five climate centers in Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico that were
not assigned to a climate region.
We used the database of HELP-generated infiltration rates to provide estimates of
LF infiltration rates in Tier 2 when a user does not have site-specific data. During the
process of assembling the HELP infiltration values for the IWEM software tool, we
£34
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
realized that the grouping of climate centers into regions for clay-lined units, resulted in a
number of apparent anomalies in which the suggested infiltration rate for a lined unit
would be higher than the unlined infiltration rate at the same climate station. This
resulted from the fact that we used the infiltration rate for the climate center with the
highest annual precipitation in each region for clay-lined units, but then compared it with
a location-specific infiltration value for unlined units. The occurrence of these anomalies
was restricted to climate stations in arid parts of the United States, and was noticeable
only when the absolute magnitude of infiltration was low. In order to remove these
counter-intuitive results, we re-calculated location-specific HELP infiltration rates for
clay-lined units at 17 climate stations (Glasgow, MT; Yakima, WA; Lander, WY;
Cheyenne, WY; Pullman, WA; Pocatello, ID; Grand Junction, CO; Denver, CO; Great
Falls, MT; Salt Lake City, UT; Cedar City, UT; El Paso, TX; Ely, NV; Las Vegas, NV;
Rapid City, SD; Phoenix, AZ; and Tucson, AZ). We then incorporated location-specific
infiltration rates for these 17 climate stations into the Tier 2 IWEM software, to replace
the regional values used for these stations in Tier 1.
As a result of the additional HELP model simulations for clay-lined units that we
performed after the Tier 1 LCTVs had been generated, the database of infiltration rates
that is incorporate into the IWEM software is slightly different from the data used in Tier
1. We performed a sensitivity analysis to assess what would have been the impact on
Tier 1 LCTVs had we used location-specific infiltration values, rather than regional
values, for the 17 climate stations involved. We used three constituents in the sensitivity
analysis: a weakly sorbing constituent (benzene, Koc = 63 mL/g); a moderately sorbing
constituent (carbon tetrachloride, Koc= 257 mL/g); and a strongly sorbing constituent
(heptachlor, Koc= 162,000 mL/g). Table 4.9 summarizes the results of this sensitivity
analysis. This table follows the format of the Tier 1 LCTV tables presented in Appendix
F of this report.
For each of the three constituents, Table 4.9 compares the actual Tier 1 LCTVs to
values calculated using location-specific infiltration rates for the 17 climate stations. The
updated values are shaded and shown in bold-face. The table indicates that if we had
used these data in the Tier 1 evaluations, it would have resulted in slightly higher LCTVs
for some constituents, notably weakly to moderately sorbing constituents. Constituents
that are strongly sorbing (as represented by heptachlor), and/or that rapidly degrade,
would be less affected because the LCTVs for these constituents are often controlled by
various imposed caps (see Section 6). Even for the constituents that are affected, the
change in LCTV would have been very slight. The largest LCTV impact in Table 4.9 is
0.004 mg/L for the MCL-based LCTV of carbon tetrachloride. The sensitivity analysis
shows that the use of regional infiltration rates for clay-lined LFs in Tier 1 resulted in
slightly more protective LCTVs than if we had used location-specific values. This
confirms the intent of Tier 1 to provide protective screening values.
4-35
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.9 Sensitivity Analysis of Tier 1 LCTVs for Clay-lined LFs to Regional
Versus Location-specific Infiltration Rates for 17 Climate Stations
Constituent
Benzene TIER 1
Benzene REVISED INFIL.DATA
Carbon tetrachloride TIER 1
Carbon tetrachloride REVISED
INFIL.DATA
Heptachlor TIER 1
Heptachlor REVISED INFIL.DATA
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.030
0.033
0.055
0.059
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
Non-Care. Effect
LCTV
based on
Ingestion
0.2
0.2
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
LCTV
based on
Inhalation
0.50 a
0.50 a
0.23
0.25
Care. Effect
LCTV
based on
Ingestion
0.011
0.012
8.2E-03
8.7E-03
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
LCTV
based on
Inhalation
0.010
0.010
8.4E-03
8.9E-03
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
' TC Rule exit level cap
Waste Pile
We calculated infiltration rates for single-lined WPs using the HELP model. We
modeled the WP as a two-layer system, consisting, from top to bottom, of:
10-foot thick, uncovered, waste layer; and
3-foot thick compacted clay liner with a hydraulic conductivity of 1 x 107
cm/sec.
Other parameters were set to the same values as in the unlined WP case. The
same three waste material types were used as in Tier 1. We also modeled a bare surface
for the evaporative zone depth.
In developing WP infiltration rates for Tier 1, we used the same grouping of
climate stations in 25 climate regions as previously discussed for LFs. Appendix D,
Table D-4, shows the infiltration rate values for clay-lined WPs that we used in
developing the Tier 1 LCTVs. The actual climate centers that were used in the HELP
simulations for each climate region are shown in bold face in the table. We calculated
individual infiltration rates for the five climate centers in Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto
Rico that were not assigned to a climate region.
Analogous to the situation encountered for LFs, we found a number of apparent
anomalies between WP infiltration rates for unlined as compared to clay-lined WPs,
resulting from the use of regional infiltration values for clay-lined units. The occurrence
4-36
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
of these anomalies for WPs was also restricted to climate centers in arid parts of the
United States, for which the absolute magnitude of infiltration was low. In order to
remove these counter-intuitive results, we re-calculated location-specific HELP
infiltration rates for clay-lined WP units at 17 climate stations (Glasgow, MT; Yakima,
WA; Lander, WY; Cheyenne, WY; Pullman, WA; Pocatello, ID; Grand Junction, CO;
Denver, CO; Great Falls, MT; Salt Lake City, UT; Cedar City, UT; El Paso, TX; Ely,
NV; Las Vegas, NV; Rapid City, SD; Phoenix, AZ; and Tucson, AZ). We then
incorporated location-specific infiltration rates for these 17 climate stations into the Tier
2 IWEM software to replace the regional values used for these stations in Tier 1.
We also assessed the impact on Tier 1 LCTVs had we used location-specific
infiltration values, rather than regional values, for the 17 climate stations. Table 4.10
summarizes the results of this sensitivity analysis for WP units. This table follows the
format of the Tier 1 LCTV tables presented in Appendix F of this report. For each of the
three constituents, the table compares the actual Tier 1 LCTVs to values calculated using
location-specific infiltration rates for the 17 climate stations given above. The updated
values are shaded and shown in bold-face. The results of the sensitivity analysis for WPs
are consistent with, and of similar magnitude, as the results we found for LFs.
Table 4.10 indicates that if we had used the additional location-specific
infiltration data in the Tier 1 evaluations, it would have resulted in slightly higher LCTVs
for some constituents, notably weakly to moderately sorbing constituents. Constituents
that are strongly sorbing (as represented by heptachlor), and/or that rapidly degrade,
would be less affected because the LCTVs for these constituents are often controlled by
various imposed caps (see Section 6). Even for the constituents that are affected, the
change in LCTV would have been very slight. The largest LCTV impact in Table 4.10 is
0.03 mg/L for the MCL-based LCTV of carbon tetrachloride. The sensitivity analysis
shows that the use of regional infiltration rates for clay-lined WPs in Tier 1 resulted in
slightly more protective LCTVs than if we had used location-specific values. This
confirms the intent of Tier 1 to provide protective screening values.
During the process of verifying the HELP-generated infiltration rates for clay-
lined units we also replaced incorrect values for clay-lined WPs assigned to the Lake
Charles, LA and Miami, FL climate stations. These two climate stations have high
precipitation (Table 4.6), but were assigned low infiltration rates in the Tier 1 analyses
(see Appendix D, Table D-4). We re-ran the HELP model for the clay-lined WP scenario
for the three clay-lined WP scenarios, that is low, medium, and high waste permeability.
4-37
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.10 Sensitivity Analysis of Tier 1 LCTVs for Clay-lined WPs to Regional
Versus Location-specific Infiltration Rates for 17 Climate Stations
Constituent
Benzene TIER 1
Benzene REVISED INFIL.DATA
Carbon tetrachloride TIER 1
Carbon tetrachloride REVISED
INFIL.DATA
Heptachlor TIER 1
Heotachlor REVISED INFIL.DATA
LCTV
based on
MCL
(me/L)
0.13
0.15
0.21
0.24
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
Non-Care. Effect
LCTV
based on
Ineestion
0.50 a
0.50 a
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
LCTV
based on
Inhalation
0.50 a
0.50 a
0.50 a
0.50 a
Care. Effect
LCTV
based on
Insestion
0.06
0.07
0.043
0.048
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.056
0.064
0.044
0.049
8.0E-03 a
8.0E-03 a
' TC Rule exit level cap
The re-calculated infiltration rate values averaged 0.066 m/yr, as compared to 0.019 m/yr
in Tier 1. We incorporated the re-calculated values in the IWEM software tool for Tier 2.
Note that the underestimation of infiltration rates for Lake Charles and Miami will have
had the effect of partially compensating for overestimating infiltration rates at other
locations in the national Tier 1 screening analysis.
Surface Impoundment
For single-lined Sis, infiltration rates were calculated inside of EPACMTP in the
same manner as described in the previous section for unlined units, with the exception
that we added a 3-foot compacted clay liner with a hydraulic conductivity of 1x107 cm/s
at the bottom of the WMU and we did not include the effect of clogged native material
due to the filtering effects of the liner.
4.2.2.4 Infiltration Rates for Composite-Lined Units
We conducted an information collection effort that involved searching the
available literature for data that quantify liner integrity and leachate infiltration through
composite liners (TetraTech, 2001). We assembled these data and applied them to
develop the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses as follows:
Landfill and Waste Pile
We treated composite-lined LFs and WPs as being the same for the purpose of
determining infiltration rates. For these WMU's, we developed an infiltration rate
4-38
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
distribution from actual leak detection system (LDS) flow rates reported for clay
composite-lined LF cells.
We based the distribution of composite-lined LF and WP infiltration rates on
available monthly average LDS flow rates from 27 LF cells reported by TetraTech
(2001). The data and additional detail for the 27 LF cells are provided in Appendix D,
Table D-5. The data included monthly average LDS flow rates for 22 operating LF cells
and 5 closed LF cells. The 27 LF cells are located in eastern United States: 23 in the
northeastern region, 1 in the mid-Atlantic region, and 3 in the southeastern region. Each
of the LF cells is underlain by a geomembrane/ geosynthetic clay liner which consists of
a geomembrane of thickness between 1 and 1.5 mm (with the majority, 22 of 27, being
1.5 mm thick), overlying a geosynthetic clay layer of reported thickness of 6 mm. The
geomembrane is a flexible membrane layer made from HOPE. The geosynthetic clay
liner is a composite barrier consisting of two geotextile outer layers with a uniform core
of bentonite clay to form a hydraulic barrier. The liner system is underlain by a LDS.
We decided in this case to use a subset of the reported flow rates compiled by
TetraTech (2001) in developing the composite liner infiltration rates for IWEM. We did
not include LDS flow rates for geomembrane/compacted clay composite-lined LF cells in
our distribution. For compacted clay liners (including composite geomembrane/
compacted clay liners), there is the potential for water to be released during the
consolidation of the clay liner and yield an unknown contribution of water to LDS flow,
such that it is very difficult to determine how much of the LDS flow is due to liner
leakage, versus how much is due to clay consolidation. We also decided in this case to
not use LDS flow rates from three geomembrane/geosynthetic clay lined-cells. For one
cell, flow rate data were available for the cell's operating period and the cell's post-
closure period. The average flow rate for the cell was 26 liters/hectare/day when the cell
was operating and 59 liters/hectare/day when the cell was closed. We believe these flow
rates, which were among the highest reported, are difficult to interpret because the flow
rate from the closed cell was over twice the flow rate from the open cell, a pattern
inconsistent with the other open cell/closed cell data pairs we reviewed. For the two
other cells, additional verification of the data may be needed in order to fully understand
the reported flow rates.
The resulting cumulative probability distribution of infiltration rates for
composite-lined LFs and WPs for use in this application is based on the 27 remaining
data points is presented in Table 4.11. Note that over 50% of the values are zero, that is,
they have no measurable infiltration.
4-39
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.11 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Infiltration Rate for Composite-
Lined LFs and WPs
Ipercentile
Infiltration Rate (m/yr)
0
0.0
10
0.0
25
0.0
50
0.0
75
7.30xl05
90
1.78x10"
100 1
4.01x10" 1
Surface Impoundment
We calculated leakage through circular defects (pin holes) in a composite liner
using the following equation developed by Bonaparte et al. (1989):
Q =
1 h
°-9
where:
Q = steady-state rate of leakage through a single hole in the liner (m3/s)
a = area of hole in the geomembrane (m2)
h = head of liquid on top of geomembrane (m)
Ks = hydraulic conductivity of the low-permeability soil underlying the
geomembrane (m/s)
This equation is applicable to cases where there is good contact between the
geomembrane and the underlying compacted clay liner. For each SI unit, we determined
its infiltration rate using the above equation. We used the unit-specific ponding depth
data (corresponding to h in the above equation) from the recent Surface Impoundment
Study (U.S. EPA, 2001) in combination with a distribution of leak densities (expressed as
number of leaks per hectare) compiled from 26 leak density values reported in TetraTech
(2001). The leak densities are based on liners installed with formal Construction Quality
Assurance (CQA) programs.
The 26 sites with leak density data are mostly located outside the United States: 3
in Canada, 7 in France, 14 in United Kingdom, and 2 with unknown locations. The
WMUs at these sites (8 LFs, 4 Sis, and 14 unknown) are underlain by a layer of
geomembrane of thickness varying from 1.14 to 3 mm. The majority of the
geomembranes are made from HOPE (23 of 26) with the remaining 3 made from
prefabricated bituminous geomembrane or polypropylene. One of the sites has a layer of
compacted clay liner beneath the geomembrane, however, for the majority of the sites (25
of 26) material types below the geomembrane layer are not reported. The leak density
data above were used for Sis. The leak density distribution is shown in Table 4.12.
Table D-6, Appendix D, provides additional detail.
4-40
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
To use the Bonaparte equation, we assumed a uniform leak size of 6 millimeters
squared (mm2). The leak size is the middle of a range of hole sizes reported by Rollin et
al. (1999), who found that 25 percent of holes were less than 2 mm2, 50 percent of holes
were 2 to 10 mm2, and 25 percent of holes were greater than 10 mm2. We assumed that
the geomembrane is underlain by a compacted clay liner whose hydraulic conductivity is
Ixl07cm/s.
In order to ascertain the plausibility of the leak density data, we conducted an
infiltration rate calculation to estimate the range of infiltration resulting from the leaks in
geomembrane. Because of the absence of documented infiltration data for Sis, we used
the infiltration data for LFs, described previously under the LF and WP section, as a
surrogate infiltration data set for comparison purposes. Because the comparison was
made on the basis of LF data, we set the head of liquid above the geomembrane to 0.3 m
(1 foot) which is a typical maximum design head for LFs. Calculation results are shown
in Table D-6, Appendix D. The results indicate that the calculated leakage rates, based
on the assumptions of above-geomembrane head, hole dimension, hydraulic conductivity
of the barrier underneath the geomembrane, and good contact between the geomembrane
and the barrier, agree favorably with the observed LF flow rates reported in Table D-5,
Appendix D. This result provided confidence that the leak density data could be used as
a reasonable basis for calculating infiltration rates using actual SI ponding depths.
The resulting frequency distribution of calculated infiltration rates for composite-
lined Sis used in Tier 1 is presented in Table 4.13. For Tier 2, the user is required to
specify the unit's ponding depth. IWEM will then determine the unit's infiltration
distribution using the Bonaparte equation and the leak density distribution in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Leak Density for Composite-
Lined Sis
Percentile
Leak density
(No. Leaks/ha)
0
0
10
0
20
0
30
0
40
0.7
50
0.915
60
1.36
70
2.65
80
4.02
90
4.77
100
12.5
Table 4.13 Cumulative Frequency Distribution of Infiltration Rate for Composite-
Lined Sis
1 Percentile
Infiltration Rate (m/yr)
0
0.0
10
0.0
25
0.0
50
1.34xl05
75
1.34x10"
90
3.08x10"
100 1
4.01xl03 1
4-41
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.2.2.5 Determination of Recharge Rates
We estimated recharge rates for the three primary soil types across the United
States (SNL, SLT, and SCL) and ambient climate conditions at 102 climate stations
through the use of the HELP water-balance model as summarized in 4.2.2.1. We
assumed the ambient regional recharge rate for a given climate center and soil type (for
all four WMU types) is the same as the corresponding unlined LF infiltration rate.
4.2.3 Parameters Used to Describe the Unsaturated and Saturated Zones
We used a number of data sources to obtain parameter values for the unsaturated
and saturated zone modeling in Tier 1 and Tier 2. A primary data source was the
Hydrogeologic Database for Ground-Water Modeling (HGDB), assembled by Rice
University on behalf of the American Petroleum Institute (API) (Newell et al, 1989).
This database provides probability distributions of a number of key ground-water
modeling parameters for various types of subsurface environments.
For unsaturated zone modeling, we used a database of soil hydraulic properties
for various soil types, assembled by Carsel and Parrish (1988), in combination with
information from the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) on the nationwide prevalence of
different soil types across the United States.
4.2.3.1 Subsurface Parameters
The HGDB database provides site-specific data on four key subsurface
6.
parameters :
Depth to ground water;
Saturated zone thickness;
Saturated zone hydraulic conductivity; and
Saturated zone hydraulic gradient;
The data in this hydrogeological database were collected by independent
investigators for approximately 400 hazardous waste sites throughout the United States.
In the HGDB, the data are grouped into twelve subsurface environments, which are based
on EPA's DRASTIC classification of hydrogeologic settings (U.S. EPA, 1985). Table
4.14 lists the subsurface environments. The table includes a total of 13 categories; 12 are
distinct subsurface environments, while the 13th category, which is labeled "other" or
The database also provides data on ground-water seepage velocity and on "vertical penetration
depth" of a waste plume below the water table. We did not use these data. EPACMTP calculates the
ground-water velocity directly and the vertical penetration depth is not used in EPACMTP.
4^42
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
"unknown", was used for waste sites that could not be classified into one of the first 12
environments. The subsurface parameter values in this 13th category are simply averages
of the parameter values in the 12 actual subsurface environments. Details on the
individual parameter distributions for each subsurface environment are provided in the
EPACMTP Parameters/Data BackgroundDocument (U.S. EPA, 2002b).
Table 4.14 HGDB Subsurface Environments (from Newell et al, 1989)
Region
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Description
Metamorphic and Igneous
Bedded Sedimentary Rock
Till Over Sedimentary Rock
Sand and Gravel
Alluvial Basins Valleys and Fans
River Valleys and Floodplains with Overbank Deposit
River Valleys and Floodplains without Overbank Deposits
Outwash
Till and Till Over Outwash
Unconsolidated and Semi-consolidated Shallow Aquifers
Coastal Beaches
Solution Limestone
Other (Not classifiable)
The key feature of this database is that it provides a set of correlated values of the
four parameters for each of the 400 sites in the database. That is, the value of each
parameter is associated with the three other subsurface parameters reported for the same
site. We preserved these correlations because having information on some parameters
allows us to develop more accurate estimates for missing parameter values.
In Tier 1 we used the HGDB in conjunction with a geographical classification of
aquifers developed by the United States Geological Survey (Heath, 1984) to assign each
waste site in our nationwide database of Subtitle D WMU's (see Section 4.2.1) to one of
the 13 subsurface environments. For each type of WMU, we used information on its
location (see Figures 4.2 - 4.5), in combination with USGS state-by-state aquifer maps to
determine the type of subsurface environment at that site. Sites that could not be
classified into one of the 12 categories were assigned as "other" (that is, they were
assigned to environment number 13). Using the subsurface parameters in the HGDB for
each of the 13 environments, we could then assign a probability distribution of parameter
values to each WMU location. This methodology is consistent with how we assigned
HELP-derived infiltration and recharge rates to each WMU in the IWEM modeling
database.
4-43
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
In Tier 2, the type of subsurface environment, as well as each of the four
individual subsurface parameters (depth to ground water, saturated thickness, saturated
hydraulic conductivity, and hydraulic gradient) are optional, site-specific user inputs.
Depending on the extent of available site data, IWEM will use statistical correlations
developed from the HGDB to estimate missing or unknown parameters. If site-specific
values for all four parameters are known, then Tier 2 will use these values and in this
case, information on the type of subsurface environment is not needed. If one or more of
the four subsurface parameters are unknown, but the type of subsurface environment at
the site is known, Tier 2 will use the known parameters to generate a probability
distribution for the unknown parameters, using the statistical correlations that correspond
to the type of environment at the site. If no site-specific hydrogeologic information is
known, IWEM will treat the site as being in subsurface environment number 13 and
assign values that are national averages.
4.2.3.2 Unsaturated Zone Parameters
To model flow of infiltration water through the unsaturated zone, we used data on
unsaturated hydraulic properties assembled by Carsel and Parrish (1988) in conjunction
with information from the SCS on the nationwide prevalence of different soil types
across the United States. First, we used SCS soil mapping data to estimate the relative
prevalence of light- (sandy loam), medium- (silt loam), and heavy-textured (silty clay
loam) soils across the United States. The estimated percentages are shown in Table 4.15.
The soil types used in the unsaturated zone modeling were also used in the HELP model
to derive infiltration and recharge rates (See Section 4.2.2) in order to have a consistent
set of soil modeling parameters. We then used the soil property data reported by Carsel
and Parrish to determine the probability distributions of individual soil parameters for
each soil type, and used these distributions in the Monte Carlo modeling for Tier 1 and
Tier 2. Table 4.16 presents the unsaturated zone parameter values used in the Tier 1 and
Tier 2 development.
Table 4.15 Nationwide Distribution of Soil Types Represented in IWEM
Texture Category
Light textured
Medium textured
Heavy textured
SCS Soil Type
Sandy Loam
Silt Loam
Silty Clay Loam
Relative Frequency (%)
15.4
56.6
28.0
4-44
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.16 Statistical Parameters for Soil Properties for Three Soil Types Used in
IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 Development (Carsel and Parrish, 1988)
Parameter1
Distribution
Type2
Limits of Variation
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Soil Type - Silty Clay Loam
Ksat (cm/hr)
Or
a (cm 1J
P
%OM
Pb
es
SB
NO
SB
NO
SB
Constant
Constant
0
0
0
1.0
0
-
-
3.5
0.115
0.15
1.5
8.35
-
-
0.017
0.089
.009
1.236
0.11
1.67
0.43
2.921
0.0094
.097
0.061
5.91
-
-
Soil Type - Silt Loam
Ksat (cm/hr)
Or
a (cm 1J
P
%OM
Pb
es
LN
SB
LN
SB
SB
Constant
Constant
0
0
0
1.0
0
-
-
15.0
0.11
0.15
2.0
8.51
-
-
.343
.068
.019
1.409
0.105
1.65
0.45
.989
0.071
0.012
1.629
5.88
-
-
Soil Type - Sandy Loam
Ksat (cm/hr)
Or
a (cm"1)
P
%OM
Pb
%
SB
SB
SB
LN
SB
Constant
Constant
0
0
0
1.35
0
-
-
30.0
0.11
0.25
3.00
11.0
-
-
2.296
0.065
0.070
1.891
0.074
1.60
0.41
24.65
0.074
0.171
0.155
7.86
-
-
1 Ksat is saturated hydraulic conductivity; 6r is residual water content; a, p are retention curve parameters; % OM
is percent Organic Matter, pb is bulk density; 6S is saturated water content.
2 NO is Normal (Gaussian) distribution; SB is Log ratio distribution where Y = In [(x-A)/(B-x)], A < x < B; LN
is Log normal distribution, Y = In [x] , where Y = normal distributed parameter
The parameters a, p, and 6r in Table 4.16 are specific to the Mualem-Van
Genuchten model that is employed in the EPACMTP unsaturated zone flow module
described in Section 3.2 (see the EPACMTP Technical Background Document for
details).
In addition to the soil hydraulic parameters listed in Table 4.16, IWEM also
requires certain soil transport parameters. These are the soil bulk density and percent
organic matter, which are used to calculate the constituent-specific retardation
coefficients, the unsaturated zone dispersivity, and the soil pH and temperature. The
4-45
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
latter two parameters are used to calculate hydrolysis transformation rates; pH is also a
key parameter for modeling transport of metals. Soil bulk density and percent organic
matter were obtained from the Carsel and Parrish (1988) database and are presented in
Table 4.16. These parameters are used to calculate the retardation factor in the
constituent transport equation (Section 3.2). We used the data on the percent organic
matter to calculate the fraction organic carbon according to:
, % OM
foe =
174
where:
foe = Mass fraction organic carbon in the soil (kg/kg)
% OM = Percent organic matter
174 = Conversion constant
We calculated dispersivity in the unsaturated zone, auz as a function of the travel
distance (Du m) between the base of the WMU and the water table, according to the
following relationship:
auz = 0.02 + (0.022 x Du)
where:
auz = longitudinal dispersivity in the unsaturated zone (m)
Du = Depth of the unsaturated zone, from the base of the WMU to the
water table (m)
This relationship is based on a regression analysis of field scale transport data
presented by Gelhar et al. (1985). We capped the maximum allowed value of
dispersivity at one meter in IWEM.
Soil temperature and pH were obtained from nationwide distributions. For these
parameters we used the same distributions for the entire aquifer, that is, both for the
unsaturated zone and for the saturated zone. In both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we
used a nationwide aquifer pH distribution, derived from EPA's STORET database. The
pH distribution is an empirical distribution with a median value of 6.8 and lower and
upper bounds of 3.2 and 9.7, respectively, as shown in Table 4.17.
4-46
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Table 4.17 Probability Distribution of Soil and Aquifer pH
Percentile
pH Value
0
3.20
1
3.60
5
4.50
10
5.20
25
6.07
50
6.80
75
7.40
90
7.90
95
8.2
99
8.95
100
9.7
As modeled in IWEM, soil and aquifer temperature affects the transformation rate
of constituents that are subject to hydrolysis, through the effect of temperature on
reaction rates (see Section 4.2.4.1). In the IWEM development, we used information on
average annual temperatures in shallow ground-water systems (Todd, 1980) to assign a
temperature value to each WMU in the modeling database, based on the unit's
geographical location. For each WMU site, the assigned temperature was an average of
the upper and lower values for that temperature region, as shown in Figure 4.8. In other
words, all WMU's located in the band between 10° and 15° were assigned a temperature
value of 12.5 degrees C.
Figure 4.8 Ground-water Temperature Distribution for Shallow
Aquifers in the United States (from Todd, 1980).
4-47
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
IWEM Monte Carlo Methodology for Soil Parameters
In both Tier 1 and Tier 2, we assumed that soil properties are uniform at each site.
That is, while we selected a new set of soil parameters for each realization in the Tier 1
and Tier 2 modeling process, the soil properties were assumed uniform for a given
realization. However, the methodology for assigning soil types differed. In Tier 1, we
randomly selected one of the three soil types shown in Table 4.15 for each realization,
with a probability given by each soil type's frequency of occurrence, i.e., we would select
silt loam soils in 56.6% of the realizations, sandy loam soils in 15.4% of the cases, and
silty clay loam soils in 28% of the cases. The selection of the soil type also determines
the distribution of recharge and - for unlined and single-lined LF, WP, and LAUs - the
infiltration rate through the unit (see Section 4.2.2). Based on the selected soil type,
values for each of the unsaturated zone modeling parameters were generated using the
distributions presented in Table 4.16.
In Tier 2, the soil type is a optional site-specific user input parameter. Because
the site location must always be entered by the user, the selection of the soil type
determines the recharge rate, as well as the HELP-derived infiltration rates which the
IWEM tool will use in the evaluation. Based on the selected soil type, the IWEM tool
will randomly select values for the parameters in Table 4.16 from the probability
distributions corresponding to the soil type. If the soil type in Tier 2 is entered as
"unknown", the Tier 2 Monte Carlo process for the unsaturated zone parameters will
default to that used in Tier 1, that is, IWEM will randomly select one of the three
possible soil types in accordance with their nationwide frequency of occurrence.
4.2.3.3 Saturated Zone Parameters
In addition to the four site-related subsurface parameters discussed in Section
4.2.3.1, IWEM requires a number of additional saturated zone transport parameters.
They are: saturated zone porosity; saturated zone bulk density; longitudinal, transverse
and vertical dispersivities; fraction organic carbon; aquifer temperature; and aquifer pH.
Saturated zone porosity is used in the calculation of the ground-water seepage
velocity; saturated zone porosity and bulk density are used in the calculation of
constituent-specific retardation coefficients. In IWEM, we used default, nationwide
distributions for aquifer porosity and bulk density, that is, they are not user inputs. Both
were derived from a distribution of aquifer particle diameter presented by Shea (1974).
This distribution is presented in Table 4.18. Using the data in Table 4.18 as an input
distribution, IWEM calculates porosity, <$>, from particle diameter using an empirical
relationship based on data reported by Davis (1969) as:
4> = 0.261 - 0.0385 In (d)
4^48
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
where
c|) = Porosity (dimensionless)
d = Mean particle diameter (cm)
In = Natural logarithm
Additionally, we used relationships presented in McWorther and Sunada (1977),
to establish relationships between total () and effective porosity (c|)e) as a function of
mean particle diameter, see Table 4.19.
Table 4.18 Empirical Distribution of Mean Aquifer Particle Diameter
(from Shea, 1974)
Percentile
Particle
Diameter
(cm)
0.0
3.9x10"
3.8
7.8x10"
10.4
0.0016
17.1
0.0031
26.2
0.0063
37.1
0.0125
56.0
0.025
79.2
0.05
90.4
0.1
94.4
0.2
97.6
0.4
100
0.8
Table 4.19 Ratio Between Effective and Total Porosity as a Function of Particle
Diameter (after McWorther and Sunada, 1977)
Mean Particle Diameter (cm)
< 6.25x10 3
6.25x10 3- 2.5x10 2
2. 5x10 2- 5. 0x10 2
5.0x10 2- 10 -1
>10!
J Range
0.03-0.77
0.04 - 0.87
0.31-0.91
0.58-0.94
0.52-0.95
IWEM calculates apparent saturated zone dispersivities as a function of the
distance between the waste unit and the modeled ground-water well, using regression
relationships based on a compilation of field-scale dispersivity data in Gelhar et al.
(1985). These relationships are:
«L(x) = afFx(x/152.4)°-5
OCT = OCL/8
ocv = aL/160
4-49
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
where
x = downgradient ground-water travel distance (m)
aL = longitudinal dispersivity (m)
aT = horizontal transverse dispersivity (m)
aw = vertical transverse dispersivity (m)
&L F = reference dispersivity value (m)
We used the longitudinal dispersivity corresponding to a distance of 152.4 m (500
feet) as a reference to calculate dispersivity at different well distances, according to the
probability distribution presented in Table 4.20.
Table 4.20 Cumulative Probability Distribution of Longitudinal Dispersivity at
Reference Distance of 152.4 m (500 ft)
Percentile
TV *. REFf \
Dispersivity, aL (m)
0.0
0.1
1.00
1.0
70.0
10.0
100.0
100.0
We used data as the fraction organic carbon in the aquifer (foc) to model sorption
of organic constituents, as discussed in Section 3.2. In the development of the IWEM
Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we used a nationwide distribution obtained from values of
dissolved organic carbon in EPA's STORET water quality database. The distribution
was modeled as a Johnson SB frequency distribution (see EPACMTP Parameters/Data
Background Document) with a mean of 4.32x104, a standard deviation of 0.0456, and
lower and upper limits of 0.0 and 0.064, respectively.
We determined values of the ground-water temperature and pH in the same
manner as we did for soil pH and temperature (see Section 4.2.3.2).
4.2.4 Parameters Used to Characterize the Chemical Fate of Constituents
For the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations the chemical fate of constituents as they are
transported through the subsurface is presented in terms of an overall first-order decay
coefficient, a retardation coefficient which reflects equilibrium sorption reactions, and for
transformation daughter-products, a production term that represents the formation of
daughter compounds due to the transformation of parent constituents.
This section describes how we developed constituent-specific parameter values
for these chemical fate processes. Section 4.2.4.1 describes constituent transformation
processes, while Section 4.2.4.2 discusses all constituent degradation processes. Section
4.2.4.3 describes how we modeled sorption processes. Section 4.2.4.4 describes the
4^50
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
criteria we applied to determine whether constituents could be treated as being effectively
non-reactive (i.e., zero transformation and sorption) in developing the Tier 1 evaluation.
4.2.4.1 Constituent Transformation
For organic constituents, IWEM accounts for chemical and biological
transformations by considering a first-order overall degradation coefficient in the
transport analysis (see Section 3.2). In Tier 1, we considered only hydrolysis reactions.
In Tier 2, the default hydrolysis rate coefficients in the IWEM constituent database can
be replaced with a user-specified overall degradation rate that can account for any type of
transformation process, including biodegradation.
Hydrolysis
Hydrolysis refers to the transformation of chemical constituents through reactions
with water. For organic constituents, hydrolysis can be one of the main degradation
processes that occur in soil and ground water and is represented in the EPACMTP model
by means of an overall first-order chemical decay coefficient. For modeling hydrolysis
in the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, we used constituent-specific hydrolysis rate
constants compiled at the EPA's Environmental Research Laboratory in Athens, GA
(Kollig et al., 1993). These are listed in Appendix B.
The hydrolysis process as modeled in IWEM is affected by both aquifer pH,
aquifer temperature and constituent sorption, through the following equations. The
tendency of e,ach constituent^ hydrolyze is expressed^ through constituent-specific acid-
catalyzed (Ka *), neutral (K^ ^ and base-catalyzed (K,,1) rate constants. The superscript
Tr indicates that the values are measured at a specified reference temperature, Tr. First,
the values of the rate constants are modified to account for the effect of aquifer
temperature through the Arrhenius equation:
K.J = Kjr exp [E/R( - )]
j j F L j g^+273 r+273'J
where:
Kj = Hydrolysis rate constant for reaction process J and temperature T
J a for acid, b for base, and n for neutral
T = Temperature of the subsurface (°C)
Tr = Reference temperature (°C)
Rg = Universal gas constant (1.987E-3 Kcal/deg-mole)
Ea = Arrhenius activation energy (Kcal/mole)
4-51
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Next, the effect of pH on hydrolysis rates is incorporated via:
^ = KaT[H+] + KnT + KbT[OH-]
where
Aj = First-order decay rate for dissolved phase (1/yr)
KTa , KTn , K_l = Hydrolysis rate constants
[H+] = Hydrogen ion concentration (mole/L)
[OH'] = Hydroxyl ion concentration (mole/L)
[H+] and [OH'] are computed from the pH of the soil or aquifer using
[H+] = 10pH
[Off] = 10(14pH)
The sorbed phase hydrolysis rate is calculated as:
A2 = lQKar[H+] + KnT
where:
A2 = First-order hydrolysis rate for sorbed phase (1/yr)
KTa = Acid-catalyzed hydrolysis rate constant (1/mole/yr)
KTn = Neutral hydrolysis rate constant (1/yr)
10 = Acid-catalyzed hydrolysis enhancement factor
Finally, the overall first-order transformation rate for hydrolysis is calculated as:
4-52
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
where:
A = Overall first-order hydrolysis transformation rate (1/yr)
A! = Dissolved phase hydrolysis transformation rate (1/yr)
A2 = Sorbed phase hydrolysis transformation rate (1/yr)
c|) = Porosity (water content in the unsaturated zone) (dimensionless)
P6 = Bulk density (kg/L)
kd = Partition coefficient (L/kg)
We used the information on hydrolysis transformation pathways presented in
Kollig et al. (1993) to identify toxic hydrolysis daughter products; Section 6 of this
document describe how we incorporated this information into the determination of Tier 1
and Tier 2 LCTVs.
4.2.4.2 Other Constituent Degradation Processes
Many organic constituents may be subject to biodegradation in the subsurface,
and in Tier 2, the IWEM tool allows the user to provide a constituent-specific overall
degradation coefficient, which can include both aerobic or anaerobic biodegradation.
IWEM does not specifically simulate biodegradation reactions, and therefore, the IWEM
user must ensure that the value entered is representative of actual site conditions, and that
the transformation reactions can be adequately characterized as a first-order rate process,
(that, is a process that can be represented in terms of a characteristic half-life). The
overall degradation rate parameter that is used as a Tier 2 input is related to the
constituent's subsurface half-life and is expressed as:
A = 0.693/t1/2
where
A = IWEM degradation rate input value (1/yr)
ty2 = Constituent half-life (yr)
4.2.4.3 Constituent Sorption
In addition to physical and biological transformation processes, the transport of
constituents can be affected by a wide range of complex geochemical reactions. From a
practical view, the important aspect of these reactions is the removal of solute from
solution, irrespective of the process. For this reason IWEM lumps the cumulative effects
of the geochemical processes into a single term (i.e., solid-water partition coefficient)
4^53
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
which is one of several parameters needed to describe the degree to which a constituents
mobility is retarded relative to ground water. In the EPACMTP fate and transport model
upon which IWEM is based, this process is defined by the retardation factor defined in
Section 3.2. The remainder of this section describes the procedures we used to model
sorption for organic constituents and inorganic constituents, specifically, metals.
4.2.4.3.1 Sorption Modeling for Organic Constituents
For organic constituents we determined kd values as the product of the
constituent-specific Koc and the fraction organic carbon in the soil or ground water:
kd =Kocxfoc
where
kd = partition coefficient (L/kg),
Koc = normalized organic carbon distribution coefficient (kg/L), and
foc = fractional organic carbon content (dimensionless)
Koc values for IWEM constituents are listed in Appendix B. For IWEM, we
calculated the fraction organic carbon in the unsaturated zone from the percent organic
matter in the soil (see section 4.2.3.2) as:
, = %OM
Joe ~ 174
where
foc = fractional organic carbon content (kg/kg),
%OM = percent organic matter in the soil, and
174 = conversion factor.
In the saturated zone modeling we used the nation-wide data on the fraction
organic carbon on ground water to provide direct values for foc (see Section 4.2.3.3)
4.2.4.3.2 Sorption Modeling for Inorganic Constituents (Metals)
Partition coefficients (kd) for metals in the IWEM tool modeling are selected from
non-linear sorption isotherms estimated using the geochemical speciation model,
MINTEQA2. For a particular metal, kd values in a soil or aquifer are dependent upon the
metal concentration and various geochemical characteristics of the soil or aquifer and the
associated porewater.
£54
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Geochemical parameters that have the greatest influence on the magnitude of kd
include the pH of the system and the nature and concentration of sorbents associated with
the soil or aquifer matrix. In the subsurface beneath a disposal facility, the concentration
of leachate constituents may also influence kd. Although the dependence of metal
partitioning on the total metal concentration and on pH and other geochemical
characteristics is apparent from partitioning studies reported in the scientific literature,
the reported kd values for individual metals do not cover the range of metal
concentrations or geochemical conditions relevant in the IWEM scenarios. For this
reason, we chose to use an equilibrium speciation model, MINTEQA2, to estimate metals
partition coefficients for the IWEM development. We used the speciation model to
estimate kd values for a range of total metal concentrations in various model systems
designed to depict natural variability in those geochemical characteristics that most
influence metal partitioning.
From input data consisting of total concentrations of inorganic chemicals,
MINTEQA2 calculates the fraction of a constituent metal that is dissolved, adsorbed, and
precipitated at equilibrium. The ratio of the adsorbed fraction to the dissolved fraction is
the dimensionless partition coefficient. We converted the dimensionless partition
coefficient to kd with units of liters per kilogram (L/kg) by normalizing the mass of soil
(in kg) with one liter of porewater in which it is equilibrated (the phase ratio).
We used MINTEQA2 to develop isotherms for Antimony (Sb-5+), Arsenic (As-
3+ and As-5+) Barium (Ba), Beryllium (Be), Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr-3+ and Cr-
6+), Cobalt (Co), Copper (Cu), Fluoride (F), Manganese (Mn-2+), Mercury (Hg), Lead
(Pb), Molybdenum (Mo-5+), Nickel (Ni), Selenium (Se-4+ and Se-6+), Silver (Ag),
Thallium (T1-1+), Vanadium (V-5+), and Zinc (Zn).
MINTEQA2 Input Parameters
We accounted for the expected natural variability in kd for a particular metal in
the MINTEQA2 modeling by including variability in important input parameters upon
which kd depends. The input parameters for which variability was incorporated include
ground-water compositional type, pH, concentration of sorbents, and concentration of
metal. In addition, we varied the concentration of representative anthropogenic organic
acids that may be present in leachate from a waste site.
We modeled two ground-water compositional types - one with composition
representative of a carbonate-terrain system and one representative of a non-carbonate
system. The two ground-water compositional types are correlated with the subsurface
environment (see Section 4.2.3.1, Table 4.14). The carbonate type corresponds to the
"solution limestone" subsurface environment setting. The other eleven subsurface
environments in IWEM are represented by the non-carbonate ground-water type. If the
4^55
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
subsurface environment is "unknown", then IWEM will also assume it is a non-carbonate
type. For both ground-water types, a representative, charge-balanced ground-water
chemistry specified in terms of major ion concentrations and natural pH was selected
from the literature. The carbonate system was represented by a sample reported in a
limestone aquifer. This ground water had a natural pH of 7.5 and was saturated with
respect to calcite. The non-carbonate system was represented by a sample reported from
an unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifer with a natural pH of 7.4. We selected an
unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifer to represent the non-carbonate compositional type
because it is the most frequently occurring of the twelve subsurface environments in
HGDB database.
We included two types of adsorbents in modeling the kd values: ferric oxide
(FeOx) and particulate organic matter (POM). Mineralogically, the ferric oxide was
assumed to be goethite (FeOOH). We used a database of sorption reactions for goethite
reported by Mathur (1995) with the diffuse-layer sorption model in MINTEQA2 to
represent the interactions of protons and metals with the goethite surface. The
concentration of sorption sites used in the model runs was based on a measurement of
ferric iron extractable from soil samples using hydroxylamine hydrochloride as reported
in EPRI (1986). This method of Fe extraction is intended to provide a measure of the
exposed amorphous hydrous oxide of Fe present as mineral coatings and discrete
particles and available for surface reaction with pore water. The variability in FeOx
content represented by the variability in extractable Fe from these samples was included
in the modeling by selecting low, medium and high FeOx concentrations corresponding
to the 17th, 50th and 83rd percentiles of the sample measurements. The specific surface
area and site density used in the diffuse-layer model were as prescribed by Mathur.
Although we used the same distribution of extractable ferric oxide sorbent in the
saturated and unsaturated zones, the actual concentration of sorb ing sites corresponding
to the low, medium, and high FeOx settings in MINTEQA2 was different in the two
zones because the phase ratio was different (4.57 kg/L in the unsaturated zone; 3.56 kg/L
in the saturated zone.)
We obtained the concentration of the second adsorbent, POM, from organic
matter distributions already present in the IWEM modeling database. In the unsaturated
zone, low, medium, and high concentrations for components representing POM in the
MINTEQA2 model runs were based on the distribution of solid organic matter for the silt
loam soil type. (The silt loam soil type is intermediate in weight percent organic matter
in comparison with the sandy loam and silty clay loam soil types and is also the most
frequently occurring soil type among the three.) The low, medium, and high POM
concentrations used in the saturated zone MINTEQA2 model runs were obtained from
the organic matter distribution for the saturated zone. For both the FeOx and POM
adsorbents, the amount of sorbent included in the MINTEQA2 modeling was scaled to
correspond with the phase ratio in the unsaturated and saturated zones.
4^56
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
We obtained a dissolved organic matter (DOM) distribution for the saturated zone
from the EPA's STORET database. This distribution was used to provide low, medium,
and high DOM concentrations for the MINTEQA2 model runs. The low, medium, and
high DOM values were used exclusively with the low, medium, and high values,
respectively, of POM. In the unsaturated zone, there was no direct measurement of DOM
available. The ratio of POM to DOM for the three concentration levels (low, medium,
high) in the unsaturated zone was assumed to be the same as for the saturated zone. In
MINTEQA2, the POM and DOM components were modeled using the Gaussian
distribution model. This model includes a database of metal-DOM reactions (Susetyo et
al., 1991). Metal reactions with POM were assumed to be identical in their mean binding
constants with the DOM reactions.
Leachate exiting a WMU may contain elevated concentrations of anthropogenic
leachate organic acids (LOA). We included representative carboxylic acids for leachate
from industrial WMUs in the MINTEQA2 modeling. An analysis of total organic carbon
(TOC) in LF leachate by Gintautas et al. (1993) was used to select and quantify the
organic acids. We assigned the low, medium, and high values for the representative acids
in the modeling based on the lowest, the average, and the highest measured TOC among
the six LF leachates analyzed. Because we expect leachate from industrial WMUs to be
lower in organic matter than in municipal LFs, we included only the low and medium
LOA values in IWEM.
MINTEQA2 Modeling and Results
We conducted the MINTEQA2 modeling separately for each metal in three steps
for the unsaturated zone, and these were repeated for the saturated zone:
Sorbents were pre-equilibrated with ground waters: Each of nine possible
combinations of the two FeOx and POM sorbent concentrations (low
FeOx, low POM; low FeOx, medium POM; etc.) were equilibrated with
each of the two ground-water types (carbonate and non-carbonate).
Because the sorbents adsorb some ground-water constituents (calcium,
magnesium, sulfate, fluoride), the input total concentrations of these
constituents were adjusted so that their equilibrium dissolved
concentrations in the model were equal to their original (reported) ground-
water dissolved concentrations. This step was conducted at the natural pH
of each ground water, and calcite was imposed as an equilibrium mineral
for the carbonate ground-water type. Small additions of inert ions were
added to maintain charge balance.
The pre-equilibrated systems were titrated to new target pH's: Each of the
nine pre-equilibrated systems for each ground-water type were titrated
4^57
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
with NaOH to raise the pH or with HN03 to lower the pH. Nine target
pH's spanning the range 4.5 to 8.2 were used for the non-carbonate
ground water. Three target pH's spanning the range 7.0 to 8.0 were used
for the carbonate ground water. Titration with acid or base to adjust the
pH allowed charge balance to be maintained.
LOAs and the constituent metal were added: Each of the eighty-one pre-
equilibrated, pH-adjusted systems of the non-carbonate ground water and
the twenty-seven pre-equilibrated, pH-adjusted systems of the carbonate
ground water were equilibrated with two concentrations (low and
medium) of LOAs. The equilibrium pH was not imposed in MINTEQA2;
pH was calculated and reflected the acid and metal additions. The
constituent metal was added as a metal salt (e.g., PbN03) at a series of
forty-four total concentrations spanning the range 0.001 mg/L to 10,000
mg/L of metal. Equilibrium composition and Kd were calculated at each
of the forty-four total metal concentrations to produce an isotherm of
sorbed metal versus metal concentration. The isotherm can also be
expressed as kd versus metal concentration.
This modeling resulted in eighty-one isotherms for the non-carbonate
environment and twenty-seven isotherms for the carbonate environment for the
unsaturated zone. A like number of isotherms for each environment was produced for the
saturated zone. Each isotherm corresponds to a particular setting of FeOx sorbent
concentration, POM sorbent (and associated DOM) concentration, leachate acid
concentration, and pH. An example isotherm for Cr(VI) is shown in Figure 4.9. This
isotherm corresponds to the following conditions: low LOAs, medium FeOX
concentration, high POM concentration, for pH 6.3 in unsaturated zone, non-carbonate
environment.
We computed isotherms for two environmentally relevant oxidation states of
chromium, arsenic, and selenium. The different oxidation states of these metals have
different geochemical behavior, and in the case of chromium also distinctly different
toxicological behavior. Chromium-3+ exhibits behavior typical of a cation, but
chromium-6+ behaves as an anion (chromate). Chromium-3+ and chromate are most
strongly sorbed at opposite ends of the pH spectrum: sorption of chromium-3+ tends to
increase with pH over the pH range 4 to 8, whereas sorption of chromate tends to
decrease with pH over this range. In addition, separate health-based toxicity values have
been established for chromium-3+ and chromate. The dissimilarity in sorption behavior
and the availability of separate toxicity benchmarks warrants treating chromium-3+ and
4-58
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
120
100 -
80 -
60 -
40 -
20 -
0
-3-2-101 23
log Total Cr(VI) (mg/L)
Figure 4.9 Example Unsaturated Zone Isotherm for Cr(VI) Corresponding to
Low LOA, Medium FeOx, High POM, pH-6.3.
chromate as if they were separate metals. Thus, IWEM considers chromium-3+ and
chromium-6+ as different constituents and we used both sets of Cr isotherms to produce
Tier 1 LCTVs for both forms.
The two oxidation states of arsenic and selenium also exhibit differences in
sorption behavior, but both metals tend always to behave as anions. Unlike chromium,
separate toxicity values have not been established for the two forms of arsenic and
selenium. We therefore incorporated the more mobile forms only of arsenic and
selenium in IWEM as the more protective approach. We ran EPACMTP with both sets
of isotherms for these metals to discover which oxidation state was more mobile. The
results indicate that As and Se should be assumed to be present as As-5+ and Se-6+.
Accordingly, these are the species used in producing the Tier 1 LCTVs, and partition
coefficients for these are provided for use in Tier 2 modeling.
4-59
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
4.2.4.4 Partition Coefficient and Degradation Rate Threshold Criteria EPA Used
to Define Conservative Constituents in Developing the Tier 1 Evaluation
In developing the Tier 1 LCTVs, we conducted a very large number of
EPACMTP Monte Carlo runs to account for all constituents and combinations of WMU
types and liner designs. We expedited these modeling analyses by treating all
conservative organic constituents as a single group. This was permissible, because as
modeled in EPACMTP, constituents that have the same fate characteristics will show the
same subsurface transport behavior.
A conservative chemical is defined as a chemical that neither adsorbs to the
soil matrix nor degrades as it is transported through the subsurface. Metals are not
regarded as conservative chemicals because they tend to sorb strongly to the soil matrix.
Organic chemicals, however, vary in degrees of sorptivity and susceptibility to
degradation. Some of the organic chemicals may be approximated as equivalent to
conservative chemicals due to their recalcitrance to degradation and low sorptivity. The
sorptivity and degradation of organic chemicals are governed by two key parameters: the
organic carbon distribution coefficient (Koc) and the effective degradation rate constant
(A), respectively. For an organic to be considered conservative, it must have sufficiently
small Koc and A.
We determined cutoff values for Koc and A by conducting a sensitivity analysis
for selected waste management scenarios, each with several combinations of Koc and A.
Based on the results if this analysis, we used threshold values of Koc =100 L/kg, and A =
1 x 104 I/year to categorize constituents as conservative for the purpose of developing
the IWEM Tier 1 LCTVs for unlined and single-lined WMUs only. In other words, we
treated constituents with Koc and A values below these thresholds as conservative species.
For all composite liner evaluations, we conducted individual Monte Carlo runs for each
chemical. The reason is that at the low infiltration rates associated with composite liners,
the DAF values predicted by EPACMTP become very sensitive to even small differences
in Knr and A.
"oc
4.2.5 Well Location Parameters
In the IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 development, we modeled the ground-water
exposure location as the intake point of a ground-water well located down gradient from
the WMU. The location of the well in IWEM is described by three parameters:
Downgradient distance from the waste unit (x-location)
Transverse distance from the plume centerline (y-location)
Vertical distance below the water table (z-location)
4-60
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
The well location parameters are depicted schematically in Figure 4.10, which
shows the location of the well relative to WMU in plan view and in cross-section view.
Downgradient Distance from WMU (m)
This parameter represents the distance between the downgradient edge of the
WMU and the position of the well, measured along the direction of ground-water flow.
This direction represents the x- coordinate as depicted in Figure 4.10. In Tier 1, we
assigned this parameter a fixed value of 150 meters. In Tier 2, this parameter is an
optional site-specific user input value, with a maximum allowed value of 1609 meters (1
mile). The default value in Tier 2 is 150 meters.
Well Transverse Distance from the Plume Centerline (m)
This parameter represents the horizontal distance between the well and the
modeled centerline of the plume, see Figure 4.10. For the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations,
we always set this parameter to zero, that is, we modeled the ground-water well as
always being located at the centerline of the plume. This is a protective assumption
because the ground-water concentrations predicted by the model will be highest along the
centerline of the plume, and decrease with distance away from the centerline.
Well Intake Depth Below the Water Table (m)
This parameter represents the vertical distance of the well intake point below the
water table. In calculating the position of the well intake, the model uses the water table
elevation before any mounding effects are taken into consideration. In both Tier 1 and
Tier 2, we assigned the well depth parameter a uniform probability distribution with a
range of 0 - 10 meters. This means that all depth values are between 0 to 10 meters
below the water table are equally likely. For each Monte Carlo realization in which the
modeled saturated zone thickness is less than 10 meters, the maximum well depth of 10
meters is replaced with the actual saturated zone thickness used in the realization.
4.2.6 Screening Procedures EPA Used to Eliminate Unrealistic Parameter
Combinations in the Monte Carlo Process
Inherent to the Monte Carlo process is that parameter values are drawn from
multiple data sources, and then combined in each realization of the modeling process.
Because the parameter values are drawn randomly from their individual probability
distributions, it is possible that parameters are combined in ways that are physically
infeasible and that violate the validity of the EPACMTP flow and transport model. We
4-61
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
PLAN VIEW
CONTAMINANT
PLUME
CENTERLINE
WMU .4
SECTIONAL VIEW
DOWNGRADIENT DISTANCE (X)
WELL
LOCATION
LAND SURFACE
Figure 4.10 Position of the Modeled Ground-water Well
Relative to the WMU.
implemented a number of checks to eliminate or reduce these occurrences as much as
possible. As a relatively simple measure, upper and lower limits are specified on
individual parameter values to ensure that their randomly generated values are within
physically realistic limits. Where possible, we used data sources that contained multiple
parameters, and implemented these in the Monte Carlo process in a way that preserved
the existing correlations among the parameters. For example, we used the HGDB
database of subsurface parameters (see Section 4.2.3) in combination with knowledge of
the subsurface environments at each waste site location in our WMU parameter database
to assign the most appropriate combinations of subsurface parameters to each site.
4-62
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
Likewise, we assigned climate-related parameters based on each site's proximity to an
infiltration modeling database of 102 climate stations, as described in Section 4.2.2.
We also specified upper and lower limits on secondary parameters whose values
are calculated (derived) internally in the Monte Carlo module as functions of the primary
EPACMTP input parameters, see the EPACMTP Parameters/Data Background
Document (U.S. EPA, 2002b), and implemented a set of screening procedures to ensure
that infiltration rates and the resulting predicted ground-water mounding would remain
physically plausible. Specifically, we screened the parameter values generated in each
Monte Carlo realization for the following conditions:
Infiltration and recharge so high they cause the water table to rise above
the ground surface;
Water level in a SI unit below the water table, causing flow into the SI;
and
Infiltration rate from a SI exceeds the saturated hydraulic conductivity of
the soil underneath.
These screening procedures are discussed in more detail below. Mathematical
details of the screening algorithms are presented in the EPACMTP Technical Background
Document (U.S. EPA, 2002a).
The logic diagram for the infiltration screening procedure is presented in Figure
4.11; Figure 4.12 provides a graphical illustration of the screening criteria. The
numbered criteria checks in Figure 4.11 correspond to the numbered diagrams in Figure
4.12. Note that high infiltration rates are most likely with (unlined) Sis. Therefore, the
screening procedure is the most involved for SI WMUs.
Figure 4.11 (a) depicts the screening procedures for LFS, WPs, and LAUs. For
these units, after the four correlated subsurface parameters (depth to water table, aquifer
saturated thickness, aquifer hydraulic conductivity, and regional gradient), as well as
recharge associated with the selected soil type and the nearest climate center, and source
infiltration have been generated for each Monte Carlo realization, the IWEM tool
calculates the estimated water table mounding that would result from the selected
combination of parameter values. The combination of parameters is accepted if the
calculated maximum water table elevation (the ground-water 'mound') remains below
the ground surface elevation at the site. If the criterion is not satisfied, the selected
parameters for the realization is rejected and a new data set is selected.
4-63
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
For Sis, there are two additional screening steps, as depicted in Figure 4.11 (b).
At each Monte Carlo realization, a SI unit is selected from the SI WMU database. The
unit-specific parameter, including ponding depth, and base depth below ground surface
are retrieved from the database. The four correlated subsurface parameters are then
selected from the hydrogeologic database, based on the subsurface environment at that
WMU location. Using the information on the base depth and water table elevations, we
can determine whether the SI unit is hydraulically connected to the water table. If the
base of the SI is below the water table, the SI unit is said to be hydraulically connected to
the water table (see Figure 4.12, Criterion 1). The realization is rejected and a new set of
hydrogeologic parameters is generated if the hydraulically connected SI is an inseeping
type, that is, the water surface in the SI is below the water table (see Figure 4.12,
Criterion l(b)). As long as the elevation of the waste water surface in the impoundment
is above the watertable, the first criterion is passed (Figure 4.12, Criterion l(a)).
If the base of the unit is located above the ambient water table, that is, before any
adjustment to the water table elevation to account for mounding is made, the unit is said
to be hydraulically separated from the water table (see Figure 4.12, Criterion 2).
However, in this case, it is necessary to ensure that the calculated infiltration rate does
not exceed the maximum feasible infiltration rate. The maximum feasible infiltration rate
is the maximum infiltration that allows the water table to be hydraulically separated from
the SI. In other words, it is the rate that does not allow the crest of the local ground-
water mound to be higher than the base of the SI. This limitation allows us to determine
a conservative infiltration rate that is based on the free-drainage condition at the base of
the SI. The infiltration rate is no longer conservative if the water table is allowed to be in
hydraulic contact with the base of the SI. If the maximum feasible infiltration rate (Imax)
is exceeded, IWEM will set the infiltration rate to this maximum value.
IWEM handles the screening in this order to accommodate the internal software
logic in EPACMTP. If the SI is a hydraulically connected type based on the user-
supplied information on the WMU and water table positions, EPACMTP will simulate
this system by by-passing the unsaturated zone module. On the other hand, if the
hydraulic connection results from water table mounding, i.e., the original water table
elevation is below the WMU, EPACMTP cannot easily handle this situation, and the
realization is therefore rejected.
Once the infiltration limit has been imposed, the third criterion is checked to
ensure that any ground-water mounding does not result in a rise of the water table mound
above the ground surface, in the same manner as done for other types of WMU.
In the IWEM software, the parameter constraints are checked after all Tier 2
inputs have been specified, but before the actual EPACMTP Monte Carlo simulations are
initiated. The first check applies when the user provides all Tier 2 input parameters as
4^64
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
site-specific values. In this case, the software checks that the combination of input values
does not violate the infiltration and water table elevation constraints. The second check
applies when some Tier 2 inputs are set to site-specific values, while default probability
distributions are used for other Tier 2 inputs. In this case, it is possible that the
combination of fixed, site-specific values with national or regional distributions, results
in a high frequency of rejections in the EPACMTP simulations. An example would be
simulating an unlined SI at a site where the depth to ground-water is set to a very small
value. This combination is likely to lead to a large number of rejections in the
EPACMTP Monte Carlo simulation due to violation of the ground-water mounding
constraint. This, in turn, may result in very long EPACMTP run times. It also indicates
that IWEM may not be appropriate for that site.
IWEM therefore checks the Tier 2 user inputs through a probabilistic screening
routine which generates random combinations of EPACMTP parameter values in
accordance with the specified Tier 2 inputs and measures the number of rejections. This
routine will check that 20,000 acceptable parameter combinations can be generated in
100,000 or less random realizations. If the inputs fail this test, the software will report
the most frequently violated constraint and suggest potential remedies in the user inputs.
4-65
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 4.0
Landfill
Waste Pile
Land Application Unit
Pick
Correlated
Hydrogeological
Parameters
Accept
Perform
Unsaturated
Zone
Simulation
Perform
Saturated
Zone
Simulation
Next
Realization
(A)
w
_>,
I
D
O
>>
I
Surface
Impoundment
Pick
Correlated
Hydrogeological
Parameters
Hydraulically
,Co
Perform
Unsaturated
Zone
Simulation
Compute
Maximum
Feasible
Infiltration (lmax;
Accept
Perform
Saturated
Zone
Simulation
Next
Realization
(B)
Figure 4.11 Flowchart Describing the Infiltration Screening Procedure.
4-66
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 4.0
La_QytseeelQS-S!J.!Dit
*- / \ Ground surface
SI /
^^ \_i__\h -£- ? Accepted
Tabte ^7 \ The unsaturated zone is bypassed.
ci / \ Ground surface
SI / N_ v Rejected
Water ^
Table
* 4
1 Surface impoundment initially hydraulically connected with the saturated zone,
-TA
si
Groundwater mound
" due to infiltration
Liu = maKimum feasible infiltration rate
Initial Water Table
2 Surface impoundment initially hydraulically separated from the saturated zone.
II
Recharge
SI / ~ "~ *'--___-,,- New Water Table
Initial Water Table
3 Water table below ground surface criterion for all WMU types.
Figure 4.12 Infiltration Screening Criteria.
4-67
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
5.0 Establishing Reference Ground-water Concentrations
This section presents the RGCs that we used to establish protective constituent
concentrations in the modeled well. The constituent-specific MCL and HBN values we
used in IWEM are provided in Table 5.4 at the end of this chapter. Appendix E of this
background document provides detailed background information on the methodology and
human health benchmarks used in developing the HBNs.
The IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations incorporate two types of RGCs:
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs are available for some
constituents in IWEM. MCLs are maximum constituent concentrations
allowed in public drinking water and are established under the SDWA. In
developing MCLs, EPA considers not only a constituent's health effects,
but also additional factors, such as the cost of treatment.
Health-based numbers (HBNs). HBNs (for ingestion and/or inhalation
route(s) of exposure) are available for all constituents. To calculate
HBNs, we only consider parameters that describe a constituent's toxicity
and a receptor's exposure to the constituent. For the purposes of
developing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations, HBNs are the maximum
constituent concentrations in ground water that we expect generally will
not cause adverse noncancer health effects in the general population
(including sensitive subgroups), or that will not result in an additional
incidence of cancer in more than approximately one in one million
individuals exposed to the constituent.
The sections below provide our methodology for calculating the cancer and
noncancer HBNs for ingestion and inhalation of the constituents included in the IWEM
software. We calculated the HBNs by "rearranging" standard risk equations (see EPA's
Risk Assessment Guidance for Super fund: Volume 1 - Human Health Evaluation
Manual [U.S. EPA, 1991a]) so that we could calculate constituent concentration, rather
than cancer risk or noncancer hazard. The standard equations for cancer risk and
noncancer hazard are comprised of two sets of variables: variables that describe an
individual's exposure to a constituent and a variable that describes the toxicity of the
constituent.
Exposure is the condition that occurs when a constituent comes into contact with
the outer boundary of the body, such as the mouth and nostrils. Once EPA establishes
the concentrations of constituents at the points of exposure, we can estimate the
magnitude of each individual's exposure, or the potential dose of constituent. The dose is
5-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
the amount of the constituent that crosses the outer boundary of the body and is available
for absorption at internal exchange boundaries (lungs, gut, skin) (U.S. EPA, 1992). For
example, if an exposure to a carcinogen through ingestion of contaminated drinking
water occur, the dose is a function of the concentration of the constituent in drinking
water (assumed to be the concentration of the constituent at the receptor well), as well as
certain "exposure factors," such as how much drinking water the individual consumes
each day (the intake rate), the period of time over which the individual is exposed to the
contaminated drinking water (the exposure duration), how often the individual is exposed
to contaminated drinking water during the exposure duration (the exposure frequency),
and the body weight of the individual. For effects such as cancer, where we usually
describe the biological response in terms of lifetime probabilities even though exposure
does not occur over the entire lifetime, we average doses over an individual's lifetime,
which we call the "averaging time."
Constituent toxicity is described through the use of "human health benchmarks."
Human health benchmarks are quantitative expressions of dose-response relationships.
Human health benchmarks include:
Oral cancer slope factors (CSFo) for oral exposure to carcinogenic
(cancer-causing) constituents;
Reference doses (RfD) for oral exposure to constituents that cause
noncancer health effects;
Inhalation cancer slope factors (CSFi), that are derived from Unit Risk
Factors (URFs), for inhalation exposure to carcinogenic constituents; and
Reference concentrations (RfC) for inhalation exposure to constituents
that cause noncancer health effects.
EPA defines the cancer slope factor (CSF) as "an upper bound, approximating a
95% confidence limit, on the increased cancer risk from a lifetime exposure to an agent
[constituent]." Because the CSF is an upper bound estimate of increased risk, EPA is
reasonably confident that the "true risk" will not exceed the risk estimate derived using
the CSF and that the "true risk" is likely to be less than predicted. CSFs are expressed in
units of proportion (of a population) affected per milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day).
For non-cancer health effects, we use the RfD and the RfC as health benchmarks for
ingestion and inhalation exposures, respectively. RfDs and RfCs are estimates of daily
oral exposure (in the case of an RfD) or a continuous inhalation exposure (in the case of
an RfC) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of adverse effects in the general
population, including sensitive individuals, over a lifetime. The methodology used to
5-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
develop RfDs and RfCs is expected to have an uncertainty spanning an order of
magnitude.
We combined estimates of constituent dose and estimates of constituent toxicity
(the health benchmarks) to calculate estimates of excess lifetime cancer risk for
individuals who may be exposed to carcinogenic constituents and HQs for those
constituents that produce noncancer health effects. Excess lifetime cancer risk is the
incremental probability (chance) of an individual developing cancer over a lifetime as a
result of exposure to a carcinogen. We estimate cancer risk resulting from exposure to a
carcinogenic constituent by multiplying the constituent's CSF by our estimate of
constituent dose. We calculate a receptor's ingestion HQ resulting from exposure to a
noncarcinogenic constituent by dividing our estimate of daily constituent dose by the
RfD (the HQ is the ratio of an individual's chronic daily constituent dose to the RfD for
chronic exposures to the constituent). We calculated a receptor's inhalation HQ by
dividing the concentration of the constituent in air by the RfC.
We developed the IWEM HBNs to correspond to a "target risk" and a "target
HQ." The target risk we use to calculate the HBNs for carcinogens is 1 x 106 (one in one
million). The target HQ we use to calculate the HBNs for noncarcinogens is 1 (unitless).
A HQ of 1 indicates that the estimated dose is equal to the RfD and, therefore, an HQ of
1 is frequently EPA's threshold of concern for noncancer effects. These targets are used
to calculate separate HBNs for each constituent of concern, and separate HBNs for each
exposure route of concern (ingestion or inhalation). The Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations do
not consider combined exposure from ground-water ingestion (from drinking water) and
ground-water inhalation (from showering), nor do they consider the potential for additive
exposure to multiple constituents.
Usually, doses less than the RfD (HQ=1) are not likely to be associated with
adverse health effects and, therefore, are less likely to be of regulatory concern. As the
frequency and/or magnitude of the exposures exceeding the RfD increase (HQ>1), the
probability of adverse effects in a human population increases. However, it should not be
categorically concluded that all doses below the RfD are "acceptable" (or will be
risk-free) and that all doses in excess of the RfD are "unacceptable" (or will result in
adverse effects).
5.1 Ingestion HBNs
Section 5.1.1 describes how we calculated ingestion HBNs for constituents that
cause cancer, and Section 5.1.2 describes how we calculated ingestion HBNs for
constituents that cause adverse health effects other than cancer.
5-3
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
5.1.1 Ingestion HBNs for Constituents That Cause Cancer
To calculate ingestion HBNs for carcinogens, we rearranged the standard
equation for estimating risk so that instead of solving for risk, we solve for constituent
concentration in water. The constituent concentration in water that corresponds to the
target cancer risk is the cancer HBN for ingestion exposures, as follows:
CJNGESTJJBN = X*k_targefAT'365
CSFo'EF'ED'CRw
where
C_INGEST_HBN = cancer HBN for ingestion of water (mg/L)
Risk_target = target risk for carcinogens = 1x106
CSFo = constituent -specific oral cancer slope factor
(mg/kg-d)1
AT = averaging time = 70 years [yrs]
EF = exposure frequency = 350 d/yr
CRw = intake rate of water = 0.0252 L/kg/d
ED = exposure duration = 30 yr
365 = conversion factor (d/yr).
In this equation, the CSFo quantifies the toxicity of the constituent. The
averaging time, exposure frequency, intake rate of water (which is expressed as the
amount of water an individual consumes each day per kilogram of their body weight),
and exposure duration quantify aspects of an individual's potential exposure. In our
calculation of cancer and noncancer ingestion HBNs, we use data that combine the
factors for intake rate and body weight. That is, we express intake in terms of the amount
of water an individual consumes per kilogram of their body weight. For example, if an
individual consumes 2 liters (L) of water per day (d), and that individual weighs 65 kg,
then their intake would be 2 L/d per 65 kg, or 0.03 L/kg/d. Table 5.1 summarizes the
basis for the exposure parameter values that we used in this equation.
Inspection of the equation above shows that the HBN value is directly
proportional to the target risk. That is, if the target risk were set to 105 instead of 106, we
would obtain a 10 times higher HBN value.
5-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.1 Exposure Parameter Values for Ingestion HBNs - Carcinogens
Exposure
Parameter
Drinking Water Intake
Rate
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Averaging Time
Value
25.2
350
30
70
Units
mL/kg/d
d/yr
yr
y
Source
The value is a time-weighted average of mean
drinking water intake rates (per kilogram body
weight) for individuals aged 0 to 29 years.
Table 3-7 of the Exposure Factors Handbook (U.S.
EPA, 1997a)
The exposure frequency is the number of days per
year that an individual is exposed. A value of 350
days per year considers that an individual is away
from home for 2 weeks per year.
Risk Assessment Guidance for Super fund:
Volume 1 Human Health Evaluation Manual (U.S.
EPA, 1991a)
The exposure duration is the number of years that an
individual is exposed. Thirty years is the 95th
percentile value for population mobility (exposure
duration) .
Table 15-176 of the Exposure Factors Handbook
(U.S. EPA, 1997b)
Averaging time is the period of time over which a
receptor's dose is averaged. When evaluating
carcinogens, dose is averaged over the lifetime of the
individual, assumed to be 70 years.
Risk Assessment Guidance for Super fund:
Volume 1 Human Health Evaluation Manual
(U.S. EPA, 1991a)
5-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
5.1.2 Ingestion HBNs for Constituents that Cause Noncancer Health Effects
To calculate ingestion HBNs for constituents that cause health effects other than
cancer, we rearranged the standard equation for estimating HQ so that instead of solving
for the HQ, we solve for constituent concentration in water. The constituent
concentration in water that corresponds to the target HQ is the cancer HBN for ingestion
exposures, as follows:
NCJNGEST HBN = ffQ_target'RfD'365
EF»CRw
where
NC_INGEST_HBN = noncancer HBN for ingestion of water (mg/L)
HQ_target = target HQ for noncarcinogens = 1
RfD = constituent-specific reference dose (mg/kg-d)
EF = exposure frequency = 350 d/yr
CRw = intake rate of water = 0.0426 L/kg/d
365 = conversion factor (d/yr).
In this equation, the exposure frequency and intake rate of water (expressed as the
amount of water an individual consumes each day per kilogram of body weight) quantify
aspects of an individual's exposure. To develop noncancer ingestion HBNs that are
protective of children, the intake rate in this equation assumes that the individual who is
drinking water from the modeled well is a child who is exposed from age 0 to 6 years.
Children in this age range typically ingest greater amounts of water per unit body weight
(that is, have greater exposure) than do adults.
The RfD in the equation quantifies the toxicity of the constituent. Even though
the RfDs that we use in this analysis are defined to pertain to exposures that occur over a
lifetime, these "chronic" RfDs commonly are used to evaluate potential noncancer effects
associated with exposures that occur over a significant portion of a lifetime (generally
assumed to be between seven years and a lifetime). We do not average the dose for
noncarcinogens over the lifetime of an individual (the "averaging time") as we do for
carcinogens, rather, we average dose over only the period of exposure. Consequently,
the values for exposure duration and averaging time are the same, and cancel each other
out (that is why they are not included in the above equation). Table 5.2 summarizes the
basis for the exposure parameter values that we used in this equation.
Inspection of the equation above shows that the HBN value is directly
proportional to the target HQ. That is, if the target risk were set to 0.1 instead of 1, we
would obtain a 10 times lower HBN value.
5-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.2 Exposure Parameter Values for Ingestion HBNs - Noncarcinogens
Exposure Parameter
Drinking Water Intake
Rate
Exposure Frequency
Value
42.6
350
Units
mL/kg/d
d/yr
Source
The value is a time-weighted average of mean
drinking water intake rates (per kilogram body
weight) for children aged 0 to 6 years.
Table 3-7 of the Exposure Factors Handbook (U.S.
EPA, 1997a)
The exposure frequency is the number of days per
year that an individual is exposed. A value of 350
days per year considers that an individual is away
from home for 2 weeks per year.
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund:
Volume 1 Human Health Evaluation Manual
(U.S. EPA, 1991a)
5.2 Inhalation HBNs
In the IWEM tool, the inhalation HBN is the maximum concentration of a
constituent in ground water that is not expected to cause adverse health effects in most
adults who inhale the constituent as a result of activities associated with showering. We
did not evaluate children's shower-related exposure in developing inhalation HBNs
because we assume that children take baths. Because we have not yet developed a "bath
model" for evaluating children, we do not have inhalation HBNs that consider children's
exposure. We calculated inhalation HBNs only for constituents that (1) volatilize (that is,
mercury and organic constituents) and (2) have an inhalation health benchmark available
(that is, a RfC, inhalation URF, and/or CSFi).
We developed the inhalation HBNs as follows:
First, we used a shower model to calculate, on a per unit ground-water
concentration basis, the average concentration of each constituent in indoor air that an
adult will be exposed to daily as a result of activities associated with showering. In this
analysis, we assume that the shower water is ground water from the well. However, in
this step of the analysis we only have to model a "unit" ground-water concentration. This
is because the average concentration of a constituent in indoor air is directly proportional
to the concentration of the constituent in the water coming into the shower. As a result,
we can back-calculate the ground-water concentration that would result in any given
constituent concentration in indoor air by simple scaling. Section 5.2.1 describes how we
use the shower model to calculate the average concentration of a constituent in indoor air
to which an adult is exposed during the day.
5-7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
Second, we used the unit average constituent concentration in indoor air,
determined above, to calculate the HBN. We first calculated the risk or HQ associated
with the unit air concentration from the shower model, and then scaled this result to
determine the ground-water concentration associated with the target risk level or target
HQ. The ground-water concentration that generates the air concentration associated with
a risk of 1x106 or a HQ of 1 is the inhalation HBN.
5.2.1 Calculation of Exposure Concentrations from Showering
Individuals may be exposed to constituents through inhalation of air-phase
emissions from ground water. Such exposure may occur during the time spent in the
shower while showering, in the shower stall after showering, and in the bathroom after
showering. To evaluate these exposures, EPA uses a shower model to estimate
constituent concentrations in a shower stall and in bathroom air.
A primary assumption of our evaluation is that constituents are released into
household air only as the result of showering activity, and that exposure to air-phase
constituents only occurs in the shower stall and in the bathroom. Some investigators
evaluate constituent emissions resulting from other household uses of water (for example,
use of water in sinks, toilets, washing machines, and dishwashers) and the associated
inhalation exposure that occurs during the time spent in the non-bathroom portions of the
house (that is, "the remainder of the house"). The model we used only focuses on
exposure in the shower stall and bathroom, and the exposure that results from showering.
The shower model is based on the mathematical formulation presented in McKone
(1987) and Little (1992a). A detailed description of the shower model, its assumptions
and limitations, and the parameter values we used to develop inhalation HBNs is
provided in Appendix E.
5.2.2 Calculating Inhalation HBNs
To calculate HBNs, we used a unit ground-water concentration (usually 1 mg/L)
within the solubility limits of each constituent and implemented the shower model using
that concentration. The result of the shower model was the average concentration of a
constituent in air to which an individual is exposed on a daily basis. We used this "unit"
air concentration to calculate a corresponding "unit" risk (for cancer-causing chemicals)
or "unit" HQ (for constituents that cause noncancer health effects). Because ground-
water concentration and inhalation risk or hazard are directly proportional, we used
simple ratios to adjust the unit ground-water concentration to the ground-water
concentration corresponding to the target risk or target HQ (that is, to calculate the
inhalation HBNs). Section 5.2.2.1 describes our application of this methodology to
carcinogens and Section 5.2.2.2 describes our application of this methodology to
noncarcinogens.
5-8
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
5.2.2.1 Inhalation HBNs for Constituents that Cause Cancer
Using the shower model, we estimated the average concentration of a constituent
in air to which an individual is exposed on a daily basis. To calculate the inhalation HBN
for carcinogens, we first calculate the inhalation risk that corresponds to this modeled
constituent concentration:
D. . , , , (Cair modeled IR ED EF) .
Risk modeled = = - CSFi
(BW AT 365)
where
Risk_modeled
Cair modeled
IR
ED
EF
BW
AT
CSFi
365
inhalation risk resulting from the modeled constituent
concentration in air
average constituent concentration in air to which an
individual is exposed during a day (mg/m3) (calculated
from the unit ground-water concentration using the shower
model)
inhalation rate = 13.25 m3/d
exposure duration = 30 yr
exposure frequency = 350 d/yr
body weight (kg) = 71.8 kg
averaging time = 70 yr
constituent-specific inhalation cancer slope factor (mg/kg-
d)1
conversion factor (d/yr).
In this equation, the CSFi quantifies the toxicity of the constituent. We use the
average constituent concentration in air, inhalation rate, exposure duration, exposure
frequency, body weight, and averaging time to quantify the individual's exposure, or
dose. Table 5.3 summarizes the basis for the exposure parameter values used in this
equation.
5-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.3 Exposure Parameter Values for Inhalation HBNs
Exposure Parameter
Inhalation Rate
Body Weight
Exposure Frequency
Exposure Duration
Averaging Time
Value
13.25
71.8
350
30
70
Units
m3/d
kg
d/yr
y
y
Source
The value corresponds to the mean inhalation rates for
adults (ages 19 to 65+). The value was calculated by
averaging the daily mean inhalation rates for females
(11.3 nrYd) and males (15.2 mVd).
Table 5-23 of the Exposure Factors Handbook (U.S.
EPA, 1997a)
The value corresponds to the mean body weight of 18-
to 75-year-old men and women.
Tables 7-2 and 7-1 1 of the Exposure Factors
Handbook (U.S. EPA, 1997a)
The exposure frequency is the number of days per year
that an individual is exposed. A value of 350 days per
year considers that an individual is away from home
for 2 weeks per year.
Risk Assessment Guidance for Super fund:
Volume 1 Human Health Evaluation Manual
(U.S. EPA, 1991a)
The exposure duration is the number of years that an
individual is exposed. Thirty years is the 95th
percentile value for population mobility (exposure
duration).
Table 15-176 of the Exposure Factors Handbook (U.S.
EPA, 1997b)
Risk Assessment Guidance for Super fund:
Volume 1 Human Health Evaluation Manual (U.S.
EPA, 1991a)
The modeled constituent concentration in air was based on evaluating a unit
constituent concentration in ground water (a constituent concentration in ground water
that we selected somewhat arbitrarily). To calculate the ground-water concentration that
corresponds to the target inhalation risk (that is, the inhalation HBN) we adjusted the
modeled unit ground-water concentration using a simple ratio of target risk and modeled
risk:
CJNHALEJfBN = Rlsk-tarSet
Risk modeled
CGWmodeled
5-10
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 5.0
where
C_INHALE_HBN = concentration in ground water resulting in target risk
(l-ig/L) (cancer HBN for inhalation)
C_GW_modeled = unit concentration in ground water used in shower model
(ng/L)
Risk_target = target risk for carcinogens = 1x106
Risk_modeled = risk resulting from ground-water concentration modeled.
This equation assumes that ground-water concentration and inhalation risk are
directly proportional, which we confirmed by running the shower model using the target
ground-water concentration (the inhalation HBN) for several constituents and comparing
the results to the target risk level.
Inspection of the equation above shows that the HBN value is directly
proportional to the target risk. That is, if the target risk were set to 105 instead of 106, we
would obtain a 10 times higher HBN value.
5.2.2.2 Inhalation HBNs for Constituents that Causes Non-Cancer Health Effects
Calculating inhalation HBNs for noncarcinogens is simpler than calculating
HBNs for carcinogens because the toxicity benchmark (RfC) is expressed as a
concentration in air. To calculate the HBN, we first determine the HQ resulting from the
unit air concentration output by the shower model:
j , j Cair modeled
HQ modeled = =
», RfC
where J
HQ_modeled = HQ resulting from the ground-water concentration modeled
(unitless)
Cair_modeled = average air concentration to which an individual is exposed
during a day (mg/m3) (calculated from the unit ground-water
concentration using the shower model)
RfC = constituent-specific reference concentration (mg/m3).
We then derive the target ground-water concentration (that is, the inhalation
HBN) by adjusting the modeled unit ground-water concentration using the ratio of the
target HQ to the modeled HQ:
NCJNHALEJJBN = HQ-tar8et . C_GW_modeled
HQ_modeled
5-11
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
where
NC_INHALE_HBN = concentration in ground water resulting in target HQ
(l-ig/L) (non-cancer HBN for inhalation)
C_GW_modeled = unit concentration in ground water used in shower model
HQjarget
HQ_modeled
target HQ for noncarcinogens = 1
HQ resulting from ground-water concentration modeled.
Inspection of the equation above shows that the HBN value is directly proportional
to the target HQ. That is, if the target risk were set to 0.1 instead of 1, we would obtain a
10 times lower HBN value.
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs
CAS
Number
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
Chemical Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
MCL
(mg/L)
6.0E-03
5.0E-02
2.0E+00
5.0E-03
2.0E-04
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.2E-05
1.8E-04
5.7E-06
1.7E-02
6.4E-05
8.1E-05
1.8E-03
4.2E-07
1.3E-05
8.1E-05
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.5E+00
2.5E+00
2.5E+00
4.9E-01
4.9E-03
1.2E+01
2.5E-02
7.3E-04
1.2E-01
7.3E+00*
9.8E-03
7.3E-03
1.7E+00
7.3E-02
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
4.1E-02
5.1E+00
l.OE-03
l.OE-05
2.2E+00
1.8E-02*
1.6E-03
2.6E+00
5.4E-03*
6.3E-04
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.2E-01
1.5E+03
3.1E+00
3.3E-04
1.5E+01
3.8E-02
9.3E-01
1.9E-01
5-12
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
100-44-7
100-51-6
7440-41-7
39638-32-9
111-44-4
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
88-85-7
85-68-7
7440-43-9
56-23-5
75-15-0
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
106-44-5
Chemical Name
Benzyl chloride
Benzyl alcohol
Beryllium
Bis (2 -chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2 -chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2 -ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1,3-
Butanol
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-
(Dinoseb)
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol p-
MCL
(mg/L)
4.0E-03
6.0E-03
8.0E-02
7.0E-03
5.0E-03
5.0E-03
2.0E-03
l.OE-01
8.0E-02
8.0E-02
l.OE-01
l.OE-01
1.3E+00**
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
5.7E-04
1.4E-03
8.8E-05
6.9E-03
1.6E-03
7.4E-04
2.8E-04
3.6E-04
1.2E-03
7.4E-03
8.1E-04
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
7.3E+00
4.9E-02
9.8E-01
4.9E-01*
4.9E-01
3.4E-02
2.5E+00
2.5E-02
4.9E+00*
1.2E-02
1.7E-02
2.5E+00
1.2E-02
4.9E-01
9.8E-02
4.9E-01
4.9E-01
4.9E-01
2.5E-01
1.2E-01
3.7E+01
7.3E-02
4.9E-01
1.2E-01
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
5.2E-04
5.9E-03
1.1E-03
2.8E+01*
8.0E-04
4.0E-05
7.6E-04
1.5E-03
1.2E+00
7.5E-04
5.9E-03
1.9E-03
7.3E-03*
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.8E+02*
1.5E-02
6.0E-02
2.1E-02
1.9E+00
2.8E-02
2.2E-02
2.0E-01
3.0E+01
3.3E-01
2.6E-01
9.7E-03
3.0E-03
1.3E+03
5-13
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
108-39-4
95-48-7
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
117-84-0
84-74-2
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
106-46-7
95-50-1
91-94-1
75-71-8
107-06-2
75-34-3
156-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-02-6
10061-01-5
60-57-1
84-66-2
Chemical Name
Cresol M-
Cresol o-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
DDD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoro methane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3- (mixture of
isomers)
Dichloropropene trans- 1,3-
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
MCL
(mg/L)
2.0E-04
7.5E-02
6.0E-01
5.0E-03
7.0E-02
l.OE-01
7.0E-03
7.0E-02
5.0E-03
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
4.0E-04
2.8E-04
2.8E-04
1.6E-03
1.3E-05
6.9E-05
4.0E-03
2.2E-04
1.1E-03
1.6E-04
1.4E-03
9.7E-04
9.7E-04
9.7E-04
6.0E-06
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.2E+00
1.2E+00
1.2E+00
2.5E+00
4.2E-04
1.2E+02
1.2E-02
4.9E-01*
2.5E+00
2.2E+00
4.9E+00
2.5E+00
2.5E-01
4.9E-01
2.2E-01
7.3E-02
2.5E-01
2.2E+00
7.3E-01
7.3E-01
7.3E-01
1.2E-03
2.0E+01
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
8.8E-03
3.8E-01
7.9E-02
1.3E-03
4.9E+00*
6.3E-04
7.4E-03
2.2E-04
2.9E-03
3.5E-03
3.3E-03
l.OE-04
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.2E+03
8.8E+02
1.1E+03
1.3E+00
3.9E-04
2.9E-03
3.0E+00
7.7E-01
5.8E-01
l.OE+01
1.6E+00
2.1E-01
1.4E-02
6.1E-02
7.5E-02
7.0E-02
5-14
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
62-50-0
97-63-2
141-78-6
60-29-7
100-41-4
96-45-7
107-21-1
75-21-8
106-93-4
206-44-0
Chemical Name
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1,2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II,
mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene thiourea
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene dibromide
(1,2-Dibromoethane)
Fluoranthene
MCL
(mg/L)
2.0E-03
7.0E-01
5.0E-05
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.1E-08
6.9E-03
1.1E-05
1.4E-04
1.4E-04
8.8E-03
1.2E-04
9.8E-03
3.3E-07
8.8E-04
9.5E-05
1.1E-06
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
4.9E-03
2.5E+00
4.9E-01
2.5E-03
4.9E-02
4.9E-02
2.5E-02
6.1E-01
9.8E-04
1.5E-01
7.3E-03
4.9E-02
9.8E+00
7.3E+00
2.2E+00
2.2E+01
4.9E+00
2.5E+00
2.0E-03
4.9E+01
9.8E-01*
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
3.0E-03
8.1E-01
1.8E-01
2.0E-02
1.9E-01
1.1E-02
1.6E+03
5.2E-04
8.4E-05
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
7.1E+02
1.1E+03
6.0E-02
2.4E-01
2.9E+03
3.0E+02
3.3E+00
1.2E+04
4.1E-01
9.8E-04
5-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-84-6
58-89-9
319-85-7
1024-57-3
76-44-8
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
34465-46-8
55684-94-1
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
110-49-6
109-86-4
80-62-6
78-93-3
Chemical Name
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH alpha-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH beta-
Heptachlor epoxide
Heptachlor
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
[HxCDDs]
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane N-
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indeno{l,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl ethyl ketone
MCL
(mg/L)
4.0E+00
2.0E-04
2.0E-04
4.0E-04
l.OE-03
5.0E-02
1.5E-02**
2.0E-03
4.0E-02
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.5E-05
7.4E-05
5.4E-05
1.1E-05
2.2E-05
1.2E-03
6.0E-05
6.2E-09
6.2E-09
6.9E-03
8.1E-05*
l.OE-01
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.9E+00
4.9e+00
4.9E+01
7.3E-02
2.0E-01
7.3E-03
3.2E-04
1.2E-02
7.3E-03
2.0E-02*
1.5E-01
2.5E-02
7.3E-03
2.7E+02*
7.3E-02
7.3E+00
4.9E+00
1.2E-02
1.2E+00
2.5E-03
2.5E-03
1.2E+01
1.2E-01*
4.9E-02
2.5E-02
3.4E+01
1.5E+01
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.5E+00
3.6E-04
1.6E-03
1.7E-02
2.8E-04
1.5E-05
6.1E-04
3.6E-05
1.4E-07
1.4E-07
3.3E-03
3.8E-02*
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
5.1E+01
2.2E+01
6.9E-04
6.6E-01
5.3E+02
7.0E-04
6.5E-03
1.5E+03
5.1E+02
4.4E+02
5.3E+00
3.3E+01
5-16
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
298-00-0
108-10-1
1634-04-4
56-49-5
75-09-2
74-95-3
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
55-18-5
62-75-9
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
36088-22-9
30402-15-4
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
Chemical Name
Methyl parathion
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene chloride
(Dichloromethane)
Methylene bromide
(Dibromomethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
[PeCDDs]
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
MCL
(mg/L)
5.0E-03
l.OE-03
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.3E-02
1.8E-05
1.4E-05
6.4E-07
1.9E-06
2.0E-02
4.4E-06
4.6E-05
6.2E-10
1.2E-09
3.7E-04
8.1E-04
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
6.1E-03
2.0E+00
1.5E+00
2.5E-01
1.2E-01
4.9E-01
4.9E-01
1.2E-02
2.0E-04
4.9E-01
4.9E-02
1.5E-01
2.0E-02
7.3E-02
7.3E-01
1.5E+01
2.0E-03
1.5E-01
4.9E-03
4.9E+01
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.2E-03
2.8E-02
2.3E-05
2.0E-05
1.5E-03
4.3E-05
4.0E-04
5.2E-01
4.5E-03
8.7E-03
9.2E-01
6.0E-08
6.3E-08
5.4E+01
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.2E+00
1.7E+01
l.OE+01
1.9E-02
1.5E-01
3.3E-01
9.0E+02
1.3E+04*
5-17
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
1746-01-6
51207-31-9
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
106-49-0
95-53-4
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
Chemical Name
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate
(Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine p-
Toluidine o-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro- 1,2,2 -trifluoro-ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethylene
1,1,2-)
MCL
(mg/L)
5.0E-04
5.0E-02
l.OE-01
3.0E-08
5.0E-03
2.0E-03
l.OE+00
3.0E-03
8.0E-02
7.0E-02
2.0E-01
5.0E-03
5.0E-03
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.4E-04
4.0E-04
5.4E-04
6.2e-10
6.2E-09
3.7E-03
4.8E-04
1.9E-03
3.0E-05
5.1E-04
4.0E-04
8.8E-05
1.2E-02
1.7E-03
8.8E-03
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
4.9E-04
1.8E+00
7.3E-01*
2.5E-02
1.2E-01
1.2E-01
7.3E-03
4.9E+00
7.3E-03
2.5E-08
7.3E-01
1.5E+00
2.5E-01
7.3E-01
1.2E-02
2.0E-03
1.2E-01
4.9E+00
4.9E-01
7.3E+02*
2.5E-01
6.9E+00
9.8E-02
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
1.4E-04
1.7E-02
2.2E-09
l.OE-07
1.9E-03
5.0E-04
2.1E-02
7.5E+00
3.6E-02
3.6E-03
1.9E-02
1.1E-03
6.8E-03
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
4.9E-01
1.4E+00
3.6E+00
9.4E-01
1.3E+00
9.5E+01
8.3E-01
6.9E+00
1.9E+00
5-18
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 5.0
Table 5.4 IWEM MCLs and HBNs (continued)
CAS
Number
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
95-47-6
108-38-3
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
Chemical Name
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid
2-(2,4,5-(Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (Trinitrobenzene
1,3,5-) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene o-
Xylene m-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
MCL
(mg/L)
5.0E-02
2.0E-03
l.OE+01
Ingestion HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
8.8E-03
1.4E-05
9.9E-06
1.3E-04
Non-Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
7.3E+00
2.5E+00
2.0E-01
2.5E-01
1.5E-01
7.3E-01
1.7E-01
2.5E+01
7.3E-02
4.9E+01
4.9E+01
4.9E+01
4.9E+01
7.3E+00
Inhalation HBNs
Cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.8E-01
2.5E-03
Non-cancer
HBN
(mg/L)
2.1E+00
3.4E-02
1.1E-01
1.2E+00
2.9E-01
1.4E+00
1.3E+00
1.3E+00
1.4E+00
Key:
* = Value exceeds constituent's water solubility
** = Value exceeds drinking water action level as specified by 40 CFR 141.32(e)(13) and (14)
5-19
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
6.0 How Does IWEM Calculate LCTVs and Make Liner
Recommendations?
The objective of the ground-water fate and transport model is to determine the
amount of dilution and attenuation a constituent may undergo as it migrates from a WMU
to a ground-water well and determine the constituent concentration at the well. For Tier
1, once the amount of dilution and attenuation is determined, that data are used in
conjunction with RGCs (either drinking water MCLs or HBNs which reflect a
constituent's toxicity) to establish the maximum allowable leachate constituent
concentrations for wastes that can be protectively managed in a particular unit design.
We refer to these maximum allowable leachate concentrations as LCTVs. For Tier 2, the
amount of dilution and attenuation help determine an exposure concentration that can be
compared to RGCs. The dilution and attenuation also may be used to estimate an LCTV
in Tier 2. This section describes the methods we used to develop the basis for the liner
recommendations for the Tier 1 and Tier 2 analysis in IWEM.
6.1 Determining Liner Recommendations Corresponding to a 90th
Percentile Exposure Concentration
Every single realization of EPACMTP in the Monte Carlo process results in a
predicted concentration at the modeled ground-water well. Because the predicted
ground-water concentrations are compared against health-based RGC's which reflect
specific exposure duration assumptions (see Section 5), the ground-water concentrations
calculated in IWEM represent time-averaged values, as depicted conceptually in Figure
6.1.
Depending on the type of RGC, the IWEM tool uses different averaging times in
calculating ground-water well concentrations, as follows:
MCL: Peak ground-water well concentration
Non-cancer HBN: Maximum 7-year average well concentration
Cancer HBN: Maximum 30-year average well concentration
At the conclusion of a Monte Carlo simulation consisting of 10,000 realizations,
the 10,000 values of predicted ground-water concentration for each specific averaging
time period are sorted from low to high into a CDF function, see Figure 6.2. In Tier 1,
the CDF represents the range in expected ground-water concentrations due to nationwide
variations in site hydrogeologic and other conditions; in Tier 2, the CDF represents the
6-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 6.0
01
£
0)
u
c
o
O
1
Peak
Concentration
Time
Exposure
Averaging Period
Figure 6.1 Determination of Time-Averaged
Ground-Water Well Concentration.
range in the expected location-specific ground-water concentration due to uncertainty and
variability in the local conditions.
For the development of the IWEM tool we selected the 90th percentile of the
predicted ground-water concentration CDF as the basis for determining the Tier 1 LCTVs
and as the point of comparison for the Tier 2 analysis. We based the selection of a 90th
percentile protection level on: (1) the need to have a large degree of confidence that the
results are adequately protective of human health and the environment given the degree
of uncertainty inherent in the data and the analyses; and (2) the need to choose a level of
protection that is consistent with EPA's Guidance for Risk Characterization (U.S. EPA,
1995b). The Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations are based on a high-end risk assessment which
is used to describe the risk or hazard for individuals in small, but definable segments of
the population. EPA's Guidance for Risk Characterization (U.S. EPA, 1995b) advises
that "conceptually, high-end exposure means exposure above about the 90th percentile of
the population distribution, but not higher than the individual in the population who has
the highest exposure." Use of the 90th percentile protection level in IWEM implies that,
of the modeled scenarios, 90% result in well concentrations that are lower than the
specified RGC, and thus, are considered protective for at least 90% of the cases.
By definition, the LCTV is that value of leachate concentration for which the 90th
percentile of the predicted ground-water well concentration is equal to the RGC. In the
6-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
case of organic constituents, the well concentration is linearly proportional to the leachate
concentration input value. We used this relationship to facilitate the determination of
LCTVs. For metals constituents that are subject to nonlinear sorption processes (see
Section 4.2.4), we followed a slightly different process to determine LCTVs. The
methodologies for organics and metals are discussed in the following sections.
6.1.1 Calculating LCTVs for Organic Constituents
For organic constituents, the fate and transport equations solved by EPACMTP
are linear, which means that the magnitude of the predicted ground-water well
concentration is linearly proportional to the value of the leachate concentration. In other
words, a doubling of the EPACMTP input value of leachate concentration would result in
a doubling of the predicted ground-water well concentration, as long as all other model
parameters stay the same. This relationship can be expressed in terms of a Dilution and
Attenuation Factor (DAF):
DAF =
where:
CRW = Ground-water well concentration (mg/L)
CL = Leachate concentration (mg/L)
DAF = Dilution and attenuation factor (dimensionless)
Because both the leachate concentration and the well concentration can vary with
time, the calculation of DAF uses the maximum value of a constituent's leachate
concentration, that is, the initial concentration at the time when leaching from the WMU
begins, and uses the maximum time-average well exposure concentration (see Figure 6.1
for CRW.
The DAF accounts for the aggregate effects of all fate and transport processes
simulated by EPACMTP. The value of the DAF is constituent-specific, as well as
WMU- and liner design-specific, that is, more protective liner designs increase the value
of the DAF for a given chemical constituent. Likewise, constituents which are subject to
degradation and sorption in the subsurface will have higher DAFs than constituents
which do not react in the subsurface.
For the purpose of determining IWEM LCTVs, the IWEM tool first converts the
CDF of predicted ground-water well concentrations into an equivalent CDF of DAF
values. This is depicted schematically in Figure 6.2. The 90th percentile DAF is the DAF
value that corresponds to the 90th percentile value of the ground-water well concentration
6-3
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 6.0
for a fixed value of leachate concentration. Because the DAF is inversely related to the
ground-water well concentration, a lower DAF value indicates that the concentration at
the well is closer to the leachate concentration and this provides a higher degree of
protection. As depicted in Figure 6.2, the CDF of DAF is ordered from high to low
values, and the 90th percentile DAF is defined such that 90% of DAF values are higher
than this threshold.
10'
10°
10
10'
r Well Co
ncentrailon
Percenlilg
Figure 6.2 Relationship Between Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of Well
Concentrations and Dilution and Attenuation Factors (DAFs).
Because the RGCs represent acceptable threshold values for the concentration of
chemical constituents in ground water, the RGC can be substituted for CRW in the
equation above. In this case, CL then represents the allowable concentration in the
leachate, or the LCTV. Making these substitutions and rearranging to solve for the
LCTV gives us:
LCTV = DAFQO x RGC
6-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
where
LCTV = Leachate Concentration Threshold Value (mg/L)
DAF90 = Dilution and attenuation factor at a 90th percentile protection level
RGC = Reference ground-water concentration (mg/L)
For each organic constituent in Tier 1, we conducted one modeling run (consisting
of 10,000 realizations) per WMU and liner scenario to determine the DAF90, and then
used the equation above to calculate the Tier 1 LCTV. As we will discuss in Section 6.2,
these "raw" Tier 1 LCTVs were then subjected to several caps to determine the final Tier
1 LCTVs. The final LCTVs presented in the Tier 1 look-up tables were rounded to two
significant digits. For organic constituents, the Tier 1 LCTV tables in Appendix F
include the DAF values generated by EPACMTP.
In Tier 2, once all of the user-specified inputs have been entered, and the Monte
Carlo simulations are complete, the IWEM software constructs the CDFs of the ground-
water well concentration and the DAF, and then develops a liner recommendation by
directly comparing expected exposure concentrations to RGCs. In addition, IWEM
calculates Tier 2 LCTVs using the same equation and caps as used for Tier 1.
6.1.2 Determining LCTVs for Metals
In the case of metals constituent whose geochemical behavior is characterized by
nonlinear sorption isotherms (see Section 4.2.4), the concept of a DAF is still applicable,
but due to their nonlinear transport behavior, the metals do not have a DAF that is
constant across all leachate concentrations. Therefore, for metals, we used a slightly
different methodology to determine the Tier 1 LCTVs. For each metal constituent and
WMU/liner scenario, we ran multiple EPACMTP Monte Carlo simulations using a
number of different input values of leachate concentration. For each value of leachate
concentration we compared the 90th percentile value of the predicted well concentration
to each of the applicable RGCs until we found the leachate concentration that resulted in
10% of the simulations exceeding the given RGC - a protection level of 90%. In this
way, we determined the Tier 1 LCTVs for metals directly, without the intermediate step
of determining the DAF. For this reason, DAF values are not presented for the metals in
the Tier 1 Look-up Tables (Appendix F) in the results of the IWEM software.
For each metal constituent and WMU/liner scenario, we continued the iterative
process of running EPACMTP with different values of leachate concentration, until we
found the leachate concentration value for which the predicted ground-water
concentration would match the target RGC between 89.9 and 90.1 percentile probability,
i.e., we used a convergence tolerance of ±0.1 percentile point. We then rounded this
convergent input leachate concentration to two significant digits and reported it as the
(T5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
LCTV of the metal constituent for the specified liner scenario. As a quality control check
on these calculations, we performed an independent Monte Carlo simulation for each
metal LCTV, with the above value as input, and verified that the 90th percentile of the
predicted ground-water well concentrations did indeed match the target RGC, up to the
first two significant digits.
In Tier 2, the LCTV for metal constituents is an estimated value. Rather than
performing time-consuming iterative EPACMTP Monte Carlo simulations to determine
exact LCTVs, IWEM estimates values using an empirical adjustment factor of 0.85 in
order to ensure adequate protection of ground water. Tier 2 LCTVs for metals are
calculated as:
LCTV = DAF x RGC x 0.85
6.2 Capping the LCTVs
Once the raw LCTV was determined for each constituent, this value was then
subjected to the following limits:
Toxic hydrolysis transformation products cap;
l,000(mg/L)cap;and
TC Rule cap.
6.2.1 Hydrolysis Transformation Products
For organic constituents with transformation products that are produced by
chemical hydrolysis, the final LCTV values of the parent are modified if necessary to be
protective for the daughter product(s). That is, we also calculated LCTVs for any
transformation product (s) into which the parent might hydrolyze, assuming complete
transformation. Then, if any of the daughter products was found to have a lower LCTV
than the parent, the parent LCTV was set equal to (that is, capped at) the LCTV of the
daughter. Details of the calculation procedure we used to develop the daughter product
caps are presented in the text box which follows this page.
Table 6.1 presents the IWEM constituents that have toxic hydrolysis
transformation products that are included in the IWEM Tier 1 and Tier 2 analyses. We
assembled this table from information in Kollig et al. (1993) and Jeffers et al. (1989).
The last column of Table 6.1 presents the ratio of the number of moles of the daughter
product to the number of moles of the parent compound; for instance, a "1" in this
column means that one mole of the daughter is produced by the hydrolysis of one mole of
the parent, and a "2" in this column means that two moles of the daughter are produced
by the hydrolysis of one mole of the parent compound.
(T6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
In accounting for hydrolysis daughter products, we did not explicitly model the
formation, fate, and transport of transformation products along with the parent
constituent in the EPACMTP simulations, but rather made the adjustments by applying a
cap to the parent LCTV if necessary. This methodology is relatively simple and
protective because it is based on the assumption that the parent compounds are fully
transformed. In reality, the rate of hydrolysis may be quite slow with half-lives on the
order of several hundred years, and the formation of certain daughter products may also
depend on pH and other factors. When we calculated the parent LCTVs for slowly
hydrolyzing compounds we used the actual, constituent-specific hydrolysis parameters
(see Appendix B). Only when we calculated the daughter LCTVs did we assume that
100% transformation would occur.
6-7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
Calculation Procedure to Determine Daughter Product Caps
Suppose that we have a parent chemical (P) that hydrolyzes to form two daughter products (Dl and D2). The
molecular weights of these chemicals are MW(P), MW(D1), and MW(D2). The EPACMTP-modeled DAFs are
DAF(P), DAF(l), and DAF(2). The reference ground-water concentrations for these chemicals are RGC(P),
RGC(Dl), and RGC(D2). The "raw" LCTVs are calculated as the product of the modeled DAF and the given RGC;
these values are denoted as LCTV(P), LCTV(Dl) and LCTV(D2) and are referred to as "raw" LCTVs because they
are the calculated values that have not yet been affected by the capping procedure. One mole of P hydrolyzes to
form n(l) moles of D(l) and n(2) moles of D(2); n(l) and n(2) are referred to as the stoichiometric factors.
For a given RGC (reference ground-water concentration, e.g., MCL, HBN), the following steps are followed to
calculate the final LCTV of the parent compound:
1. Determine the raw LCTV of the parent chemical, using the following equation:
LCTV(P) = DAF(P)x RGC(P)
2. Determine the (raw) LCTV of each daughter, using the following equations:
LCTV(Dl) = DAF(Dl) x RGC(Dl)
LCTV(D2) = DAF(D2) x RGC(D2)
3. Using the molecular weight and stoichiometric factor of each daughter, calculate the adjusted LCTV (denoted
as LCTV(P(i)*) in the equations below) of the parent based on each daughter.
ForDl:
LCTV(P(D1)*) = LCTV(D1) x MW(P)/ (n(Dl) xMW(Dl))
For D2:
LCTV(P(D2)*) = LCTV(D2) x MW(P)/ (n(D2) xMW(D2))
4. For each daughter, compare the adjusted LCTV of the parent based on that daughter to the uncapped LCTV of
the parent; if the adjusted LCTV of the parent is less than the uncapped LCTV of the parent, replace the uncapped
LCTV of the parent with the adjusted LCTV of the parent based on that daughter:
ForDl:
If (LCTV(P) < LCTV(Dl) x MW(P)/ (n(Dl) xMW(Dl))
then LCTV(P(D1)*) = LCTV(Dl) x MW(P)/ (n(Dl) xMW(Dl))
Otherwise LCTV(P(D1)*) = LCTV(P)
For D2:
If (LCTV(P) < LCTV(D2) x MW(P)/ (n(D2) xMW(D2))
then LCTV(P(D2)*) = LCTV(D2) x MW(P)/ (n(D2) xMW(D2))
Otherwise LCTV(P(D2)*) = LCTV(P)
5. Compare all the adjusted LCTV of the parent, and pick the smallest value as the final LCTV of the parent:
LCTV(P) = Min (LCTV(P(D1)*), LCTV(P(D2)*))
6-8
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 6.0
Table 6.1 IWEM Constituents with Toxic Hydrolysis Transformation Products
Parent
Constituent
CASf
107-13-1
100-44-7
74-83-9
50-29-3
80-62-6
75-09-2
79-34-5
71-55-6
79-00-5
75-34-3
107-06-2
111-44-4
58-89-9
319-84-6
630-20-6
60-51-5
131-11-3
298-00-0
Common Name
Acrylonitrile
Benzyl chloride
Bromomethane
DDT, p,p'-
Methyl methacrylate
Methylene Chloride
(Dichloromethane)
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Dimethoate
Dimethyl phthalate
Methyl parathion
Transformation
Product(s)
CASf
79-06-1
79-10-7
100-51-6
67-56-1
72-55-9
67-56-1
50-00-0
79-01-6
75-35-4
75-35-4
75-07-0
75-01-4
75-01-4
75-21-8
107-21-1
123-91-1
120-82-1
120-82-1
79-01-6
7783-06-4
67-56-1
67-56-1
67-56-1
7783-06-4
Common Name
Acrylamide
Acrylic Acid
Benzyl alcohol
Methanol
DDE
Methanol
Formaldehyde
Trichloroethylene
Dichloroethylenel,!-
Dichloroethylenel,!-
Acetaldehyde
Vinyl chloride
Vinyl chloride
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene Glycol
Dioxane 1,4-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethylene
hydrogen sulfide
Methanol
Methanol
Methanol
hydrogen sulfide
Molar
Ratio
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
A number of daughter products that are produced by hydrolysis of these parent
compounds could not be included in the IWEM analyses due to a lack of toxicological
benchmarks for the daughter compounds. Table 6.2 presents a list of these daughter
products along with their IWEM parent constituents. Several parent constituents have
the same hydrolysis end-products, and a number of the daughters in Table 6.2 therefore
are listed with multiple parents. An example is hydrochloric acid which is a breakdown
product of a several chlorinated components.
6-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 6.0
Table 6.2 IWEM Daughter Constituents Without RGC Values
Daughter Constituent
CAS No.
64-19-7
7664-41-7
111-46-6
107-20-0
107-07-3
628-89-7
7647-01-0
7783-06-4
79-14-1
79-41-4
4376-18-5
100-02-7
7664-38-2
88-99-3
87-61-6
Name
Acetic acid
Ammonia
Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)ether
Chloroacetaldehyde
Chloroethanol, 2-
(2-chloroethoxy)ethanol,2-
Hydrochloric acid
Hydrogen sulfide
Hydroxacetic acid
Methylacrylic acid
Methylhydrogen phthalate
Nitrophenol, 2-
Phosphoric acid
Phthalic acid
Trichlorobenzene
IWEM Parent Constituent
CAS No.
71-55-6
107-13-1
111-44-4
79-00-5
107-06-2
111-44-4
100-44-7
7647-01-0
75-09-2
79-34-5
71-55-6
79-00-5
75-34-3
107-06-2
111-44-4
58-89-9
319-84-6
630-20-6
630-20-6
298-00-0
60-51-5
630-20-6
80-62-6
131-11-3
298-00-0
298-00-0
131-11-3
58-89-9
319-84-6
Name
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Acrylonitrile
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Dichloroethane
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Benzyl chloride
DDT, p,p'-
Dichloromethane
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Dichloroethane, 1,1-
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
Bis (2 -chloroethyl) ether
HCH, gamma-
HCH, alpha-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Methylparathion
Dimethoate
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Methylmetha cry late
Dimethyl phthalate
Methylparathion
Methylparathion
Dimethylphthalate
HCH, gamma-
HCH, alpha-
6-10
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
6.2.2 l,OOOmg/L/Cap
The second cap we applied was to limit the calculated LCTV for any constituent
at 1,000 mg/L. If the LCTV calculated from the ground-water modeling analysis is
greater than 1,000 mg/L, the LCTV will be set to 1,000 mg/L. The basis for this cap is
that leachate concentrations from nonhazardous wastes are not expected to exceed this
value. The calculated "raw" LCTVs exceeded the 1,000 mg/L cap in a significant
number of cases for composite liner designs. Review of the LCTV tables in Appendix F
shows that many of the composite liner LCTVs are capped at this value.
6.2.3 TC Rule Cap
Finally, we capped the LCTVs for the 39 constituents that are identified in the
Toxicity Characteristic Rule (TC Rule) (40 CFR 261.24; U.S. EPA, 1990) at their
regulatory TC level (see Table 6.3). The basis for applying this cap is that any waste
with leachate concentrations equal to or greater than the TC Rule regulatory level is a
characteristically hazardous waste under RCRA and state statutes.
6.3 Making Liner Recommendations
The IWEM tool allows the user to enter chemical and facility information and
automatically analyzes the results of the database query (Tier 1) or the modeling analysis
(Tier 2) to determine an appropriate WMU design that is protective of ground water.
The use and interpretation of the Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations are described in this
section.
When interpreting the Tier 1 and 2 liner recommendations, the following key
risk assessment issues should be kept in mind:
The IWEM HBNs correspond to a target risk of 1x106 for carcinogens
and a target HQ of 1 for noncarcinogens. These targets are used to
calculate separate HBNs for each constituent of concern, and separate
HBNs for each exposure route of concern (ingestion or inhalation).
The Tier 1 and Tier 2 evaluations do not consider combined exposure
from ground-water ingestion (from drinking water) and ground-water
inhalation (from showering), nor do they consider the potential for
additive exposure to multiple constituents. Therefore, use caution
when evaluating multiple constituents that have similar fate and
transport characteristics (e.g., similar kds and hydrolysis rates), as well
as constituents with non-cancer health effects associated with the same
target organ.
6-11
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Section 6.0
Table 6.3 Toxicity Characteristic Regulatory Levels (U.S. EPA, 1990)
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Chromium
o-Cresol
m-Cresol
p-Cresol
Cresol
2,4-D
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1 -Dichloroethylene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Endrin
Heptachlor
TC Rule Leachate
Concentration
Limit
(mg/L)
5.0
100
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.03
100
6.0
5.0
200
200
200
200
10.0
7.5
0.5
0.7
0.13
0.02
0.008
Constituent
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachloro-l,3-butadiene
Hexachloroethane
Lead
Lindane
Mercury
Methoxychlor
Methyl ethyl ketone
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Pyridine
Selenium
Silver
Tetrachloroethylene
Toxaphene
Trichloroethylene
2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2,4,5-TP Acid (Silvex)
Vinyl chloride
TC Rule Leachate
Concentration
Limit
(mg/L)
0.13
0.5
3.0
5.0
0.4
0.2
10.0
200.0
2.0
100.0
5.0
1.0
5.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
400
2.0
1.0
0.2
Usually, doses less than the RfD (HQ=1) are not likely to be associated with
adverse health effects and, therefore, are less likely to be of regulatory
concern. As the frequency and/or magnitude of the exposures exceeding the
RfD increase (HQ>1), the probability of adverse effects in a human
population increases. However, it should not be categorically concluded
that all doses below the RfD are "acceptable" (or will be risk-free) and that
all doses in excess of the RfD are "unacceptable" (or will result in adverse
effects).
6.3.1 Use and Interpretation of Tier 1 Evaluation
The Tier 1 evaluation is intended to provide a rapid, national-scale screening
assessment to determine if a proposed WMU design will be protective of human health
and the environment.
6-12
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
In a Tier 1 analysis, the potential impact that a WMU may have on ground-water
resources is characterized by comparing the expected constituent leachate concentration
(based on the TCLP or another appropriate leachate test method) to the calculated LCTV
in the appropriate look-up table. That is, the Tier 1 user only needs to know the type of
WMU to be evaluated, the chemical constituents expected in the waste (these
constituents are chosen from a list provided in the IWEM software), and their expected
leachate concentrations. EPA has performed the Tier 1 Monte Carlo simulations for each
of the IWEM constituents and assembled the results into Tier 1 LCTV look-up tables.
An electronic version of these look-up tables is included in the IWEM software as the
Tier 1 Evaluation, and a printed copy of the tables are included in Appendix F of this
document. This appendix presents LCTV values corresponding to each of the available
RCGs for each constituent, that is LCTVs based on MCLs as well as on ingestion and
inhalation cancer and non-cancer HBNs. Where a RGC is not available, for instance, a
constituent does not have an inhalation HBN, the LCTV entry in the table is left blank.
The IWEM Tier 1 evaluation automatically performs the required comparisons of
leachate concentration to all of the LCTVs for each waste constituent and liner scenario.
The result of this comparison determines the recommended liner system for the WMU or
determines whether land application of this waste is appropriate (that is, determines
whether the waste constituent concentrations will not exceed HBNs at a well if a
particular WMU design is implemented). In Tier 1, the results of the evaluation are
presented in terms of a MCL summary and a HBN summary. The HBNs summary
reflects the liner recommendation based on the most protective, that is the lowest, HBN
available for each constituent.
If the user-identified leachate concentrations for all constituents are lower than
the corresponding no-liner LCTVs in the look-up table, then no liner is recommended as
being sufficiently protective of ground water. If any leachate concentration is higher than
the corresponding no-liner LCTV, then a minimum of a single clay liner is
recommended. If any leachate concentration is higher than the corresponding single-liner
LCTV, then a minimum of a composite liner is recommended. If any concentration is
higher than the composite liner, consider pollution prevention, treatment, or additional
controls. For waste streams with multiple constituents, the most protective minimum
recommended liner that is specified for any one constituent is the recommended liner
design.
After conducting a Tier 1 analysis, the user can choose to implement the Tier 1
recommendation by designing the unit based on the liner recommendations given by the
IWEM software. If the user chooses to implement the Tier 1 recommendation,
consultation with state authorities is recommended to ensure compliance with state
regulations, which may require more protective measures than the Tier 1 lookup tables
recommend. Alternatively, if the waste has one or very few "problem" constituents that
call for a more stringent and costly liner system (or which make land application
(Tl3
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
inappropriate), evaluate pollution prevention, recycling, and treatment efforts for those
constituents.
If, after conducting the Tier 1 analysis, the user is not satisfied with the resulting
recommendations or if site-specific conditions seem likely to support the use of a liner
design different from the one recommended (or suggest a different conclusion regarding
the appropriateness of land application of a waste), then the user can proceed to the Tier
2 analysis or conduct a site-specific ground-water fate and transport analysis (Tier 3).
6.3.2 Use and Interpretation of Tier 2 Evaluation
The Tier 2 analysis is designed to provide user-friendly software that allows users
to input location-specific data for a number of EPACMTP input parameters and quickly
determine if a proposed WMU design will be protective of human health and the
environment.
As with Tier 1, the IWEM software provides the Tier 2 user with a list of
constituents commonly encountered when managing industrial waste, along with the
opportunity to input constituent-specific data that are necessary for a Tier 2 analysis (for
examples parameters such as decay rate and sorption coefficients, as well as HBNs
and/or MCLs). The IWEM Tier 2 evaluation also allows the user to define new
chemicals and enter the required chemical property data, including user-specified RGCs.
Once the list of constituents and their chemical data have been specified, the user is
requested to input location-specific data, where available, and to document the source of
these data. In Tier 2, the user also selects the type of RGC to be used in the evaluation.
This can be MCL, HBN, or all available. If the user selects one type of RGC, IWEM
performs the evaluation only for that RGC. If all available RGCs are selected, then all
are considered in the evaluation and the final liner recommendation will be based on the
most protective, that is the lowest, RGC for each constituent.
After entering the available data, the EPACMTP model is automatically launched
by the IWEM software. In Tier 2, EPACMTP will perform Monte Carlo simulations,
comprising 10,000 model realizations for each waste constituent and liner design, in
order to determine the minimum recommended liner design at a 90th percentile protection
level. The Monte Carlo simulations can be computationally demanding, and an
evaluation of multiple liner designs for a single waste constituent can take several hours.
In order to optimize the computational process, IWEM will first perform the liner
evaluations from least protective (no-liner) to most protective (composite liner). If
during this process, IWEM identifies a liner design that is protective for all constituents
(for instance, a single clay liner), it will stop the evaluation process, and not evaluate
more protective designs (in the example case, it would skip the composite liner
evaluation). Once the modeling analyses are complete, the user is provided with
(Tl4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 6.0
recommendations regarding whether or not a specific liner type for a WMU is protective
based on the modeled 90th percentile exposure concentrations using the location-specific
data and the RGCs for the chemicals of concern.
After conducting the Tier 2 Evaluation, you can choose to implement the Tier 2
recommendation by designing the unit based on the liner recommendations given by the
IWEM software or continue to a Tier 3 analysis. If the user chooses to implement the
Tier 2 recommendation, consultation with state authorities is recommended to ensure
compliance with state regulations, which may require more protective measures than the
Tier 2 results recommend. Alternatively, if the waste has one or very few "problem"
constituents that call for a more stringent and costly liner system (or which make land
application inappropriate), evaluate pollution prevention, recycling, and treatment efforts
for those constituents. If you are not satisfied with the resulting recommendations or if
site-specific conditions seem likely to support the use of a liner design different from the
one recommended (or suggest a different conclusion regarding the appropriateness of
land application of a waste), then you may wish to consider a fully site-specific ground-
water fate and transport analysis (Tier 3).
6-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 7.0
7.0 REFERENCES
ABB Environmental Services, 1995. Estimation of Leachate Rates from Industrial Waste
Management Facilities. August, 1995.
Bonaparte, R., J. P. Giroud, and B.A. Cross, 1989. Rates of leakage through landfill
liners. Geosynthetics 1989 Conference, San Diego, California.
Burnett, R.D. and E.O. Frind, 1987. Simulation of contaminant transport in three
dimensions. 2. Dimensionality effects. Water Resources Research 23(4): 695-
705.
Carsel, R.F., and R.S. Parrish, 1988. Developing joint probability distributions of soil
water retention characteristics. Water Resources Research 29:755-770.
Coburn, J., 1996. Memo to Dana Greenwood on Emission Flux Equations for
Showering, July 1.
Davis, S. N., 1969. Porosity and permeability of natural materials. In Flow Through
Porous Media, R.J. M. de Wiest, Editor, Academic Press, NY.
de Marsily, G., 1986. Quantitative Hydrogeology - Groundwater hydrology for
Engineers. Academic Press, 44 pp.
EPRI, 1986. Physiochemical Measurements of Soils at Solid Waste Disposal Sites.
Electric Power Research Institute, prepared by Battelle, Pacific Northwest
Laboratories, Richland, WA, EPRI EA-4417.
Gelhar, L.W., A. Mantoglou, C. Welty, and K.R. Rehfeldt, 1985. A review of field scale
physical solute transport processes in saturated and unsaturated porous media.
Report EPRI-EA-4190. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
Gintautas, P.A., K.A. Huyck, S.R. Daniel, and D.L. Macalady, 1993. Metal-Organic
Interactions in Subtitle D Landfill Leachates and Associated Groundwaters, in
Metals in Groundwaters, H.E. Allen, E.M. Perdue, and D.S. Brown, eds. Lewis
Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI.
Heath, R.C., 1984. Ground-Water Regions of the United States. United States
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2242, 78 pp.
7-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 7.0
Jeffers, P.M., L.M. Ward, L.M. Woytowitch, and N.L. Wolfe, 1989. "Homogeneous
Hydrolysis Rate Constants for Selected Chlorinated Methanes, Ethanes, Ethenes,
and Propanes." Environ. Sci. Technol. 23, 965-969.
Jury, W.A., W.R. Gardner, and W.H. Gardner, 1991. Soil Physics. J. Wiley and Sons,
327 pp.
Kollig et al, 1993. Environmental Fate Constants for Organic Chemicals Under
Consideration for EPA's Hazardous Waste Identification Projects. Report No.
EPA/600/R-93/132. Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, GA 30605.
Lambe, T.W., and Whitman, R.V., 1969. Soil Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons.
Little, J.C., 1992a. Applying the two resistance theory to constituent volatilization in
showers. Environmental Science and Technology 26(7): 1341 -1349.
Little, J.C., 1992b. Applying the two resistance theory to constituent volatilization in
showers. Environmental Science and Technology 26(4); 836-837.
Mathur, S. S., 1995. Development of a Database for Ion Sorption on Goethite Using
Surface Complexation Modeling. Master's Thesis, Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
McKone, I.E., 1987. Human exposure to volatile organic compounds in household tap
water: The indoor inhalation pathway. Environmental Science and Technology
21:1194-1201.
McWorther, D. B., and D. K. Sunada, 1977. Groundwater Hydrology and Hydraulics,
Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, CO.
Newell, C., J.M., L. P. Hopkins, and P. B. Bedient, 1989. Hydrogeologic Database for
Ground Water Modeling. API Publication No. 4476. American Petroleum
Institute, Washington, DC 20005.
Rollin, A.L., M. Marcotte, T. Jacquelin, and L. Chaput, 1999. Leak location in exposed
geomembrane liners using an electrical leak detection technique. Geosynthetics
'99: Specifying Geosynthetics and Developing Design Details, Vol. 2, pp 615-
626.
7-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 7.0
Schroeder, P.R., T.S., Dozier, P.A. Zappi, B.M. McEnroe, J. W. Sjostrom, and R.L.
Peton, 1994. The hydrologic evaluation of landfill performance model (HELP):
Engineering Documentation for Version 3. EPA/600/R-94/1686. United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
Shea, J.H., 1974. Deficiencies of elastic particles of certain sizes, Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology 44:985-1003.
Susetyo, W., L.A. Carreira, L.V. Azarraga, and D.M. Grimm, 1991. Fluorescence
techniques for metal-humic interactions. Fresenius J Anal Chem, 339:624-635.
TetraTech, Inc., 2001. Characterization of infiltration rate data to support groundwater
modeling efforts (Draft). Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Contract No. 68-W6-0061, May, 2001.
Todd, O.K., 1980. Groundwater Hydrology (2nd edition), John Wiley & Sons, 535 pages.
U.S. EPA, 1985. DRASTIC: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water
Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings. EPA/600-2-85/018,
Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 1986. Industrial Subtitle D Facility Study (Telephone Survey), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, October, 1986.
U.S. EPA, 1990. Toxicity Characteristic Final Rule. 55 FR 11796. March 29, 1990.
U.S. EPA, 1991a. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1 -Human Health
Evaluation Manual (Part B, Development of Risk-Based Preliminary Goals).
EPA/540/R-92/003. Interim Draft. Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 1991b. MINTEQA2/PRODEFA2, A Geochemical Assessment Model for
Environmental Systems: Version 3.0 User's Manual EPA/600/3-91/021, Office
of Research and Development, Athens, Georgia 30605.
U.S. EPA, 1992. 57 Federal Register 22888. Final Guidelines for Exposure Assessment.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. May 29.
U.S. EPA, 1995a. Hazardous Waste: Identification and Listing; Proposed Rule. 40
CFR Parts 260, 261, 266, and 268.
7-3
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Section 7.0
U.S. EPA, 1995b. Guidance for Risk Characterization. Science Policy Council, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, February.
U.S. EPA, 1996. Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document.
EPA/540/R95/128. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. May.
U.S. EPA, 1997a. Exposure Factors Handbook, Volume I, General Factors.
EPA/600/P-95/002Fa. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 1997b. Exposure Factors Handbook, Volume II, FoodIngestion Factors.
EPA/600/P-95/002Fb. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 1997c. Exposure Factors Handbook, Volume III, Activity Factors.
EPA/600/P-95/002Fc. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2000. Volatilization Rates from Water to Indoor Air, Phase II. EPA/600/R-
00/096. National Center for Environmental Assessment-Washington Office,
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. October.
U.S. EPA, 2001. Industrial Surface Impoundments in the United States. U.S. EPA
Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC 20460. USEPA 530-R-01-005.
U.S. EPA, 2002a. EPACMTP Technical Background Document. Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2002b. EPACMTP Parameters/Data Background Document. Office of Solid
Waste, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2002c. IWEM User's Guide. Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
7-4
-------
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
GLOSSARY
Adsorption - Adherence of molecules in solution to the surface of solids.
Adsorption isotherm - The relationship between the concentration of constituent in
solution and the amount adsorbed at constant temperature.
Advection - The process whereby solutes are transported by the bulk mass of flowing
fluid.
Alluvium - The general name for all sediments, including clay, silt, sand, gravel or
similar unconsolidated material deposited in a sorted or semi-sorted condition by a
stream or other body of running water, in a stream bed, floodplain, delta or at the base of
a mountain slope as a fan.
Anisotropy - The condition of having different properties in different directions.
Aquifer - A geologic formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that contains
sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells
and springs.
Aquifer system - A body of permeable material that functions regionally as a
water-yielding unit; it comprises two or more permeable beds separated at least locally
by confining beds that impede ground-water movement but do not greatly affect the
regional hydraulic continuity of the system; includes both saturated and unsaturated parts
of permeable material.
Area of influence of a well - The area surrounding a pumping or recharging well within
which the potentiometric surface has been changed.
Breakthrough curve - A graph of concentration versus time at a fixed location.
Cancer slope factor (CFS) - An upper bound estimate, approximating a 95% confidence
limit, on the increased cancer risk from a lifetime exposure to an agent. This estimate,
usually expressed in units of proportion (of a population) affected per mg/kg/day, is
generally reserved for use in the low-dose region of the dose-response relationship, that
is, for exposures corresponding to risks less than 1 in 100.
Cation exchange capacity - The sum total of exchangeable cations that a porous
medium can absorb. Expressed in moles of ion charge per kilogram of soil.
A-l
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Chronic daily intake (GDI) - Exposure expressed as mass of a substance contacted per
unit body weight per unit time, averaged over a long period of time.
Confined - A modifier that describes a condition in which the potentiometric surface is
above the top of the aquifer.
Confined aquifer - An aquifer bounded above and below by impermeable beds or by
beds of distinctly lower permeability than that of the aquifer itself; an aquifer containing
confined ground water.
Confining unit - A body of impermeable or distinctly less permeable material which
separates water-bearing layers.
Darcian velocity - The rate of ground-water flow per unit area of porous or fractured
media measured perpendicular to the direction of flow. See specific discharge.
Darcy's law - An empirical law which states that the velocity of flow through porous
medium is directly proportional to the hydraulic gradient.
Desorption - Removal of a substance adsorbed to the surface of an adsorbent. Also, the
reverse process of sorption.
Diffusion - Spreading of solutes from regions of higher concentration to regions of lower
concentration caused by the concentration gradient. In slow-moving ground water, this
can be a significant mixing process.
Diffusion coefficient - The rate at which solutes are transported at the microscopic level
due to variations in the solute concentrations within the fluid phases.
Dispersion coefficient - A measure of the tendency of a plume of dissolved constituents
in ground water to spread. Equal to the sum of the coefficients of mechanical dispersion
and molecular diffusion in a porous medium.
Dispersion, longitudinal - Process whereby some of the water molecules and solute
molecules travel more rapidly than the average linear velocity and some travel more
slowly. Results in the spreading of the solute in the direction of the bulk flow.
Dispersion, transverse - Process whereby some of the water molecules and solute
molecules spread in directions perpendicular to the bulk flow.
A-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Dispersivity - A geometric property of a porous medium that determines the dispersion
characteristics of the medium by relating the components of pore velocity to the
dispersion coefficient.
Distribution coefficient - The quantity of a constituent sorbed by a solid per unit weight
of solid divided by the quantity dissolved in water per unit volume of water.
Dose-response relationship - The relationship between a quantified exposure (dose),
and the proportion of subjects demonstrating specific, biological changes (response).
Evapotranspiration - The combined loss of water from a given area by evaporation
from the land and transpiration from plants.
Exposure pathway - The course a chemical or physical agent takes from a source to an
exposed organism. An exposure pathway describes a unique mechanism by which an
individual or population is exposed to chemicals or physical agents at, or originating
from, a site. Each exposure pathway includes a source or release from a source, an
exposure point, and an exposure route. If the exposure point differs from the source,
transport/exposure medium (e.g., water) or media (in case of intermedia transfer) also is
included.
Exposure point - A location of potential contact between an organism and a chemical or
physical agent.
Exposure point concentration - an estimate of the of the arithmetic average
concentration of a contaminant at a exposure point.
Flow, steady - A characteristic of a flow system where the magnitude and direction of
specific discharge are constant in time at any point. See also flow, unsteady.
Flow, uniform - A characteristic of a flow system where specific discharge has the same
magnitude and direction at any point.
Flow, unsteady - A characteristic of a flow system where the magnitude and/or direction
of the flow rate changes with time.
Flow velocity - The rate of ground-water flow per unit area of porous or fractured media
measured perpendicular to the direction of flow. See specific discharge.
Flux - The rate of ground-water flow per unit area of porous or fractured media measured
perpendicular to the direction of flow. See specific discharge.
Fracture - A break or crack in the bedrock.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Geohydrologic system - The geohydrologic units within a geologic setting, including
any recharge, discharge, interconnections between units, and any natural or
human-induced processes or events that could affect ground-water flow within or among
those units. See ground-water system.
Geohydrologic unit - An aquifer, a confining unit, or a combination of aquifers and
confining units comprising a framework for a reasonably distinct geohydrologic system.
See hydrogeologic unit.
Ground water - Water present below the land surface in a zone of saturation. Ground
water is the water contained within an aquifer.
Ground water, confined - Ground water under pressure significantly greater than
atmospheric and whose upper limit is the bottom of a confining unit.
Ground-water discharge - Flow of water out of the zone of saturation.
Ground-water flow - The movement of water in the zone of saturation.
Ground-water flux - The rate of ground-water flow per unit area of porous or fractured
media measured perpendicular to the direction of flow. See specific discharge.
Ground-water mound - A raised area in a water table or potentiometric surface created
by ground-water recharge.
Ground-water recharge - The process of water addition to the saturated zone or the
volume of water added by this process.
Ground-water system - A ground-water reservoir and its contained water. Also, the
collective hydrodynamic and geochemical processes at work in the reservoir.
Ground-water table - That surface below which rock, gravel, sand or other material is
saturated. It is the surface of a body of unconfmed ground water at which the pressure is
atmospheric. Also called water table; synonymous with phreatic surface.
Ground-water travel time - The time required for a unit volume of ground water or
solute to travel between two locations. The travel time is the length of the flow path
divided by the pore water velocity. If discrete segments of the flow path have different
hydrologic properties, the total travel time will be the sum of the travel times for each
discrete segment.
A-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Ground water, unconfined - Water in an aquifer that has a water table. See also ground
water, confined.
Hazard quotient - The ratio of a single contaminant exposure level over a specified time
period to a reference dose for that contaminant derived from a similar period.
Health-based number (HBN) - The maximum constituent concentration in ground
water that is expected to not usually cause adverse noncancer health effects in the general
population (including sensitive subgroups), or that will not result in an additional
incidence of cancer in more than approximately one in one million individuals exposed to
the contaminant.
Heterogeneity - A characteristic of a medium in which material properties vary
throughout the medium.
Homogeneity - A characteristic of a medium in which material properties are identical
throughout the medium.
Hydraulic conductivity - A coefficient of proportionality describing the rate at which
water can move through an aquifer or other permeable medium. Synonymous with
permeability.
Hydraulic gradient - Slope of the water table or potentiometric surface.
Hydraulic head - The level to which water rises in a well with reference to a datum such
as sea level.
Hydrodynamic dispersion - The spreading of the solute front during ground-water
plume transport resulting from both mechanical dispersion and molecular diffusion.
Synonymous with mechanical dispersion.
Hydrogeologic unit - Any soil or rock unit or zone that by virtue of its porosity or
permeability, or lack thereof, has a distinct influence on the storage or movement of
ground water.
Hydrologic properties - Those properties of a rock that govern the entrance of water and
the capacity to hold, transmit, and deliver water. Hydrologic properties include porosity,
effective porosity, and permeability.
Hydrolysis - The splitting (lysis) of a compound by a reaction with water. Example are
the reaction of salts with water to produce solutions that are not neutral, and the reaction
of an ester with water.
A-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Hydrostratigraphic unit - See hydrogeologic unit.
Igneous rocks - Rocks that solidified from molten or partly molten materials, that is from
a magma or lava.
Immiscible - The chemical property of two or more phases that, at mutual equilibrium,
cannot dissolve completely in one another, for example, oil and water.
Impermeable - A characteristic of some geologic material that limits its ability to
transmit significant quantities of water under the head differences ordinarily found in the
subsurface.
Infiltration - The downward entry of water into the soil or rock, specifically from a
waste management unit.
Isotropy - The condition in which the property or properties of interest are the same in
all directions.
Leachate - A liquid that has percolated through waste and has extracted dissolved or
suspended materials.
Leaching - Separation or dissolving out of soluble constituents from a waste by
percolation of water.
Matrix - The solid particles in a porous system and their spatial arrangement. Often used
in contrast to the pore space in a porous system.
Matrix diffusion - The tendency of solutes to diffuse from the larger pores in the system
into small pores inside the solid matrix from where they can be removed only very
slowly.
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - Legally enforceable standards regulating the
maximum allowed amount of certain chemicals in drinking water.
Mechanical dispersion - The process whereby solutes are mechanically mixed during
advective transport caused by the velocity variations at the microscopic level.
Synonymous with hydrodynamic dispersion.
Metamorphic rocks - Any rock derived from pre-existing rocks by mineralogical,
chemical, and/or structural changes, essentially in the solid state, in response to marked
changes in temperature, pressure, shearing stress, and chemical environment, generally at
depth in the Earth's crust.
A-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Miscible - The chemical property of two or more fluid phases that, when brought
together, have the ability to mix and form one phase.
Model - A simplified representation of a physical system obeying certain specified
conditions, whose behavior is used to understand the real world system. Often, the model
is a mathematical representation, programmed into a computer.
Moisture content - The ratio of either (a) the weight of water to the weight of solid
particles expressed as moisture weight percentage or (b) the volume of water to the
volume of solid particles expressed as moisture volume percentage in a given volume of
porous medium. See water content.
Molecular diffusion - The process in which solutes are transported at the microscopic
level due to variations in the solute concentrations within the fluid phases. See diffusion.
Monte Carlo simulation - A method that produces a statistical estimate of a quantity by
taking many random samples from an assumed probability distribution, such as a normal
distribution. The method is typically used when experimentation is infeasible or when
the actual input values are difficult or impossible to obtain.
Mounding - Commonly, an outward and upward expansion of the free water table
caused by surface infiltration or recharge.
Outwash deposits - Stratified drift deposited by meltwater streams flowing away from
melting ice.
Overburden - The layer of fragmental and unconsolidated material including loose soil,
silt, sand and gravel overlying bedrock, which has been either transported from elsewhere
or formed in place.
Permeability - The property of a porous medium to transmit fluids under an hydraulic
gradient.
Permeable - The property of a porous medium to allow the easy passage of a fluid
through it.
pH - A numerical measure of the acidity or alkalinity of water ranging from 0 to 14.
Neutral waters have pH near 7. Acidic waters have pH less than 7 and alkaline waters
have pH greater than 7.
Pore-water velocity - Average velocity of water particles. Equals the Darcian velocity
divided by the effective porosity. Synonymous with seepage velocity.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Porosity - The ratio, usually expressed as a percentage, of the total volume of voids (or
pores) of a given porous medium to the total volume of the porous medium.
Porosity, effective - The ratio, usually expressed as a percentage, of the total volume of
voids (or pores) available for fluid transmission to the total volume of the porous
medium.
Receptor - The potentially exposed individual for the exposure pathway considered.
Recharge - The process of addition of water to the saturated zone; also the water added.
In IWEM, recharge is the result of natural precipitation around a waste management unit.
Reference concentration (RfC) - An estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an
order of magnitude) of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human population
(including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of
deleterious effects during a lifetime. It can be derived from a NOAEL, LOAEL, or
benchmark concentration, with uncertainty factors generally applied to reflect limitations
of the data used. Generally used in EPA's noncancer health assessments.
Reference Dose (RfD) - An estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of
magnitude) of a daily oral or dermal exposure to the human population (including
sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects
during a lifetime.
Retardation factor - The ratio of the average linear velocity of ground water to the
velocity of a dissolved constituent. A value greater than one indicates that the constituent
moves more slowly than water, usually caused by sorption.
Risk - The probability that a constituent will cause an adverse effect in exposed humans
or to the environment.
Risk assessment - The process used to determine the risk posed by contaminants
released into the environment. Elements include identification of the contaminants
present in the environmental media, assessment of exposure and exposure pathways,
assessment of the toxicity of the contaminants present at the site, characterization of
human health risks, and characterization of the impacts or risks to the environment.
Saturated Zone - The part of the water bearing layer of rock or soil in which all spaces,
large or small, are filled with water.
Sedimentary rocks - Rocks formed from consolidation of loose sediments such as clay,
silt, sand, and gravel.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Seepage velocity - See pore-water velocity.
Soil bulk density - The mass of dry soil per unit bulk soil.
Soil moisture - Subsurface liquid water in the unsaturated zone expressed as a fraction of
the total porous medium volume occupied by water. It is less than or equal to the
porosity.
Solubility - The total amount of solute species that will remain indefinitely in a solution
maintained at constant temperature and pressure in contact with the solid crystals from
which the solutes were derived.
Solute transport - The net flux of solute (dissolved constituent) through a hydrogeologic
unit controlled by the flow of subsurface water and transport mechanisms.
Sorption - A general term used to encompass the process of adsorption.
Source term - The kinds and amounts of constituents that make up the source of a
potential release.
Specific discharge - The rate of discharge of ground water per unit area of a porous
medium measured at right angle to the direction of flow. Synonymous with Darcian
velocity, or (specific) flux.
Till - Till consists of a generally unconsolidated, unsorted, unstratified heterogeneous
mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel and boulders of different sizes and shapes. Till is
deposited directly by and underneath glacial ice without subsequent reworking by
meltwater.
Toxicity - The degree to which a chemical substance elicits a deleterious or adverse
effect on a biological system of an organism exposed to the substance over a designated
time period.
Transient flow - See flow, unsteady.
Transmissivity - The rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width of the
aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. It is equal to an integration of the hydraulic
conductivities across the saturated part of the aquifer perpendicular to the flow paths.
Transport - Conveyance of dissolved constituents and particulates in flow systems. See
also solute transport.
A-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Unconfined - A condition in which the upper surface of the zone of saturation forms a
water table under atmospheric pressure.
Unconfined aquifer - An aquifer that has a water table.
Unconsolidated deposits - Deposits overlying bedrock and consisting of soil, silt, sand,
gravel and other material which have either been formed in place or have been
transported in from elsewhere.
Unsaturated flow - The movement of water in a porous medium in which the pore
spaces are not filled to capacity with water.
Unsaturated zone - The subsurface zone between the water table and the land surface
where some of the spaces between the soil particles are filled with air.
Vadose zone - See unsaturated zone.
Volatiles - Substances with relatively large vapor pressures that easily volatilize when in
contact with air.
Water content - The amount of water lost from the soil after drying it to constant weight
at 105 °C, expressed either as the weight of water per unit weight of dry soil or as the
volume of water per unit bulk volume of soil. See also moisture content.
Water table - The upper surface of a zone of saturation except where that surface is
formed by a confining unit. The water pressure at the water table equals atmospheric
pressure.
Water table aquifer - See unconfined aquifer.
Well - A bored, drilled or driven shaft, or a dug hole extending from the ground surface
into the ground water, that is used to inject (injection well) or extract ground water.
Well screen - A cylindrical filter used to prevent sediment from entering a water well.
There are several types of well screens, which can be ordered in various slot widths,
selected on the basis of the grain size of the aquifer material where the well screen is to
be located. In very fine grained aquifers, a zone of fine gravel or coarse sand may be
required to act as a filter between the screen and the aquifer.
A-10
-------
APPENDIX B
LIST OF IWEM WASTE CONSTITUENTS AND DEFAULT
CHEMICAL PROPERTY DATA
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Table B-l: Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
Constituent Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanall
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acidl
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}±luoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1,3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride!
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Molecular
Weight
(g/mol)
(a)
154.2
44.1
58.1
41.1
120.2
56.1
71.1
72.1
53.1
364.9
58.1
93.1
178.2
121.8
74.9
137.3
228.3
78.1
184.2
252.3
252.3
108.1
126.6
9.0
143.0
171.1
390.6
163.8
94.9
54.1
74.1
312.4
240.2
112.4
76.1
153.8
409.8
88.5
127.6
112.6
325.2
208.3
64.5
119.4
50.5
128.6
76.5
52.0
52.0
228.3
58.9
63.5
108.1
108.1
108.1
324.4
120.2
100.2
98.1
320.0
318.0
354.5
270.2
278.4
236.3
147.0
147.0
253.1
Solubility
(mg/L)
(b)
4.24
1.0E+06(e)
1.0E+06(e)
1.0E+06(e)
6.13E+03
2.13E+05
6.4E+05
1.0E+06(e)
7.4E+04
0.18
1.0E+06(e)
3.6E+04
4.3E-02
9.4E-03
1.75E+03
500.0
1.62E-03
1.5E-03
4.0E+04
525.00
1.72E+04
1.31E+03
0.34
6.74E+03
1.52E+04
735.00
7.4E+04
2.69
52.00
1.19E+03
793.00
0.06
1.74E+03
5.3E+03
472.00
11.10
2.6E+03
5.68E+03
7.92E+03
5.33E+03
2.2E+04
3.37E+03
1.6E-03
2.27E+04
2.6E+04
2.15E+04
2.34E+04
61.30
4.3E+04(e)
5.0E+03
0.09
0.12
0.03
40.00
0.00
1.23E+03
156.00
73.80
3.11
LogK,,
(log[mL/g])
(c)
3.75
-0.21 (h)
-0.59
-0.71
1.26
-0.22
-0.99
-1.84
-0.09
6.18
1.47(e)
0.60
4.21
5.34
1.80
1.26
5.80
5.80
0.78
2.84
0.80
2.39
7.13
1.77
0.76
2.06 (e)
0.50
4.23
2.02
1.84
2.41
5.89
1.74
1.61
2.58
4.04
1.91
0.51
1.58
0.91
1.82
1.13
5.34
1.76
1.76
1.76
2.12
3.40
l.H(g)
1.82
5.89
6.64
6.59
4.17
6.52
1.94
3.08
3.05
3.32
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed
(Ka)
(1/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
31.5
0
500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral
(Kn)
(i/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
6.7E+08
0.018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
410
0.23
0
9.46
0
0
0
0
0.017
0
0
0
0
0
0
l.OE-04
0
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.025
0
0.06
0.1
0
4.0E-03
0
0
0
Base
Catalyzed
(Kb,
(1/mol/yr)
0
0
0
45
0
0
0
5.2E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.4E+03
5.0E+04
0
0
1.2E+05
0
31500
0
37.7
0
0
0
2.8E+06
2.5E+04
0
2740
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.2E+04
0
3.1E+05
8.0E+03
0
1.2E+05
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient
in Water
(Dw)
(m2/yr)
(d)
0.0426
0.0363
0.0445
0.0385
0.0397
0.0378
0.0388
0.0184
0.0319
0.0186 (i)
0.0325
0.0239
0.0208
0.0174(i)
0.0278
0.0275
0.0233
0.0132
0.0337
0.0426
0.0325
0.041
0.0308
0.0172
0.0315
0.0299
0.0173
0.0334
0.0366
0.0344
0.0429
0.0299
0.0341
0.0213
0.0294
0.0311
0.0291
0.0299
0.0248
0.0295
0.014
0.019
0.0281
0.0281
0.0274
0.0173 (i)
B-l-1
-------
Table B-l: Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
75-35-4
156-59-2
156-60-5
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
Constituent Name
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 1 2)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene l,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF1
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1,2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II,mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro- 1 , 3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFsl
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDsl
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indeno{ 1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Molecular
Weight
(g/mol)
(a)
120.9
99.0
99.0
96.9
96.9
96.9
163.0
221.0
113.0
111.0
111.0
111.0
380.9
222.2
268.4
229.2
0.0
73.1
256.3
212.3
122.2
278.3
168.1
184.1
182.1
182.1
390.6
88.1
169.2
184.2
274.4
406.9
380.9
92.5
72.1
90.1
132.2
88.1
74.1
114.1
124.2
106.2
187.9
62.1
44.1
102.2
202.3
19.0
30.0
46.0
96.1
290.8
290.8
290.8
373.3
389.3
260.8
284.8
272.8
374.9
390.9
236.7
406.9
86.2
34.1
276.3
74.1
138.2
Solubility
(mg/L)
(b)
280.00
5.06E+03
8.52E+03
2.25E+03
3.5E+03
6.3E+03
4.5E+03
677.00
2.8E+03
2.8E+03
2.72E+03
2.72E+03
0.20
1.08E+03
0.10
2.5E+04
60.00
1.0E+06(g)
2.50E-02
1.3E+03
7.87E+03
11.20
861.00
2.79E+03
270.00
182.00
0.02
1.0E+06(e)
35.70
68.00
16.30
0.51
0.25
6.59E+04
9.5E+04 (e)
1.0E+06(e)
2.29E+05 (g)
8.03E+04
5.68E+04
3.67E+03
6.3E+03
169.00
4.18E+03
1.0E+06(e)
1.0E+06(e)
6.2E+04
0.21
5.5E+05
1.0E+06(e)
1.1E+05
0.24
6.80
2.00
0.18
0.20
3.23
0.01
1.80
8.25E-06 (fl
4.0E-06 (fl
50.00
140.00
12.40
437.00
2.2E-05
8.5E+04
1.2E+04
LogK,,
(log[mL/g])
(c)
2.16
1.46
1.13
1.79
1.70
1.60
2.49
0.68
1.67
1.43
1.80
1.80
5.08
1.99
4.09
0.13
1.49
-0.99 (h)
6.64
2.55
2.29
4.37
1.31
-0.09
1.68
1.40
7.60
-0.81
3.30
2.82
2.94
3.55
4.60
-0.53
0.90 (e)
-0.54
0.70 (g)
0.35
0.55
1.27
-0.27
3.00
1.42
-1.50
-1.10
0.00
4.63
-1.30
-2.70
0.80(1)
3.43
3.40
3.43
5.21
4.90
4.46
5.41
4.72
7.00
6.38 (g)
3.61
5.00
2.95 (k)
6.26
0.44
1.90
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed
(Ka)
(1/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.5E+04
0
0
3.5E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.9E+05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral
(Kn)
(i/yr)
1.13E-02
9.61E-03
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
40
6.30E-02
0
0
1.68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.3
0.055
30.9
0
0
4.8E-03
0
0
1.25E+03
0
0.63
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.05
0
61
0.063
0
0
24.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Base
Catalyzed
(Kb,
(1/mol/yr)
0.378
54.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.1E+05
0
4.48E+06
0
0
0
0
0
1.8E+06
0
0
0
0
5.2E+05
0
0
0
5.4E+04
0
0
0
0
3.4E+06
0
1.1E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.7E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient
in Water
(Dw)
(m2/yr)
(d)
0.0341
0.0334
0.0344
0.0347
0.0307
0.0319
0.0322
0.0319
0.019
0.0353
0.0172 (i)
0.0249
0.0331
0.0229
0.035
0.0331
0.0308
0.0252
0.0267
0.0331
0.0429
0.046
0.0319 (i)
0.0549
0.0337
0.0233
0.023
0.0232
0.018
0.0176
0.0222
0.0248
0.0228
0.0133(1)
0.013 (i)
0.028
0.0256
0.0164(1)
0.0238
B-l-2
-------
Table B-l: Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
143-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439.97.6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
110-49-6
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439_98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
Constituent Name
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE1
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFsl
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDsl
Pentachloromtrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropanel
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuraml
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform
Molecular
Weight
(g/mol)
(a)
490.6
207.2
54.9
200.6
67.1
32.0
345.7
76.1
118.1
72.1
100.2
100.1
263.2
88.1
268.4
173.8
84.9
95.9
128.2
58.7
123.1
89.1
102.1
74.1
158.2
130.2
198.2
88.1
114.1
100.1
286.3
291.3
250.3
340.4
356.4
295.3
266.3
94.1
336.7
108.1
260.4
148.1
256.1
58.1
202.3
79.1
162.2
79.0
107.9
334.4
104.2
215.9
306.0
322.0
167.8
167.8
165.8
231.9
322.3
204.4
240.4
92.1
122.2
107.2
107.2
252.7
Solubility
(mg/L)
(b)
7.60
0.06
25400.00
1.0E+06(e)
0.05
1.0E+06(e)
1.0E+06(m)
2.23E+05
1.9E+04
1.5E+04
55.00
5.13E+04(e)
0.00
1.19E+04
1.3E+04
31.00
2.09E+03
1.7E+04
9.3E+04
1.0E+06(e)
1.27E+03
9.89E+03
35.10
1.97E+04
7.65E+04
1.0E+06(e)
1.0E+06(m)
6.54
1.33
2.40E-04 (f)
1.18E-04(f)
0.55
1.95E+03
8.28E+04
2.0E+03
2.55E+06
50.00
6.2E+03
0.07
32.80
4.05E+05 (e)
0.14
1.0E+06(e)
810.67
160.00
310.00
0.60
6.92E-04 (f)
7.91E-06 (f)
1.1E+03
2.97E+03
200.00
100.00
25.00
30.00
526.00
3.37E+04
1.66E+04
782.00
0.74
3.1E+03
LogK,,
(log[mL/g])
(c)
4.15
0.22
-1.08
4.90
0.95 (e)
-0.03
0.87
0.74
2.47
1.05(e)
7.00
1.21
0.93
3.11
1.51
0.23
-0.03
0.45
2.09
1.03
2.84
1.03
-0.02
-0.57
-0.51
3.15
5.39
4.93 (g)
6.3 (g)
4.57
3.06
1.23
0.00
-0.30
2.64
1.56(e)
6.19
2.63
1 .40 (e)
4.92
0.34
2.34
1.90
2.84
4.28
6.62
6.10
2.71
2.07
2.21
2.32
3.51
2.83 (e)
2.43
0.02
1.24
1.24
4.31
2.05
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed
(Ka)
(1/mol/yr)
0
500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.9E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
59
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral
(Kn)
(i/yr)
0
0
0
0.69
0
0
0
0
0
2.8
0
1.7E-02
0
l.OE-03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
62
4.9E+05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0137
5.1E-03
0
0
84
0
0
0
0
0
0.07
Base
Catalyzed
(Kb,
(1/mol/yr)
0
5.2E+03
0
1.2E+04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.7E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
610
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.13E+04
1.59E+07
0
0
9.0E+06
0
0
0
0
0
2.8E+04
l.OE+04
Diffusion
Coefficient
in Water
(Dw)
(m2/yr)
(d)
0.0949
0.0334
0.052
0.0347
0.0275
0.0322
0.0264
0.0292
0.0272
0.0194
0.0394
0.0264
0.0298
0.0322
0.0288
0.0363
0.0215
0.0245
0.0227
0.0315
0.029
0.0319
0.0142(1)
0.0138(i)
0.0253
0.0325
0.0308
0.0189
0.0382
0.0344
0.0278
0.0153(i)
0.0148 (i)
0.0287
0.0293
0.0298
0.0291
0.0282 (i)
0.029
0.0173
0.0328
B-l-3
-------
Table B-l: Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
Constituent Name
Trichloro- 1 ,2,2-trifluoro-ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1 ,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethylene 1,1,2-)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5-
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (Trinitrobenzene 1,3,5-)
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
Molecular
Weight
(g/mol)
(a)
187.4
181.4
133.4
133.4
131.4
137.4
197.4
197.4
269.5
255.5
147.4
101.2
213.1
697.6
50.9
86.1
62.5
106.2
106.2
106.2
318.5
65.4
Solubility
(mg/L)
(b)
170.00
34.60
1.33E+03
4.42E+03
1.1E+03
1.1E+03
1.2E+03
800.00
140.00
268.30
1.75E+03
5.5E+04(e)
350.00
8.00
2.0E+04
2.76E+03
161.00
178.00
185.00
175.00
LogK,,
(log[mL/g])
(c)
2.97
3.96
2.16
1.73
2.10
2.11
2.93
2.25
1.74
1.43
1.66
1.31 (1)
1.05
3.19
0.45
1.04
3.09
3.02
3.12
3.08
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed
(Ka)
(1/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral
(Kn)
(i/yr)
0
0
0.64
2.73E-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.7E-02
0
0
8.8E-02
0
0
0
0
0
0
Base
Catalyzed
(Kb,
(1/mol/yr)
0
0
2.4E+06
4.95E+04
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.6E+03
0
0
3.0E+05
0
0
0
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient
in Water
(Dw)
(m2/yr)
(d)
0.0271
0.0265
0.0303
0.0315
0.0322
0.0319
0.0255
0.0291
0.0247
0.0315
0.0378
0.0267
0.027
0.0267
0.0268
Note: Data sources for chemical property values are indicated in the column headings; exceptions are noted in parentheses for individual chemical values.
Data sources:
a. http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com (CambridgeSoft
b. U.S.EPA, 1997b. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM). SCDMWIN 1.0 (SCDM Windows User's Version), Version 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Washington DC: GPO. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/scdm/index.htm. Accessed July 2001
c. Kollig, H. P. (ed.), 1993. Environmental fate consultants for organic chemicals under consideration for EPA's hazardous waste identification projects. Environmental
Research Laboratory, Office of R&D, U.S. EPA, Athens, GA.
d. Calculated based on Water 9. U.S. EPA, 2001. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/ind
Accessed July 2001
e. Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC), 1999. CHEMFATE Chemical Search, Environmental Science Center, Syracuse, NY. http://esc.syrres.com/efdb/Chemfate.htm.
Accessed July 2001.
f. Calculated based on U.S. EPA, 2000. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3, 7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin(TCDD) and Related Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3.
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC: GPO.
g. USNLM (U.S. National Library of Medicine), 2001. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). http://toxnet.nlm.mh.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen/HSDB. Accessed July 2001.
h. MI DEQ. Environmental response Division Operational Memorandum #18 (Opmemo 18): Part 201 Generic Cleanup Criteria Tables, Revision 1, State of Michigan,
Department of Environmental Quality, http://www.deq.state.mi.us/erd/opmemol 8/index.html.
i. Calculated based on U.S. EPA, 1987. Process Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and Heavy Metals in Surface Waters. Office of Research and Develop
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office (GPO).
j. U.S. EPA, 1999. Region III Soil-to-Groundwater SSLs. Region III, Philadelphia, PA. http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/ssl.pdf
k. U.S. EPA, 2000. Physical-chemical Data.http://www.epa.gov/Rgeion9/waste/sfund/prg/index.htm
1. Calculated from octanol-water partition coefficient using regression equation log[Koc] = 1.029 x log[Kow] - 0.18; presented in Table 10.2 of G. deMarsily,
1986. Quantitative Hydrogeology. Academic Press
m. Lyman, W.J., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt, 1990. Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods: Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
B-l-4
-------
APPENDIX C
TIER 1 INPUT PARAMETERS
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table C-l. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, No Liner Scenario . . . C-l-1
Table C-2. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment,
No Liner Scenario C-2-1
Table C-3. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, No Liner Scenario . C-3-1
Table C-4. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Land Application Unit Scenario C-4-1
Table C-5. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Single Liner Scenario . C-5-1
Table C-6. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment,
Single Liner Scenario C-6-1
Table C-7. WEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Single
Liner Scenario C-7-1
Table C-8. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Composite
Liner Scenario C-8-1
Table C-9. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment,
Composite Liner Scenario C-9-1
Table C-10. IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Composite
Liner Scenario C-10-1
C-i
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Table C-l: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
1
g
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
us?
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS?
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS 14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Ratio ot Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficieni
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Eladial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefticieni
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
m
g/cmj
L/kg
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cmj
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles2
0
40.5
6.36
l.OOE-05
l.OOE-05
9,340
10
486
22.0
0.0135
0.0135
48,200
25
2,430
49.3
0.0686
0.0658
94,500
50
12,100
110
0.122
0.109
199,000
75
52,600
229
0.308
0.274
521,000
90
142,000
376
0.438
0.411
1,810,000
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
1.08
1.20E+10
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.880
0.737
1.32
0.794
2.57 14.09
0.889 |l.33
6.13
1.45
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00377
0.129
1.03
0.0106
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00358
1.60
0.594
0.596
1.20
0.0489
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0341
1.60
2.04
0.935
1.27
0.0609
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0567
1.65
7.80
1.52
1.37
0.0746
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.1020
1.65
35.0
2.71
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.177
1.67
169
5.90
1.82
0.0937
0.450
42.7
0.959
0.289
1.67
2,450
21.8
2.50
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.69
1.67
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
0.0004
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.0015
0.107
1.30
4.27
174
0.00557
0.164
1.43
7.62
804
0.0191
0.236
1.56
14.3
1,890
0.0409
0.296
1.63
32.4
11,000
0.0762
0.334
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.426
1.80
914
4,290,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.0009
3.15
0.002
16.3
0.0057
55.0
0.0151
321
0.0310
1,320
0.491
11,000
chemical-specific va ue
0.109
0.0136
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000164
0.928
0.116
0.00580
7.50
5.17
0.000132
2.72
0.340
0.0170
12.5
6.05
0.000234
6.18
0.773
0.0387
12.5
6.81
0.000433
9.76
1.22
0.0610
17.5
7.41
0.000810
14.5
1.81
0.0903
22.5
7.92
0.00139
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.00984
150
0.00
0.00321
0.945
2.52
6.42
16.4 |47.0
897
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 anclUSEPA, 19971)
ABB, 1995 anclUSEPA, 19971)
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Policy for Tier 1
No data available
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPPJ, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each soil
type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-1-1
-------
Table C-2: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
8
g
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zo
Saturated Zone (cont'd)
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
US6
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
USB
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Sediment Thickness (Thickness of Sludge)
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Eladial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
li-
ra
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles2
0
9.30
3.05
0.0000100
3.78E-15
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
174
13.2
0.00990
0.270
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
401
20.0
0.0465
0.521
50.0
0.00
0.993
50
1,770
42.1
0.144
1.14
50.0
1.22
1.81
75
6,970
83.5
0.269
2.27
50.0
3.05
2.95
90
28,300
168
0.377
3.51
50.0
4.57
4.24
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
22.3
95.0
33.5
18.2
0.20
0.00
0.00224
0.104
1.03
0.00997
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00285
1.60
90.0
0.318
0.516
1.18
0.0525
0.410
2.74
0.0803
0.0316
1.60
240
1.08
0.801
1.23
0.0674
0.430
4.27
0.114
0.0552
1.65
360
4.94
1.36
1.31
0.0812
0.430
9.14
0.22
0.100
1.6700
800
43.8
3.19
1.61
0.0905
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.181
1.67
5,000
301
7.88
1.91
0.0976
0.450
35.4
0.799
0.302
1.67
5,000
2,420
22.3
2.43
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.98
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000400
0.0500
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00145
0.108
1.29
4.57
126
0.00546
0.162
1.43
7.62
315
0.0196
0.233
1.56
15.2
2,210
0.0418
0.294
1.63
30.5
9,780
0.0777
0.333
1.70
79.3
24,800
0.211
0.430
1.80
914
7,660,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000508
2.48
0.00200
11.1
0.00670
43.4
0.0141
227
0.0330
814
0.538
10,800
chemical-specific value
0.104
0.0130
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000128
0.802
0.100
0.00501
7.5
5.21
0.000135
2.44
0.305
0.0152
12.5
6.06
0.000235
5.71
0.714
0.0357
17.5
6.81
0.000430
9.01
1.13
0.0563
17.5
7.42
0.000790
15.6
1.95
0.0976
17.5
7.91
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.69
0.0120
150
0.00
0.000126
0.953
2.49
6.04
15.2
39.4
904
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985;
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA'STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each
soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-2-1
-------
Table C-3: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
K
&
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
US6
US7
USS
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Land Surface
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm (soil/water distribution coeff)
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.0003
10
20.2
4.49
0.0508
0.0602
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.128
50
121
11.0
0.145
0.255
75
1,210
34.8
0.282
0.391
90
4,170
64.6
0.417
0.538
100
1,940,000
1,390
1.84
1.82
20.0
0.00
0.00347
0.120
1.02
0.0114
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00421
1.60
0.617
0.624
1.20
0.0487
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0339
1.60
2.10
0.946
1.26
0.0608
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0569
1.65
8.32
1.55
1.38
0.0742
0.450
7.01
0.174
0.100
1.65
36.2
2.71
1.53
0.0854
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.175
1.67
165
5.76
1.82
0.0934
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,400
20.2
2.52
0.114
0.450
610
1.00
3.56
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00153
0.105
1.30
3.60
126
0.00549
0.161
1.43
7.38
317
0.0193
0.235
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0408
0.297
1.63
33.5
11,000
0.0740
0.335
1.69
91.4
31,500
0.212
0.421
1.80
914
6,750,000
1.00
0.000002
0.101
0.0009
2.69
0.00200
10.8
0.00570
46.8
0.0170
272
0.0330
1,260
0.301
10,900
chemical-specific value
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000128
0.848
0.106
0.00530
7.50
5.20
0.000132
2.50
0.313
0.0156
12.5
6.07
0.000237
5.59
0.699
0.0350
12.5
6.81
0.000437
8.71
1.09
0.0544
17.5
7.41
0.000794
14.7
1.83
0.0916
22.5
7.90
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.00998
150
0.00
0.000308
0.868
2.44
6.27
16.9
47.7
892
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEP A, 1986 and 19971)
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEP A, 19971)
ABB, 1995 and USEP A, 1997b
US EPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPPJ, 1985; USEP A, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORE! database
USEPA STORE! database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each
soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-3-1
-------
Table C-4: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Land Application Unit Scenario
Input
Type
K
£
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
US6
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
USB
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Eladial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
in
in
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm'/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
20.2
4.49
0.00001
0.00001
10
40.5
6.36
0.0104
0.0130
25
4,050
63.6
0.0686
0.0704
50
40,500
201
0.110
0.110
75
182,000
427
0.212
0.201
90
648,000
805
0.326
0.326
100
80,900,000
8,990
0.745
0.745
40.0
0.00
0.00224
0.0926
1.04
0.0126
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00418
1.60
0.586
0.605
1.20
0.0498
0.410
2.13
0.0669
0.0346
1.60
2.01
0.929
1.26
0.0613
0.430
4.57
0.121
0.0578
1.65
chem
7.80
1.51
1.37
0.0749
0.450
8.53
0.208
0.102
1.65
33.8
2.59
1.51
0.0862
0.450
18.3
0.423
0.175
1.67
147
5.41
1.78
0.0942
0.450
45.7
1.00
0.291
1.67
2,510
20.8
2.55
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.96
1.67
cal-specific value
1.00
chem cal-specific value
0.00
0.000402
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00143
0.105
1.29
3.96
94.6
0.00545
0.162
1.43
7.62
315
0.0195
0.235
1.56
19.5
2,190
0.0408
0.295
1.63
53.3
11,000
0.0778
0.334
1.70
144
31,500
0.212
0.427
1.80
914
6,310,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.000556
2.34
0.00200
9.93
chem
0.108
0.0134
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000149
1.02
0.128
0.00639
7.50
5.20
0.000130
2.99
0.374
0.0187
12.5
6.07
0.000229
0.00800
50.2
0.0223
316
0.0430
1,210
0.430
10,900
cal-specific value
6.70
0.838
0.0419
12.5
6.82
0.000421
10.7
1.34
0.0669
17.5
7.42
0.000781
16.1
2.02
0.101
17.5
7.89
0.00133
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.0120
150
0.00
0.0000963
1.03
2.83
7.95
21.7
60.1
882
chem cal-specific value
1.00
chem cal-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 andUSEPA, 1997b
ABB, 1995 andUSEPA, 1997b
US EPA, 1996
Assumption of LAU Design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada, 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPAs STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each soil type
has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 6,557 iterations.
C-4-1
-------
Table C-S: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
1
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
US6
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
USB
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Elatio of Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
in
in
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
in
g/cm3
L/kg
in
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
in
in
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
in
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
in
in
in
degrees C
standard units
unitless
in
degrees
in
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles2
0
40.5
6.36
0.00001
0.00001
81,100
10
567
23.8
0.0135
0.00944
228,000
25
2,480
49.8
0.0686
0.0253
376,000
50
12,100
110
0.130
0.0432
728,000
75
54,600
234
0.312
0.0445
1,370,000
90
149,000
386
0.446
0.0486
2,930,000
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
0.0526
1.63E+10
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.883
0.737
1.32
0.794
2.58
0.889
4.09
1.33
6.14
1.45
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00377
0.129
1.04
0.0106
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00358
1.60
0.598
0.595
1.20
0.0489
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0340
1.60
2.06
0.935
1.27
0.0611
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0568
1.65
7.79
1.52
1.37
0.0746
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.101
1.65
35.0
2.72
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.177
1.67
169
5.92
1.82
0.0937
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.288
1.67
2,450
21.8
2.50
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.69
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000400
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00151
0.107
1.30
4.03
141
0.00558
0.164
1.43
7.62
631
0.0192
0.236
1.56
12.2
1,890
0.0411
0.295
1.63
32.0
11,000
0.0765
0.334
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.426
1.80
914
4,290,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.0009
2.97
0.002
14.5
0.00570
52.2
0.0153
297
0.0310
1,280
0.491
11,000
chemical-specific value
0.109
0.0136
0.005
7.50
3.21
0.0000164
0.916
0.114
0.00572
7.50
5.18
0.000131
2.71
0.338
0.0169
12.5
6.05
0.000234
6.15
0.769
0.0385
12.5
6.82
0.000434
9.72
1.22
0.0608
17.5
7.41
0.000810
14.4
1.80
0.0899
22.5
7.93
0.00139
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.00984
150
0.00
0.00321
0.944
2.49
6.27
16.1
46.3
897
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA 1997b
USEPA, 1999
USEPA, 2001
Policy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Policy for Tier 1
No data available
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each soil
type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-5-1
-------
Table C-6: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
1
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Total Impoundment Operating Depth
Sediment Thickness (Thickness of Sludge)
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site- Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DEPTH
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site- Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
9.30
3.05
1.00E-05
3.78E-15
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
192
13.8
0.00990
0.042
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
581
24.1
0.0465
0.0629
50.0
0.00
1.06
50
1,860
43.1
0.147
0.108
50.0
1.52
1.83
75
7,810
88.4
0.269
0.163
50.0
3.05
3.09
90
29,800
173
0.377
0.217
50.0
4.57
4.27
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
0.798
95.0
33.5
18.2
4.63
0.20
0.00
0.00224
0.0983
1.02
0.00997
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00254
1.60
90.0
0.347
0.524
1.18
0.0522
0.410
2.44
0.0737
0.0314
1.60
240
1.20
0.815
1.23
0.0669
0.430
3.70
0.101
0.0550
1.65
360
5.56
1.39
1.31
0.0809
0.430
7.62
0.188
0.0994
1.67
850
49.6
3.31
1.63
0.0904
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.180
1.67
1,800
308
7.97
1.92
0.0976
0.450
30.5
0.691
0.299
1.67
5,000
2,420
22.3
2.43
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.98
1.67
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
0.000400
0.0500
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00145
0.107
1.29
3.66
108
0.00540
0.162
1.43
7.32
315
0.0195
0.232
1.56
13.7
2,210
0.0415
0.294
1.63
30.0
6,940
0.0780
0.334
1.70
76.2
22,100
0.211
0.430
1.80
914
7,660,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000700
2.11
0.00200
9.36
0.00700
34.1
0.0150
193
0.0330
723
0.538
10,800
chemical-specific va ue
0.107
0.0134
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000128
0.808
0.101
0.00505
7.5
5.20
0.000136
2.49
0.311
0.0156
12.5
6.07
0.000236
5.78
0.723
0.0361
17.5
6.82
0.000433
9.06
1.13
0.0566
17.5
7.43
0.000794
15.5
1.94
0.0969
17.5
7.91
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.68
0.0103
150
0.00
0.000126
0.884
2.37
5.70
14.0
35.8
794
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Derived
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA's STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Dolicy for Tier 1
Dolicy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-6-1
-------
Table C-7: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
I
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
ASH
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site- Based
Derived
Regional Site- Based
Regional Site- Based
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site- Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site- Based
Regional Site- Based
Constant
Regional Site- Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.00001
10
20.2
4.49
0.0508
0.0264
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.0950
50
121
11.0
0.145
0.127
75
1,210
34.8
0.282
0.133
90
4,170
64.6
0.417
0.135
100
1,940,000
1,390
1.84
0.136
20.0
0.00
0.00347
0.120
1.02
0.0114
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00421
1.60
0.617
0.620
1.20
0.0487
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0339
1.60
2.09
0.942
1.26
0.0608
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0566
1.65
8.26
1.54
1.38
0.0743
0.450
7.01
0.174
0.100
1.65
35.8
2.70
1.53
0.0855
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.175
1.67
163
5.76
1.82
0.0935
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,400
20.2
2.52
0.114
0.450
610
1.00
3.56
1.67
chem cal-specific va ue
1.00
chem cal-specific va ue
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00153
0.105
1.30
3.60
126
0.00547
0.161
1.43
7.32
315
0.0192
0.235
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0408
0.298
1.63
33.2
11,000
0.0738
0.336
1.69
91.4
31,500
0.212
0.421
1.80
914
6,750,000
1.00
0.000002
0.101
0.0009
2.64
0.002
10.5
0.00570
45.7
0.0170
263
0.0330
1,240
0.301
10,900
chem cal-specific va ue
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000128
0.845
0.106
0.00528
7.50
5.19
0.000132
2.50
0.312
0.0156
12.5
6.06
0.000237
5.60
0.700
0.0350
12.5
6.80
0.000437
8.73
1.09
0.0546
17.5
7.41
0.000793
14.8
1.85
0.0925
22.5
7.90
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.00998
150
0.00
0.000308
0.868
2.43
6.24
16.9
47.4
892
chem cal-specific va ue
1.00
chem cal-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
USEPA, 1999
USEPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among
the three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-7-1
-------
Table C-8: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
0)
I
Unsaturated Zone
u rated Zone
£
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
ASH
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of
Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Ratio of Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB ]
Johnson SB ]
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
m
g/cm3
L/kg
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard un
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
40.5
6.36
0.00001
0.00
0.00
10
445
21.1
0.0226
0.00
0.00
25
2,480
49.8
0.0780
0.00
0.00
50
12,100
110
0.143
0.00
0.00
75
54,600
234
0.326
0.0000730
301,000,000
90
134,000
365
0.450
0.000169
1.09E+10
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
0.000401
8.33E+12
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.879
0.738
1.31
0.794
2.51
0.888
4.09
1.33
6.41
1.46
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00463
0.130
1.01
0.0118
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00347
1.60
0.608
0.614
1.20
0.0490
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0337
1.60
2.06
0.930
1.27
0.0613
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0566
1.65
8.35
1.54
1.38
0.0747
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.102
1.65
36.7
2.73
1.54
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.179
1.67
180
6.15
1.83
0.0937
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,390
20.3
2.47
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.60
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0502
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00151
0.105
1.30
3.96
94.6
0.00538
0.163
1.43
7.62
315
0.0188
0.236
1.55
12.2
1,890
0.0413
0.296
1.63
30.5
11,000
0.0762
0.335
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.424
1.80
914
8,480,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.001
2.51
0.002
10.5
0.00570
45.6
0.0180
250
0.0330
1,200
0.483
10,800
chemical-specific value
0.111
0.0139
0.00500
7.50
3.20
0.00000858
0.958
0.120
0.00599
7.50
5.20
0.000135
2.91
0.364
0.0182
12.5
6.06
0.000238
6.38
0.797
0.0399
12.5
6.79
0.000443
9.87
1.23
0.0617
17.5
7.39
0.000814
14.7
1.84
0.0921
22.5
7.89
0.00140
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.0159
150
0.00
0.000936
0.974
2.48
6.07
15.6
44.4
867
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
TetraTech, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Policy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Policy for Tier 1
No data available
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among
the three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-8-1
-------
Table C-9: TWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
1
saturated Zone
ID
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
us?
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS?
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Total Impoundment Operating Depth
Sediment Thickness
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Bod;
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DEPTH
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cnrVg
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles2
0
9.30
3.05
l.OOE-05
0.00
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
206
14.4
0.00990
0.00
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
609
24.7
0.0465
0.00
50.0
0.00
1.07
50
2,020
45.0
0.168
0.0000488
50.0
1.52
1.83
75
8,760
93.6
0.271
0.000202
50.0
3.38
3.15
90
35,200
188
0.450
0.000498
50.0
4.57
4.27
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
0.00369
95.0
33.5
18.2
4.63
0.20
0.00
0.00437
0.109
1.02
0.00851
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00366
1.60
105
0.375
0.534
1.18
0.0521
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0319
1.60
240
1.28
0.817
1.23
0.0668
0.410
3.35
0.0937
0.0552
1.60
360
6.19
1.42
1.31
0.0809
0.430
6.10
0.154
0.0993
1.67
1,000
52.3
3.31
1.64
0.0902
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.180
1.67
2,000
305
8.06
1.93
0.0973
0.450
30.5
0.691
0.304
1.67
5,000
2,520
19.8
2.49
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
2.75
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00143
0.100
1.29
3.53
63.1
0.00538
0.160
1.43
6.10
284
0.0195
0.235
1.56
12.2
1,890
0.0407
0.296
1.63
24.4
5,990
0.0768
0.334
1.70
61.0
21,300
0.212
0.429
1.80
914
7,740,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000700
1.53
0.00200
7.44
0.00700
28.2
0.0151
183
0.0330
680
0.650
11,000
chemical-specific value
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000103
0.873
0.109
0.00546
7.5
5.22
0.000136
2.54
0.317
0.0159
12.5
6.08
0.000237
5.84
0.731
0.0365
17.5
6.80
0.000429
9.11
1.14
0.0569
17.5
7.40
0.000796
13.7
1.72
0.0859
22.5
7.89
0.00135
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.69
0.00823
150
0.00
0.000118
0.803
2.18
5.38
13.1
31.9
908
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 19971)
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Derived
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
Carsel andParrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPPJ, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORE! database
USEPA STORE! database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each soil
type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-9-1
-------
Table C-10: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
s
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SSI
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
US6
US?
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
AS3
AS4
AS5
AS6
AS?
ASS
AS9
AS10
ASH
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Johnson SB '
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB '
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
in/yr
in/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.00
10
20.2
4.49
0.0495
0.00
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.00
50
121
11.0
0.147
0.00
75
1,210
34.8
0.286
0.0000730
90
4,170
64.6
0.419
0.000167
100
2,020,000
1,420
1.68
0.000401
20.0
0.00
0.00684
0.100
1.02
0.0156
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00250
1.60
0.611
0.616
1.20
0.0492
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0336
1.60
2.04
0.939
1.26
0.0610
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0570
1.65
8.26
1.53
1.37
0.0745
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.101
1.65
35.5
2.74
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.176
1.67
159
6.00
1.82
0.0937
0.450
34.1
0.770
0.291
1.67
2,520
20.2
2.45
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
2.11
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000402
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00149
0.106
1.29
3.73
94.6
0.00563
0.168
1.43
7.32
315
0.0200
0.238
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0422
0.298
1.64
32.0
11,000
0.0781
0.335
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.423
1.80
914
4,440,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.000903
2.08
0.00200
8.68
0.00570
42.2
0.0180
245
0.0330
1,210
0.390
10,900
chemical-specific value
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000116
0.864
0.108
0.00540
7.50
5.23
0.000133
2.58
0.322
0.0161
12.5
6.08
0.000236
5.60
0.701
0.0350
12.5
6.82
0.000435
8.72
1.09
0.0545
17.5
7.42
0.000809
15.2
1.90
0.0948
22.5
7.93
0.00142
40.0
5.00
.250
22.5
9.68
0.0116
150
0.00
0.00270
0.947
2.45
6.08
16.2 |46.0
914
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 19971)
Tetra Tech, 2001
US EPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Sahe, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET
USEPA STORET
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the three soil types; each soil
type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
C-10-1
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix C
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX C
ABB Environmental Services. 1995. Estimation of Leachate Rates from Industrial Waste
Management Facilities. August, 1995.
API. 1989. Hydrogeologic Database for Groundwater Modeling. API Publication No.
4476, American Petroleum Institute.
Carsel, R.F., and R.S. Parrish. 1988. Developing joint probability distributions of soil
water retention characteristics. Water Resources Research 29:755-770.
Carsel, R.F., R.S. Parrish, R.L. Jones, J.L. Hansen, andR.L. Lamb. 1988. Characterizing
the uncertainty of pesticide leaching in agricultural soils. Journal of Contaminant
Hydrology, 2: 111-124.
Collins, W.D. 1925. Temperature of water available for industrial use in the United
States. US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 520-F, pp.97-104. Presented
in: D.K. Todd, 1976. Groundwater Hydrology. J. Wiley & Sons.
Davis, S.N. 1969. Porosity and permeability of natural materials. In: Flow Through
Porous Media, R.J.M. de Wiest, Editor, Academic Press, NY.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1985. A review of Field Scale Physical Solute
Transport Processes in Saturated and Unsaturated Porous Media. EPRI EA-4190,
Project 2485-5, Palo Alto, California.
Freeze, R.A. and J. Cherry. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Gelhar, L.W. 1986. Personal Communication with Zubair Saleem.
Gelhar, L.W., C. Welty, K.R. Rehfeldt. 1992. A critical review of data on field-scale
dispersion in aquifers. Water Resource Research, 28(7), 1955-1974.
McWorter, D.B. and D.K. Sunada. 1977. Groundwater and Hydraulics, Water Resources
Publications, Fort Collins, CO.
Schanz, R. and A. Salhotra. 1992. Subtitle D Landfill Characteristics. Center for
Modeling and Risk Assessment, Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Oakland, CA.
Shea, J.H. 1974. Deficiencies of clastic particles of certain sizes. Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, 44(4):985-1003, December.
C-ll
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix C
USEPA. 1986. Industrial Subtitle D Facility Study (Telephone Survey), USEPA,
October 20, 1986. Washington, DC, 20460.
USEPA. 1996. EPA's Composite Model for Leachate Migration with Transformation
Products (EPACMTP) Background Document. USEPA Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, DC, 20460.
USEPA. 1997'a. EPA's Composite Model for Leachate Migration with Transformation
Products (EPACMTP) Users Guide. USEPA Office of Solid Waste, Washington,
DC, 20460.
USEPA. 1997b. Analysis of EPA's Industrial Subtitle D Databases used in Groundwater
Pathway Analysis of the Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR). Office of
Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
C-12
-------
APPENDIX D
INFILTRATION RATE DATA
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table D-l. Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Landfills (m/yr) D-l-1
Table D-2. Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Waste Piles (m/yr) D-2-1
Table D-3. Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Land Application
Units (m/yr) D-3-1
Table D-4. Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Clay Liner
Scenarios (m/yr) D-4-1
Table D-5. Flow rate data used to develop landfill and waste pile composite liner
infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001) D-5-1
Table D-6. Leak Density Data Used to Develop Surface Impound composite liner
infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001) D-6-1
Table D-7. Comparison of composite liner infiltration rates Calculated using
Bonaparte Equation and Infiltration Rates for composite-lined
landfill cells D-7-1
D-i
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure D-l. Infiltration Rate Comparison (Head = 0.3m, Hole Area = 6mm2) . . . D-7-1
D-ii
-------
Table D-l: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Landfills (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
101
73
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
24
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
Honolulu
Indianapolis
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
Medford
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
MT
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
HI
IN
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
OR
No Liner
SLT
O.OOE+00
1.68E+00
1.08E+00
3.42E-01
2.12E-01
1.47E-01
5.64E-02
2.39E-02
8.00E-04
2.33E-01
1.95E-01
5.49E-02
1.36E-01
1.08E-01
O.OOE+00
3.36E-01
2.61E-01
5.00E-04
7.98E-02
1.55E-01
7.80E-02
1.53E-01
7.65E-02
1.59E-01
5.99E-02
8.00E-04
1.14E-01
1.35E-02
1.09E-01
1.44E-01
3.12E-01
7.60E-03
O.OOE+00
1.04E-02
2.39E-02
3.07E-02
9.90E-03
4.42E-02
O.OOE+00
3.60E-03
3.26E-01
1.71E-01
5.23E-02
1.30E-01
1.68E-01
1.51E-01
4.11E-01
3.65E-01
3.30E-03
O.OOE+00
3.29E-01
3.53E-01
7.87E-02
3.08E-01
9.12E-02
2.07E-01
SNL
O.OOE+00
1.84E+00
1.15E+00
3.99E-01
2.70E-01
2.05E-01
7.21E-02
3.00E-02
9.40E-03
2.38E-01
2.46E-01
1.05E-01
1.78E-01
1.49E-01
8.00E-04
4.17E-01
3.29E-01
1.30E-03
1.14E-01
2.21E-01
1.21E-01
1.99E-01
1.16E-01
2.06E-01
1.07E-01
8.00E-04
1.64E-01
3.45E-02
1.45E-01
1.68E-01
3.91E-01
1.30E-02
O.OOE+00
2.34E-02
6.30E-02
3.68E-02
7.40E-03
6.27E-02
O.OOE+00
6.90E-03
3.90E-01
2.23E-01
9.45E-02
1.86E-01
2.14E-01
2.11E-01
4.46E-01
4.64E-01
5.30E-03
O.OOE+00
3.97E-01
4.34E-01
9.50E-02
3.61E-01
1.40E-01
2.31E-01
SCL
3.00E-04
1.46E+00
9.65E-01
2.82E-01
1.67E-01
1.23E-01
5.54E-02
1.96E-02
3.80E-03
1.54E-01
1.62E-01
3.84E-02
1.17E-01
8.86E-02
O.OOE+00
2.74E-01
2.12E-01
8.60E-03
6.20E-02
1.54E-01
8.23E-02
1.22E-01
6.63E-02
1.37E-01
5.31E-02
3.60E-03
1.16E-01
2.26E-02
1.10E-01
7.04E-02
2.49E-01
8.10E-03
3.00E-04
1.17E-02
2.26E-02
3.81E-02
9.90E-03
3.23E-02
3.00E-04
7.40E-03
2.71E-01
1.41E-01
3.66E-02
1.06E-01
1.39E-01
1.10E-01
3.54E-01
2.82E-01
9.40E-03
1.80E-03
2.70E-01
2.82E-01
6.99E-02
2.57E-01
6.86E-02
2.10E-01
Clay Liner
O.OOE+00
3.38E-02
5.26E-02
4.77E-02
4.45E-02
4.32E-02
2.95E-02
1.88E-02
4.61E-03
4.45E-02
4.44E-02
2.41E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
6.69E-05
4.86E-02
4.77E-02
2.38E-05
4.32E-02
4.44E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
4.32E-02
2.41E-02
1.83E-05
4.09E-02
9.44E-03
3.74E-02
4.09E-02
4.86E-02
1.03E-04
3.54E-05
9.40E-03
2.41E-02
4.61E-03
6.69E-05
1.96E-02
2.70E-05
1.02E-04
3.62E-02
4.45E-02
4.83E-03
4.44E-02
4.45E-02
3.62E-02
4.86E-02
4.92E-02
1.28E-04
6.89E-05
4.86E-02
4.77E-02
1.26E-03
4.44E-02
4.09E-02
4.32E-02
D-l-1
-------
Table D-l: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Landfills (m/yr)
ID
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
oo
JJ
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
102
15
48
68
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
City
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
San Juan
Santa Maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
State
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
PR
CA
MI
NY
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
No Liner
SLT
1.45E-01
1.80E-02
1.06E-01
2.27E-01
4.67E-01
3.52E-01
5.89E-01
2.44E-01
3.12E-01
6.71E-02
6.12E-02
1.02E-01
2.01E-01
O.OOE+00
8.94E-02
1.90E-01
O.OOE+00
4.17E-01
2.29E-01
2.13E-01
6.90E-03
5.08E-02
5.00E-04
1.21E-01
1.02E-01
1.30E-02
1.10E-01
2.21E-02
1.27E-01
9.47E-02
1.65E-01
1.47E-01
1.81E-01
4.38E-01
2.30E-01
6.02E-02
2.55E-01
5.91E-01
6.58E-02
1.05E-01
O.OOE+00
6.86E-02
2.61E-01
2.89E-01
2.02E-01
O.OOE+00
SNL
2.20E-01
2.54E-02
1.48E-01
2.81E-01
5.40E-01
4.63E-01
7.45E-01
2.94E-01
O.OOE+00
7.95E-02
9.42E-02
1.70E-01
2.61E-01
3.00E-04
1.31E-01
2.54E-01
O.OOE+00
4.39E-01
2.84E-01
2.86E-01
1.32E-02
l.OOE-01
7.10E-03
1.60E-01
8.76E-02
2.69E-02
1.65E-01
3.40E-02
1.92E-01
1.15E-01
2.10E-01
1.93E-01
2.43E-01
4.58E-01
2.94E-01
8.31E-02
3.25E-01
7.31E-01
1.03E-01
1.48E-01
3.00E-04
1.01E-01
3.49E-01
3.56E-01
2.59E-01
2.30E-03
SCL
1.02E-01
1.35E-02
8.79E-02
1.94E-01
3.77E-01
2.86E-01
4.50E-01
1.97E-01
2.69E-01
5.36E-02
3.89E-02
8.05E-02
1.64E-01
3.00E-04
7.92E-02
1.52E-01
O.OOE+00
3.93E-01
1.87E-01
1.75E-01
8.40E-03
4.95E-02
3.30E-03
1.01E-01
9.45E-02
1.85E-02
8.20E-02
2.41E-02
9.45E-02
8.41E-02
1.44E-01
1.22E-01
1.43E-01
4.08E-01
1.84E-01
5.54E-02
2.12E-01
4.56E-01
4.75E-02
7.62E-02
5.00E-04
4.65E-02
1.78E-01
2.33E-01
1.70E-01
3.00E-04
Clay Liner
4.92E-02
9.44E-03
4.32E-02
4.45E-02
4.86E-02
5.26E-02
4.77E-02
4.44E-02
3.62E-02
2.91E-02
2.46E-02
3.62E-02
4.44E-02
1.69E-05
4.32E-02
5.26E-02
5.50E-04
4.32E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
2.27E-04
4.09E-02
6.40E-05
4.32E-02
1.26E-03
5.10E-04
2.53E-02
1.26E-03
1.93E-02
1.26E-03
4.32E-02
4.45E-02
4.44E-02
4.32E-02
3.62E-02
3.42E-02
4.45E-02
4.77E-02
2.53E-02
3.50E-02
2.23E-05
2.41E-02
4.77E-02
3.62E-02
4.45E-02
1.15E-04
Notes:
SLT = Silt Loam cover
SNL = Sandy Loam cover
SCL= Silty Clay Loam cover
D-l-2
-------
Table D-2: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Waste Piles (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
101
73
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
Honolulu
Indianapolis
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
MT
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
HI
IN
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
No Liner
Low
Permeability
Waste
2.54E-04
1.54E+00
1.21E+00
5.16E-01
3.14E-01
2.57E-01
5.02E-02
2.59E-02
2.54E-04
3.22E-01
3.69E-01
2.27E-01
2.13E-01
1.88E-01
2.54E-04
5.23E-01
4.83E-01
4.32E-03
1.68E-01
3.10E-01
1.82E-01
3.10E-01
1.72E-01
2.35E-01
2.58E-01
7.62E-04
2.51E-01
1.01E-01
1.36E-01
2.63E-01
4.90E-01
2.31E-02
2.54E-04
7.67E-03
4.04E-02
4.22E-02
3.66E-02
9.63E-02
2.54E-04
2.59E-02
4.84E-01
2.79E-01
5.01E-02
2.69E-01
2.61E-01
4.09E-01
5.42E-01
6.07E-01
2.03E-03
2.54E-04
4.52E-01
5.38E-01
1.33E-01
2.69E-01
2.02E-01
Medium
Permeability
Waste
2.54E-04
1.81E+00
1.21E+00
5.16E-01
3.14E-01
2.57E-01
7.25E-02
2.59E-02
2.54E-04
3.22E-01
3.69E-01
2.27E-01
2.13E-01
1.88E-01
2.54E-04
5.23E-01
4.83E-01
4.32E-03
1.68E-01
3.10E-01
1.82E-01
3.10E-01
1.72E-01
2.35E-01
2.58E-01
7.62E-04
2.51E-01
1.01E-01
1.36E-01
2.63E-01
4.90E-01
2.31E-02
2.54E-04
1.67E-02
4.04E-02
4.22E-02
3.66E-02
9.63E-02
2.54E-04
2.59E-02
4.84E-01
2.79E-01
1.08E-01
2.69E-01
2.61E-01
4.09E-01
5.42E-01
6.07E-01
2.03E-03
2.54E-04
4.52E-01
5.38E-01
1.33E-01
2.69E-01
2.02E-01
High
Permeability
Waste
2.54E-04
1.88E+00
1.21E+00
5.16E-01
3.14E-01
2.57E-01
1.23E-01
2.59E-02
2.54E-04
3.22E-01
3.69E-01
2.27E-01
2.13E-01
1.88E-01
2.54E-04
5.23E-01
4.83E-01
4.32E-03
1.68E-01
3.10E-01
1.82E-01
3.10E-01
1.72E-01
2.35E-01
2.58E-01
7.62E-04
2.51E-01
1.01E-01
1.36E-01
2.63E-01
4.90E-01
2.31E-02
2.54E-04
7.77E-02
4.04E-02
4.22E-02
3.66E-02
9.63E-02
2.54E-04
2.59E-02
4.84E-01
2.79E-01
1.98E-01
2.69E-01
2.61E-01
4.09E-01
5.42E-01
6.07E-01
2.03E-03
2.54E-04
4.52E-01
5.38E-01
1.33E-01
2.69E-01
2.02E-01
Clay Liner
Low
Permeability
Waste
1.60E-03
1.35E-01
1.32E-01
1.18E-01
1.19E-01
1.13E-01
3.52E-02
1.24E-02
1.36E-02
1.19E-01
1.06E-01
4.97E-03
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
4.82E-03
1.26E-01
1.18E-01
1.37E-03
1.13E-01
1.06E-01
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
1.13E-01
4.97E-03
1.97E-03
6.88E-02
3.26E-03
4.81E-02
6.88E-02
1.26E-01
5.81E-03
5.89E-03
9.80E-03
1.05E-02
1.36E-02
5.35E-04
4.22E-02
4.59E-03
1.94E-03
8.04E-02
1.19E-01
3.23E-02
1.06E-01
1.19E-01
8.04E-02
1.26E-01
4.89E-02
4.19E-03
5.15E-03
1.26E-01
1.18E-01
O.OOE+00
1.06E-01
6.88E-02
Medium
Permeability
Waste
1.51E-02
1.36E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.29E-01
1.27E-01
3.64E-02
6.89E-02
4.34E-02
1.29E-01
1.34E-01
1.33E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
8.26E-04
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
2.92E-04
1.27E-01
1.34E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.27E-01
1.33E-01
1.28E-03
1.32E-01
1.06E-01
1.15E-01
1.32E-01
1.35E-01
2.63E-03
1.12E-03
1.18E-02
1.23E-01
4.34E-02
2.25E-04
1.35E-01
1.66E-03
4.66E-03
1.27E-01
1.29E-01
4.94E-02
1.34E-01
1.29E-01
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
5.58E-02
1.25E-03
1.79E-03
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
5.56E-02
1.34E-01
1.32E-01
High
Permeability
Waste
7.43E-03
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.28E-01
1.27E-01
6.60E-02
9.50E-02
6.06E-02
1.28E-01
1.33E-01
1.32E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
5.32E-03
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
7.07E-03
1.27E-01
1.33E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.27E-01
1.32E-01
3.66E-03
1.32E-01
1.19E-01
1.11E-01
1.32E-01
1.35E-01
6.74E-03
3.61E-03
4.07E-02
1.23E-01
6.06E-02
2.34E-02
1.34E-01
1.98E-03
3.34E-02
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
8.71E-02
1.33E-01
1.28E-01
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
9.27E-02
2.00E-02
7.97E-03
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
7.18E-02
1.33E-01
1.32E-01
D-2-1
-------
Table D-2: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Waste Piles (m/yr)
ID
24
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
33
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
102
15
48
68
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
City
Medford
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
San Juan
Santa Maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
State
OR
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
PR
CA
MI
NY
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
No Liner
Low
Permeability
Waste
2.50E-01
4.23E-01
7.57E-02
1.76E-01
3.34E-01
6.14E-01
5.42E-01
8.49E-01
3.99E-01
4.54E-01
1.62E-01
2.42E-01
3.84E-01
3.53E-01
2.54E-04
1.72E-01
3.03E-01
2.54E-04
5.06E-01
3.25E-01
3.48E-01
2.54E-04
1.48E-01
1.35E-02
2.13E-01
1.23E-01
1.93E-02
2.95E-01
6.58E-02
1.50E-01
1.51E-01
2.37E-01
2.75E-01
3.41E-01
5.31E-01
4.46E-01
1.52E-01
4.10E-01
8.22E-01
2.72E-01
2.47E-01
2.54E-04
2.49E-01
5.64E-01
4.67E-01
3.31E-01
2.54E-04
Medium
Permeability
Waste
2.50E-01
4.23E-01
7.57E-02
1.76E-01
3.34E-01
6.14E-01
5.42E-01
8.49E-01
3.99E-01
4.54E-01
1.62E-01
2.42E-01
3.84E-01
3.53E-01
2.54E-04
1.72E-01
3.03E-01
2.54E-04
5.06E-01
3.25E-01
3.48E-01
2.54E-04
1.48E-01
1.35E-02
2.13E-01
1.23E-01
1.93E-02
2.95E-01
6.58E-02
2.88E-01
1.51E-01
2.37E-01
2.75E-01
3.41E-01
5.31E-01
4.46E-01
1.52E-01
4.10E-01
8.22E-01
2.72E-01
2.47E-01
2.54E-04
2.49E-01
5.64E-01
4.67E-01
3.31E-01
2.54E-04
High
Permeability
Waste
2.50E-01
4.23E-01
7.57E-02
1.76E-01
3.34E-01
6.14E-01
5.42E-01
8.49E-01
3.99E-01
4.54E-01
1.62E-01
2.42E-01
3.84E-01
3.53E-01
2.54E-04
1.72E-01
3.03E-01
2.54E-04
5.06E-01
3.25E-01
3.48E-01
2.54E-04
1.48E-01
1.35E-02
2.13E-01
1.23E-01
1.93E-02
2.95E-01
6.58E-02
4.44E-01
1.51E-01
2.37E-01
2.75E-01
3.41E-01
5.31E-01
4.46E-01
1.52E-01
4.10E-01
8.22E-01
2.72E-01
2.47E-01
2.54E-04
2.49E-01
5.64E-01
4.67E-01
3.31E-01
2.54E-04
Clay Liner
Low
Permeability
Waste
1.26E-01
4.89E-02
3.26E-03
1.13E-01
1.19E-01
1.26E-01
1.32E-01
1.18E-01
1.06E-01
8.04E-02
2.02E-02
7.47E-03
8.04E-02
1.06E-01
4.73E-03
1.13E-01
1.32E-01
5.86E-03
1.13E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
9.27E-03
6.88E-02
9.92E-04
1.13E-01
O.OOE+00
9.11E-03
2.00E-02
O.OOE+00
6.37E-02
O.OOE+00
1.13E-01
1.19E-01
1.06E-01
1.13E-01
8.04E-02
2.64E-02
1.19E-01
1.18E-01
2.00E-02
1.74E-02
6.41E-03
4.97E-03
1.18E-01
8.04E-02
1.19E-01
4.86E-03
Medium
Permeability
Waste
1.33E-01
5.58E-02
1.06E-01
1.27E-01
1.29E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.34E-01
1.27E-01
1.26E-01
1.31E-01
1.27E-01
1.34E-01
2.01E-03
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
1.50E-03
1.27E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.43E-02
1.32E-01
1.14E-03
1.27E-01
5.56E-02
1.05E-02
1.34E-01
5.56E-02
7.93E-02
5.56E-02
1.27E-01
1.29E-01
1.34E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.26E-01
1.29E-01
1.35E-01
1.34E-01
1.31E-01
7.53E-03
1.33E-01
1.35E-01
1.27E-01
1.29E-01
4.74E-03
High
Permeability
Waste
1.31E-01
9.27E-02
1.19E-01
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.33E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.30E-01
1.27E-01
1.33E-01
7.62E-04
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
3.19E-02
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
3.44E-02
1.32E-01
1.92E-02
1.27E-01
7.18E-02
3.68E-02
1.33E-01
7.18E-02
1.11E-01
7.18E-02
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
1.33E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.26E-01
1.28E-01
1.35E-01
1.33E-01
1.30E-01
1.69E-03
1.32E-01
1.35E-01
1.27E-01
1.28E-01
2.84E-02
Notes:
Low, Medium, and High denote representative waste types with different hydraulic conductivities:
Low = Fine-grained waste (e.g., fly ash), Hydraulic conductivity is 5x10 cm/sec
Medium = Medium-grained waste (e.g., bottom ash), Hydraulic conductivity is 0.0041 cm/sec
High = Coarse-grained waste (e.g., slag), Hydraulic conductivity is 0.041 cm/sec
D-2-2
-------
Table D-3: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Land Application Units (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
101
73
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
24
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
Honolulu
Indianapolis
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
Medford
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
MT
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
HI
IN
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
OR
No Liner
SLT
O.OOE+00
1.80E+00
1.08E+00
3.42E-01
2.12E-01
1.47E-01
1.85E-01
2.39E-02
8.00E-04
2.33E-01
1.95E-01
5.49E-02
1.36E-01
1.08E-01
O.OOE+00
3.36E-01
2.61E-01
5.00E-04
7.98E-02
1.55E-01
7.80E-02
1.53E-01
7.65E-02
1.59E-01
5.99E-02
8.00E-04
1.14E-01
1.35E-02
1.09E-01
1.44E-01
3.12E-01
7.60E-03
O.OOE+00
1.46E-01
2.39E-02
3.07E-02
9.90E-03
4.42E-02
O.OOE+00
3.60E-03
3.26E-01
1.71E-01
5.41E-02
1.30E-01
1.68E-01
1.51E-01
4.11E-01
3.65E-01
3.30E-03
O.OOE+00
3.29E-01
3.53E-01
7.87E-02
3.08E-01
9.12E-02
2.07E-01
SNL
O.OOE+00
1.98E+00
1.15E+00
3.99E-01
2.70E-01
2.05E-01
1.98E-01
3.00E-02
9.40E-03
2.38E-01
2.46E-01
1.05E-01
1.78E-01
1.49E-01
8.00E-04
4.17E-01
3.29E-01
1.30E-03
1.14E-01
2.21E-01
1.21E-01
1.99E-01
1.16E-01
2.06E-01
1.07E-01
8.00E-04
1.64E-01
3.45E-02
1.45E-01
1.68E-01
3.91E-01
1.30E-02
O.OOE+00
1.48E-01
6.30E-02
3.68E-02
7.40E-03
6.27E-02
O.OOE+00
6.90E-03
3.90E-01
2.23E-01
9.83E-02
1.86E-01
2.14E-01
2.11E-01
4.46E-01
4.64E-01
5.30E-03
O.OOE+00
3.97E-01
4.34E-01
9.50E-02
3.61E-01
1.40E-01
2.31E-01
SCL
3.00E-04
1.52E+00
9.65E-01
2.82E-01
1.67E-01
1.23E-01
1.78E-01
1.96E-02
3.80E-03
1.54E-01
1.62E-01
3.84E-02
1.17E-01
8.86E-02
O.OOE+00
2.74E-01
2.12E-01
8.60E-03
6.20E-02
1.54E-01
8.23E-02
1.22E-01
6.63E-02
1.37E-01
5.31E-02
3.60E-03
1.16E-01
2.26E-02
1.10E-01
7.04E-02
2.49E-01
8.10E-03
3.00E-04
1.45E-01
2.26E-02
3.81E-02
9.90E-03
3.23E-02
3.00E-04
7.40E-03
2.71E-01
1.41E-01
3.63E-02
1.06E-01
1.39E-01
1.10E-01
3.54E-01
2.82E-01
9.40E-03
1.80E-03
2.70E-01
2.82E-01
6.99E-02
2.57E-01
6.86E-02
2.10E-01
D-3-1
-------
Table D-3: Tier 2 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Land Application Units (m/yr)
ID
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
33
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
102
15
48
68
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
City
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
San Juan
Santa Maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
State
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
PR
CA
MI
NY
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
No Liner
SLT
1.45E-01
1.80E-02
1.06E-01
2.27E-01
4.67E-01
3.52E-01
5.89E-01
2.44E-01
3.12E-01
6.71E-02
6.12E-02
1.02E-01
2.01E-01
O.OOE+00
8.94E-02
1.90E-01
O.OOE+00
4.17E-01
2.29E-01
2.13E-01
6.90E-03
5.08E-02
5.00E-04
1.21E-01
1.02E-01
1.30E-02
1.10E-01
2.21E-02
1.49E-01
9.47E-02
1.65E-01
1.47E-01
1.81E-01
4.38E-01
2.30E-01
6.02E-02
2.55E-01
5.91E-01
6.58E-02
1.05E-01
O.OOE+00
6.86E-02
2.61E-01
2.89E-01
2.02E-01
O.OOE+00
SNL
2.20E-01
2.54E-02
1.48E-01
2.81E-01
5.40E-01
4.63E-01
7.45E-01
2.94E-01
O.OOE+00
7.95E-02
9.42E-02
1.70E-01
2.61E-01
3.00E-04
1.31E-01
2.54E-01
O.OOE+00
4.39E-01
2.84E-01
2.86E-01
1.32E-02
l.OOE-01
7.10E-03
1.60E-01
8.76E-02
2.69E-02
1.65E-01
3.40E-02
2.16E-01
1.15E-01
2.10E-01
1.93E-01
2.43E-01
4.58E-01
2.94E-01
8.31E-02
3.25E-01
7.31E-01
1.03E-01
1.48E-01
3.00E-04
1.01E-01
3.49E-01
3.56E-01
2.59E-01
2.30E-03
SCL
1.02E-01
1.35E-02
8.79E-02
1.94E-01
3.77E-01
2.86E-01
4.50E-01
1.97E-01
2.69E-01
5.36E-02
3.89E-02
8.05E-02
1.64E-01
3.00E-04
7.92E-02
1.52E-01
O.OOE+00
3.93E-01
1.87E-01
1.75E-01
8.40E-03
4.95E-02
3.30E-03
1.01E-01
9.45E-02
1.85E-02
8.20E-02
2.41E-02
1.05E-01
8.41E-02
1.44E-01
1.22E-01
1.43E-01
4.08E-01
1.84E-01
5.54E-02
2.12E-01
4.56E-01
4.75E-02
7.62E-02
5.00E-04
4.65E-02
1.78E-01
2.33E-01
1.70E-01
3.00E-04
Notes:
SLT = Silt Loam soil
SNL = Sandy Loam soil
SCL = Silty Clay Loam soil
D-3-2
-------
Table D-4: Tier 1 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Clay Liner Scenarios (m/yr)
City
Boise 1}
Fresno
Bismarck
Denver
Grand Junction
Pocatello
Glasgow
Pullman
Yakima
Cheyenne
Lander
Rapid City
Los Angeles
Sacramento
San Diego
Santa Maria
Ely
Cedar City
Albuquerque
Las Vegas
Phoenix
Tucson
El Paso
Medford
Great Falls
Salt Lake City
Grand Island
Flagstaff
Dodge City
Midland
St. Cloud
E. Lansing
North Omaha
Dallas
Tulsa
Brownsville
Oklahoma City
Bangor
Concord
Pittsburg
Portland
Caribou
Chicago
Burlington
Rutland
Seattle
Montpelier
Sault St. Marie
Columbia
Put-in-Bay
Madison
Columbus
State
ID
CA
ND
CO
CO
ID
MT
WA
WA
WY
WY
SD
CA
CA
CA
CA
NV
UT
NM
NV
AZ
AZ
TX
OR
MT
UT
NE
AZ
KS
TX
MN
MI
NE
TX
OK
TX
OK
ME
NH
PA
OR
ME
IL
VT
VT
WA
VT
MI
MO
OH
WI
OH
Tier 1 Clay
Lined Landfill
Infiltration Rate
(m/yr)
4.61E-03
4.61E-03
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.88E-02
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
1.26E-03
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
1.96E-02
2.41E-02
9.44E-03
9.44E-03
3.42E-02
3.74E-02
2.91E-02
2.41E-02
2.41E-02
2.41E-02
2.46E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.32E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
Tier 1 Clay Lined Waste Pile
Infiltration Rate (m/yr)
Low
Permeability
Waste
1.36E-02
1.36E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
1.24E-02
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
1.60E-03
9.68E-02
9.68E-02
9.68E-02
9.68E-02
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
4.22E-02
1.05E-02
3.26E-03
3.26E-03
2.64E-02
4.81E-02
2.02E-02
4.97E-03
4.97E-03
4.97E-03
7.47E-03
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
1.13E-01
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
Medium
Permeability
Waste
4.34E-02
4.34E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
6.89E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
5.56E-02
1.51E-02
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.35E-01
1.23E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.26E-01
1.15E-01
1.26E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.31E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
High
Permeability
Waste
6.06E-02
6.06E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
9.50E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.18E-02
7.43E-03
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.31E-01
1.31E-01
1.31E-01
1.34E-01
1.23E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.26E-01
1.11E-01
1.27E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.30E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
D-4-1
-------
Table D-4: Tier 1 HELP-derived Infiltration Rates for Clay Liner Scenarios (m/yr)
City
Cleveland
Des Moines
E. St. Louis
Topeka
Tampa
San Antonio
Portland
Hartford
Syracuse
Worchester
Augusta
Providence
Nashua
Ithaca
Boston
Schenectady
New York City
Lynchburg
Philadelphia
Seabrook
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Bridgeport
Jacksonville
Orlando
Greensboro
Watkinsville
Norfolk
Shreveport
Astoria
New Haven
Plainfield
Nashville
Knoxville
Central Park
Lexington
Edison
Atlanta
Little Rock
Tallahassee
New Orleans
Charleston
W. Palm Beach
Lake Charles
Miami
Annette
Bethel
Fairbanks
Honolulu
San Juan
State
OH
IA
IL
KS
FL
TX
ME
CT
NY
MA
ME
RI
NH
NY
MA
NY
NY
VA
PA
NJ
IN
OH
CT
FL
FL
NC
GA
VA
LA
OR
CT
MA
TN
TN
NY
KY
NJ
GA
AK
FL
LA
SC
FL
LA
FL
AK
AK
AK
HI
PR
Tier 1 Clay
Lined Landfill
Infiltration Rate
(m/yr)
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
4.09E-02
3.50E-02
2.53E-02
2.53E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.45E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
4.44E-02
3.62E-02
3.62E-02
3.62E-02
3.62E-02
3.62E-02
3.62E-02
5.26E-02
5.26E-02
5.26E-02
4.86E-02
4.86E-02
4.86E-02
4.86E-02
4.86E-02
4.77E-02
4.77E-02
4.77E-02
4.77E-02
4.77E-02
4.77E-02
4.92E-02
4.92E-02
3.38E-02
2.95E-02
9.40E-03
4.83E-03
1.93E-02
Tier 1 Clay Lined Waste Pile
Infiltration Rate (m/yr)
Low
Permeability
Waste
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
6.88E-02
1.74E-02
2.00E-02
2.00E-02
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.19E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
1.06E-01
8.04E-02
8.04E-02
8.04E-02
8.04E-02
8.04E-02
8.04E-02
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
1.26E-01
1.18E-01
1.18E-01
1.18E-01
1.18E-01
1.18E-01
1.18E-01
3.84E-03
3.84E-03
1.35E-01
3.52E-02
9.80E-03
3.23E-02
6.37E-02
Medium
Permeability
Waste
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.31E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.29E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.34E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
2.36E-02
2.36E-02
1.36E-01
3.64E-02
1.18E-02
4.94E-02
7.93E-02
High
Permeability
Waste
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.32E-01
1.30E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.28E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.33E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.27E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
1.35E-01
2.97E-02
2.97E-02
1.35E-01
6.60E-02
4.07E-02
8.71E-02
1.11E-01
1 City names in bold face are climate stations selected as representative of that region
D-4-2
-------
Table D-5: Flow rate data used to develop landfill and waste pile composite liner infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001)
Landfill
Cell ID1
G228
G232
G233
G234
G235
G236
G237
G238
G239
G240
G241
G242
G243
G244
G245
G246
G247
G248
G249
G250
G251
G252
G232
G233
G234
G235
G236
Cell Type
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
closed
closed
closed
closed
closed
Average M
(L/ha/d)
5.85
11
0
2
4
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
mthly LDS Flow
Rate
(m/y)
2.14E-04
4.02E-04
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
1.46E-04
3.65E-05
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
2.19E-04
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
3.65E-05
O.OOE+00
Liner Type2
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
Type of
Waste3
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
Site Parameters
Location
Mid- Atlantic
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Average
Annual
Rainfall
(mm)
NA
990
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
760
1090
1090
1090
990
1040
1040
1040
1040
Subsurface Soil
Type
NA
Silty Clay
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand
NA
NA
NA
Silty Clay
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Landfill Cell Construction/Operation Information
Cell Area
(ha)
51
4.7
2
2
1.7
1.7
2.8
3.9
2.6
3.8
3.3
3.9
3
4
3
2.8
2.8
4.5
3.8
4
2.4
2.8
4.7
2
2
1.7
1.7
GM Liner
Material4
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
HDPE
GM Liner
Thickness
(mm)
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
1
1
1
1
GCL or CCL
Thickness
(mm)
NA
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
250
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Maximum
Height of
Waste
(in)
NA
NA
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
41
28
30
30
NA
24
24
24
24
End Construction
Date
1988
May-92
Jun-88
Jun-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Sep-88
Dec-88
Jan-89
Jul-89
Dec-89
Feb-90
Feb-90
Oct-90
Jan-91
Apr-92
May-92
Jan-93
Sep-92
Dec-90
Jan-93
Jan-93
May-92
Jun-88
Jun-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Waste Placement
Start Date
1989
May-92
Jul-88
Jul-88
Sep-88
Sep-88
Oct-88
Dec-88
Feb-89
Jul-89
Dec-89
Jul-90
Feb-90
Oct-90
Jan-91
Apr-92
May-92
Jan-93
Dec-92
Feb-91
Jan-93
Jan-93
May-92
Jul-88
Jul-88
Sep-88
Sep-88
Final Closure
Date
NA
Jul-94
Feb-91
Feb-91
Apr-93
Apr-93
Jul-94
Feb-91
Feb-91
Apr-93
Apr-93
Source of Data
Eith&Koerner(1997)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
Notes:
1. Cell ID as reported by Tetra Tech (2001)
2. GM = geomembrane; GCL = geosynthetic clay liner
3. MSW = municipal solid waste
4. HDPE = high density polyethylene
NA = not available
- = not applicable
Data Sources:
Eith, A. W., and G.R. Koerner, 1997. Assessment of HDPE geomembrane performance in municipal waste landfill double liner system after eight years of service. Geotextiles and geomembranes, Vol. 15, pp. 277 -
EPA, 1998. Assessment and Recommendations for Optimal Performance of Waste Containment Systems. Office of Research and Development, Cmcinatti, Ohio.
D-5-1
-------
Table D-6: Leak Density Data Used to Develop Surface Impound composite liner infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001)
Site ID1
LI
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
L86
L103
L110
L114
L136
L144
L152
L159
L160
L176
L177
L178
L179
L180
L181
L182
Date
1995
1996
1994
1995
1997
1998
1995
1995
1997
1998
Apr-96
Oct-96
Jan-97
Jan-97
Oct-97
May-98
Aug-98
NA
NA
May-98
Sep-96
Apr-97
Sep-98
Sep-98
NA
NA
Area (m2)
18500
14926
13480
11652
8200
9284
67100
66150
11460
18135
9416
4980
11720
7000
13526
5608
3742
15000
10000
13500
15000
7500
5000
13200
48600
8000
Location
France
France
France
France
France
France
Canada
Canada
Canada
France
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
NA
NA
Waste Type
domestic
domestic
HW
HW
HW
HW
waste water
treatment
waste water
treatment
black liqueur
domestic
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
waste water
containment
HW
WMU type
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
pond
pond
pond
landfill
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
pond
landfill
Type of GM
Liner2
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
PBGM
PBGM
PP
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HDPE/CCL
Thickness of
GM(mm)
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
1.14
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.5
2
Quality of
Material
Beneath GM
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Holes
0
4
1
1
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
Knife
Cuts/Tears
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
1
2
3
0
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
NA
NA
Seam or Weld
Defects
5
2
1
2
0
0
2
7
2
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
Total Leaks
5
6
3
5
0
1
5
9
6
6
0
0
3
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
21
10
Range of Hole
Size (mm)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30x50
NA
NA
NA
Leak Density
(leaks/ha)
2.7
4.02
2.23
4.29
0
1.08
0.75
1.36
5.24
3.31
0
0
2.6
5.7
0.7
0
0
0
0
0.7
0
1.3
0
0
4.3
12.5
Source
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
McQuade and Needham
(1999)
Laine(1991)
Laine(1991)
Notes:
1. Cell ID as reported by Tetra Tech (2001)
2. HDPE = high density polyethylene; PBGM = pre-fabricated bituminous geomembrane; PP = polypropylene; CCL = compacted clay liner
NA = not available; - = not applicable
Data Sources:
Rollin, A.L., M. Marcotte, T. Jacqulein, andL. Chaput. 1999. Leak location in exposed geomembrane liners using an electrical leak detection technique. Geosynthetics '99, Vol. 2, pp. 615-626
McQuade, S.J., and A.D. Needham, 1999. Geomembrane liner defects - causes, frequency and avoidance. Geotechnical Engineering, Vol., 137. No. 4, pp. 203-213
Laine, D.L., 1991. Analysis of pinhole seam leaks located in geomembrane liners using the electrical leak location method. Proceedings, Geosynthetics '91, pp.239-253
D-6-1
-------
Table D-7: Comparison of composite liner infiltration rates
Calculated using Bonaparte Equation and Infiltration
Rates for composite-lined landfill cells
Percentile
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Calculated Infiltration
(m/yr)
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
1.05E-05
1.37E-05
2.03E-05
3.96E-05
6.01E-05
7.13E-05
1.87E-04
Observed Infiltration
(m/yr)
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
2.19E-05
7.30E-05
7.30E-05
1.73E-04
4.02E-04
Figure D-l: Infiltration Rate Comparison (Head =0.3m, Hole Area = 6mm )
0.0002
-Calculated Infiltration
-Actual Infiltration value
40 50 60
Percentile
D-7-1
-------
APPENDIX E
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF REFERENCE GROUND-WATER
CONCENTRATION VALUES
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
E-l Shower Model E-l
E-l.l Shower Model E-l
E-l.2 Shower Model Uncertainties and Limitations E-7
E-l.3 References for Section E-l E-18
E-2 Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties for the
Shower Model E-18
E-2.1 Data Collection Procedure E-18
E-2.2 Solubility (Sol) E-19
E-2.3 Henry's Law Constant (HLC) E-19
E-2.4 Diffusion Coefficient in Water (Dw) E-20
E-2.5 Diffusion Coefficient in Air (DJ E-21
E-2.6 References for Section E-2 E-27
E-3 Human Health Benchmarks used in the IWEM Tool E-28
E-3.1 Methodology and Data Sources E-28
E-3.1.1 Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) E-28
E-3.1.2 Superfund Provisional Benchmarks E-29
E-3.1.3 Health Effects Summary Tables (HEAST) E-29
E-3.1.4 ATSDR Minimal Risk Levels E-29
E-3.1.5 CalEPA Cancer Potency Factors and Reference
Exposure Levels E-30
E-3.1.6 Other EPA Health Benchmarks E-30
E-3.2 Human Health Benchmark Values E-31
E-3.2.1 Benzene E-43
E-3.2.2 Vinyl Chloride E-43
E-3.2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls E-43
E-3.2.4 Dioxin-like Compounds E-43
E-3.2.5 Superfund Technical Support Center
Provisional Benchmarks E-45
E-3.2.6 Benchmarks From Other EPA Sources E-46
E-3.2.7 Air Characteristic Study Provisional Benchmarks E-47
E-3.2.8 Surrogate Health Benchmarks E-47
E-3.2.9 Chloroform E-48
E-3.3 References for Section E E-49
E-i
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table E-l. Shower Model Input Parameters E-4
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties E-22
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values E-32
Table E-4. TEFs Used for Dioxin and Furan Congeners E-44
Table E-5. Provisional Human Health Benchmarks Developed by the
Superfund Technical Support Center E-45
Table E-6. Provisional Inhalation Benchmarks Developed in the Air
Characteristic Study E-47
E-ii
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF REFERENCE GROUND-WATER
CONCENTRATION VALUES
E-l Shower Model
E-l.l Shower Model
The shower model calculates the incremental change in the concentration of a
constituent in air that results from the transfer of constituent mass from the water phase
(the shower water) to the vapor phase (the air in the shower stall) over time. The model
then estimates the concentration of the constituent in a bathroom that results from air
exchange within the bathroom and between the bathroom and the rest of the house over
time. After the model calculates the predicted air-phase constituent concentration in the
shower stall and bathroom, we use those concentrations to estimate the average air-phase
constituent concentration to which an individual is exposed over the course of an entire
day. We use this average daily concentration to calculate inhalation HBNs.
The shower model is based on differential equations presented in McKone (1987)
and Little (1992a). We solved the differential equations using a mathematical technique
called "finite difference numerical integration," to produce the equations that we use in
our analysis, Equations E-l to E-l 1 in this Appendix. In reviewing the equations and
reading the following sections, it will help to keep in mind the following two concepts:
We calculate air-phase constituent concentrations for different "compartments."
The shower model is based on the understanding that there are two compartments
in the bathroom: 1) the shower stall and 2) the rest of the bathroom (outside of
the shower stall). We assume that an adult spends time: in the shower stall when
the shower is running; in the shower stall after the shower is turned off; and in the
rest of the bathroom after the shower is turned off (see Equations E-l and E-2).
We calculate air-phase constituent concentrations for different time steps. We
implement the shower model in time steps. That is, we estimate the air-phase
constituent concentration in each of the two compartments in 0.2-minute
increments or time steps. The air-phase constituent concentration at the
beginning of the 0.2-minute time step differs from the concentration at the end of
the 0.2-minute time step because of volatilization of constituent mass from the
shower water (which adds constituent mass) and the exchange of air between the
compartments in the bathroom and the rest of the house (which disperses the
mass). At the beginning of a time step, the air-phase concentration in each
E-l
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
bathroom compartment is equal to the air-phase concentration that was estimated
for the compartment at the end of the previous time step.
The following is our basic procedure for implementing the shower model:
Calculate a mass transfer coefficient for each constituent;
Estimate the air-phase constituent concentration in the shower stall for
sequential 0.2-minute time steps;
Estimate the air-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom (other
than in the shower stall) for sequential 0.2-minute time steps;
Use the air-phase constituent concentrations calculated for the shower
stall, and the air-phase constituent concentrations calculated for the
bathroom, to calculate the average constituent concentration to which an
adult is exposed during the course of a day.
This procedure is explained in greater detail below. Table E-2 provides the
values for the constituent-specific properties used in the model. Table E-l provides the
values we used for the parameters in the model.
Calculating a Mass Transfer Coefficient
The first step in estimating the concentration of a constituent in air is to quantify
the constituent's "resistance" to movement between the water phase and the air phase.
We quantify this resistance using the mass transfer coefficient presented in Equation E-4,
which incorporates variables calculated in Equations E-3 and E-5. The mass transfer
coefficient depends on properties specific to each constituent evaluated, as well as
physical properties of the water droplet. Specifically, the mass transfer coefficient
depends on:
The constituent's diffusivity in water (the molecular diffusion coefficient
for the constituent in water), which determines how readily the constituent
mass in the center of the water droplet will diffuse to the surface of the
water droplet. If a constituent's diffusivity in water is low, then as the
constituent is emitted from the surface of the water droplet, the rate at
which the surface of the droplet is "supplied" with constituent from the
center of the water droplet will be slow, resulting in less constituent being
emitted from the droplet. Diffusivity influences the concentration gradient
across the droplet.
E-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The Henry's law constant for the constituent, which establishes how the
constituent will partition between the water phase and the air phase to
achieve equilibrium. Henry's law states that, at equilibrium, the amount
of a constituent dissolved in water is proportional to the amount of the
constituent in the air phase that is in contact with the water. This
proportion is constituent-specific (each constituent has a different Henry's
law constant). The Henry's law constant influences the magnitude of the
air-phase constituent concentrations more than any other constituent-
specific parameter.
The constituent's diffusivity in air (the molecular diffusion coefficient for
the constituent in air), which determines how readily the constituent will
migrate away from the droplet once it is released into the air surrounding
the droplet. Constituents with lower diffusivities in air will have
comparatively higher concentrations around the water droplet than in the
surrounding air. Therefore, because of Henry's law, less constituent
would need to come out of solution into the air phase in order to achieve
equilibrium.
The amount of time that the droplet is in contact with the air, which we
assume is equivalent to the time it takes for the droplet to fall to the floor
of the shower. We determine the time it takes the droplet to fall by
dividing distance that the droplet has to fall (which we assume is equal to
the height of the shower nozzle) by the velocity at which the water droplet
falls (which we assume is the terminal velocity of the droplet). For this
analysis, we set the nozzle height and the terminal velocity of the droplet
at fixed values, as presented in Table E-l.
The ratio of the water droplet's surface area to its volume. Because we
assume that the droplet is a sphere, its surface area to volume ratio is equal
to a value of 6 divided by the diameter of the droplet. For this analysis,
the diameter of the droplet, therefore its surface area to volume ratio, is a
fixed value (see Table E-l).
Table E-2 presents the constituent-specific diffusivities and Henry's law constants
that we used in our analysis.
E-3
-------
Table E-l. Shower Model Input Parameters
m
Input Parameter
Description
Value
Units
Reference
Comment
Bathroom Properties
Vb
Volume of the bathroom
10
m3
McKone, 1987
Exchange Rate
Qbh
Qsb
Volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom
and the house
Volumetric exchange rate between the shower
and the bathroom
300
100
L/min
L/min
derived value
derived value
Estimated from the volume and flow rate
in McKone (1987) such that the exchange
rate equals the volume divided by the
residence time (e.g., 10,OOOL/30 min).
Estimated from the volume and flow rate
in McKone (1987) such that the exchange
rate equals the volume divided by the
residence time (e.g., 2000L/20 min).
Exposure Time
ShowerStallTime
r_bathroom
ShowerTime
Time in shower stall after showering
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower
Shower time, 50th percentile
5
5
15
min
min
min
U.S. EPA, 1997c
U.S. EPA, 1997c
U.S. EPA, 1997c
Table 15-23. 50th percentile overall
Table 15-32. 50th percentile overall
Table 15-21. 50th percentile overall
Shower Properties
Vs
NozHeight
ShowerRate
DropVel
DropDiam
Volume of shower
Height of shower head
Rate of water flow from shower head
Terminal velocity of water drop
Diameter of shower water drop
2
1.8
10
400
0.098
m3
m
L/min
cm/s
cm
McKone, 1987
Little, 1992a
derived value
derived value
derived value
Selected based on the maximum height
reported in Table 1 of Little (1992a), a
summary of five studies.
Value obtained by averaging the flow rates
reported in five studies in Table 1 of
Little (1992a) (QL) = 10.08 L/min.
Selected value by correlating to existing
data.
Estimated as a function of terminal
velocity<=600cm/sec (Coburn, 1996).
Groundwater
Cin
Constituent concentration in incoming water
0.001
mg/L
NA
Unit concentration selected.
I
8
I
s.
b
o
TO
TO
I
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Calculating the Air-Phase Constituent Concentration in the Shower
Calculating the air-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the end of
each time step involves:
1. Calculating the fraction of constituent that can be emitted into the air from each
water droplet (Equation E-7);
2. Translating the fraction of constituent that can be emitted from each water droplet
(from step 1) into the mass of constituent that is emitted from the entire volume of
water that is coming into the shower during each time step (Equation E-6); and
3. Determining the constituent concentration at the end of the time step by:
calculating the concentration added to the shower air during the time step
(dividing the constituent mass emitted from the water in step 2 by the volume of
the shower); adding this concentration to the concentration of the constituent that
was already in the shower air at the beginning of the time step; and subtracting
the concentration lost from the shower air due to the exchange of air with the rest
of the bathroom (Equation E-9).
An important element of this analysis is the difference between the time in the
shower stall that is spent showering (15 minutes, Table E.I) and the time in the shower
stall that occurs after showering (5 minutes, Table E.I). The difference in these two time
periods involves how we handle the value for mass of constituent emitted from the
shower water (step 2, above). When we switch the model over from the time period
where the shower nozzle is turned on (the time spent showering), to the time period
where the shower nozzle is turned off (the time spent in the shower stall after showering),
we set the mass emitted from the water to zero. This means that during the 5-minute
period when the individual is in the shower after the shower is turned off, the air-phase
concentration of the constituent is only a function of the concentration of the constituent
in the air at the beginning of the time step and the air exchange between the shower stall
and the rest of the bathroom. The following paragraphs describe steps 1 and 2 in more
detail.
The fraction of the constituent mass that potentially can be emitted from a droplet
at any given time during the droplet's fall through the air (Equation E-7) is a function of
the mass transfer coefficient (the constituent's resistance to movement from the water
phase to the air phase, described previously) and the "fraction of gas phase saturation" in
the shower (calculated using Equation E-8). Inherent in this calculation is an assumption
that the concentration of the constituent in the air is constant over the time it takes the
droplet to fall. The fraction of gas phase saturation is an expression of how close the air-
phase constituent concentration is to the maximum possible (equilibrium) air-phase
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
concentration. Stated another way, Henry's law dictates that for a certain constituent
concentration in water, we can predict the maximum concentration of constituent in the
air that is in contact with the water (assuming the air and water are in equilibrium).
Consequently, if there is already constituent in the air, then, to maintain equilibrium,
there is a limit to how much additional constituent can be emitted from the water to the
air (the less constituent already present in the air, the more constituent that theoretically
may be emitted). The fraction of gas phase saturation is an expression of how close the
air concentration is to that limit at the beginning of each time step. However, as
suggested at the beginning of this paragraph, even though Henry's law influences the
maximum fraction of mass that could be emitted from the droplet, the mass transfer
coefficient also influences how much of the constituent will "free itself from the water.
Factors such as the constituent's dispersivity (in water and air) and the surface area of the
droplet also influence the fraction of constituent mass that can be emitted from the
droplet.
In most cases, for each 0.2-minute time step we evaluate, the mass of a
constituent emitted from the shower water to the air is the product of: the concentration
of the constituent in the shower water; the volume of water emitted from the shower
during the time step; and the fraction of the constituent mass in the water that potentially
could be emitted from the water (discussed above). However, in certain cases (typically
rare), the mass transfer coefficient is of a magnitude that the concentration calculated in
this way exceeds the mass that possibly could be emitted when the water and the air
phases are at equilibrium. In this case, we "cap" the constituent mass that can be emitted
from the shower water during the time step. The cap is the maximum constituent mass
that could be emitted from the water at equilibrium (based on Henry's law) minus the
constituent mass already in the shower stall at the beginning of the time step
Calculating the Air-Phase Constituent Concentration in the Bathroom (other than in
the Shower Stall)
The air-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom (Equation E-10) is a
function of the air-phase constituent concentration calculated for the shower, and the
exchange of air 1) between the shower and the bathroom and 2) between the bathroom
and the rest of the house. Specifically, for each time step, the air-phase constituent
concentration in the bathroom is equal to: the air-phase constituent concentration in the
bathroom at the beginning of the time step, plus the constituent concentration added as a
result of the exchange of air with the shower, minus the constituent concentration lost as
a result of the exchange of air with the rest of the house. Table E-l presents the values
we used for the volumetric exchange rate between the shower and the bathroom; the
volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom and the house; and the volume of the
bathroom.
E-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Calculating the Average Daily Constituent Concentration to which an Individual is
Exposed
To calculate the average concentration of a constituent to which an individual is
exposed on a daily basis (24 hours per day) (Equation E-ll), we:
1. Calculate the average constituent concentration in the shower air across all time
steps and multiply this concentration by the amount of time an individual spends
in the shower stall (Equation E-2);
2. Calculate the average constituent concentration in the bathroom air (not including
the shower air) across all time steps and multiply this concentration by the
amount of time an individual spends in the bathroom (not including the time spent
in the shower stall);
3. Sum the values calculated in steps 1 and 2, and divide the sum by the length of a
day. This calculation carries with it an assumption that an individual only is
exposed to the constituent in the shower, and in the bathroom after showering
(that is, that the concentration of the constituent in the rest of the house is zero).
E-1.2 Shower Model Uncertainties and Limitations
The primary limitations and uncertainties of the shower model are as follows:
The model is constructed such that air-phase concentration of a constituent
in household air results solely from showering activity. Individuals are
exposed to emissions via inhalation for time spent in the shower while
showering, in the shower stall after showering, and in the bathroom after
showering. Other models calculate indoor air concentrations resulting
from emissions from household use of tap water and/or calculate
inhalation exposures for time spent in the remainder of the house.
However, McKone (1987) found that the risk from inhalation exposures in
the remainder of the house was considerably lower than the risk from
inhalation exposures in the bathroom and during showering. In addition,
there are few data available to estimate the input parameters needed to
calculate exposure concentrations from other household activities,
including variables such as house volume, air exchange rate between the
house and outside air, and exposure time in the house. Given the expected
lower risk due to exposure in the remainder of the house, and the lack of
available data to estimate house constituent concentrations, we focused on
showering as the greatest source of inhalation exposure and risk due to use
of contaminated water.
EX7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The model currently only considers exposures to adults who shower, and
does not consider exposures to children who bathe in bathtubs. This
limitation of the model may be significant. A recent report by EPA's
National Center for Environmental Assessment states that: "Because of
the longer exposure times, chemical emissions during the use of bathtubs
may be as, or more, significant than during showers, in terms of human
inhalation. This is particularly important given that small children are
typically washed in bathtubs rather than showers and are generally more
sensitive to chemical exposure than are healthy adults" (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Our analysis does not consider an individual's dermal exposure to water
or an individual's incidental ingestion of water while showering.
The model only considers emissions that result from falling droplets of
water in the shower. The model does not include algorithms that account
for emissions from water films on shower walls or puddles on the floor of
the shower. Use of the model also assumes that a droplet falls directly
from the shower nozzle to the shower stall floor, and is not intercepted by
the body of the individual who is showering.
The input parameter values are a source of uncertainty for the shower
model. To select values for the shower properties (shower and bathroom
volume, nozzle height, and flow rate), we generally used central tendency
values that were reported in the literature. Although fixing shower model
input parameters as constant does not capture variability in the results, the
results still compare favorably to experimental data for numerous organic
compounds of varying volatility (Coburn, 1996). The values for droplet
properties (diameter and velocity) are also constants, and are based on
correlation to existing data. The largest uncertainty is likely in the
volumetric exchange rates used between the shower and bathroom and the
bathroom and the rest of house. We derived these values, 300 L/min for
the exchange rate between the bathroom and house, and 100 L/min for the
exchange rate between the shower and bathroom, from McKone (1987).
However, values reported in a five-study summary by Little (1992a)
ranged from 35 to 460 L/min for the exchange between the shower and
bathroom, and 38 to 480 L/min for the exchange between the bathroom
and the rest of the house. Such a large range of volumetric exchange rates
imparts uncertainty to the shower model's estimation of constituent
concentrations.
A constituent's solubility in water depends on a number of factors
including the temperature of the water and the other chemicals (for
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
example, other solvents) that are in the water. When the concentration of
a constituent in water exceeds the constituent's solubility in that water, we
expect that at least some of the constituent will exist in the water as a non-
aqueous (free) phase. Henry's law, a basic principle of the shower model,
only applies to constituents dissolved in water, it does not apply to non-
aqueous phase constituents (U.S. EPA, 1996). As a result, it would not be
appropriate to use the HBNs we developed for the inhalation pathway if
the shower water (which we assume is from a ground-water well)
contained non-aqueous phase constituent. More importantly, however,
EPACMTP, the ground-water fate and transport model that we use to
estimate constituent concentrations in the modeled ground water, cannot
be used to model non-aqueous phase liquids. Consequently, the IWEM
tool should not be used in cases where non-aqueous phase constituents are
present in leachate. In these situations, another tool must be used that is
capable of evaluating non-aqueous phase liquids.
E-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-l. Total time spent in shower and bathroom
BSResTime = ShowerTime + ShowerStall Time + T bathroom
Name
BSResTime
ShowerTime
ShowerStallTime
T bathroom
Description
Total time spent in shower and bathroom (min)
Duration of shower (min)
Time in shower stall after showering (min)
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower (min)
Value
Calculated above
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
This equation calculates the total time that a receptor is exposed to vapors.
Equation E-2. Total time spent in shower stall
Shower Res Time = ShowerStallTime + ShowerTime
Name
ShowerResTime
ShowerStallTime
ShowerTime
Description
Total time spent in shower stall (min)
Time in shower stall after showering (min)
Duration of shower (min)
Value
Calculated above
Provided in Table E-
Provided in Table E-
1
1
This equation calculates the total time that a receptor is exposed to vapors in the shower stall.
E-10
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-3. Dimensionless Henry's law constant
Name
Hprime
HLCcoef
HLC
R
Term
Hprime = HLCcoef x HLC
TTT f~* ^-i ?f
llL^Loej -
R x lemp
Description
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Coefficient to Henry's law constant Mol/(atm-m3)
Henry's law constant (atm-m3/Mol)
Ideal Gas constant (atm-m3/K-Mol)
Temoerature (K)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Chemical-specific
0.00008206
298
This equation calculates the dimensionless form of Henry's law constant.
Equation E-4. Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient
Name
N
AVRatio
Kol
DropResTime
DropDiam
NozHeight
DropVel
100
N = Kol x AVRatio x DropResTime
6
A >- latino
DropDiam
^ ^ T. NozHeight x 100
Di,pRc,Timc - DmpVei
Description
Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient (dimensionless)
Area-to-volume ratio for a sphere (cm2/cm3)
Overall mass transfer coefficient (cm/s)
Residence time for falling drops (s)
Drop diameter (cm)
Nozzle height (m)
Drop terminal velocity (cm/s)
Conversion factor (cm/m)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-5
Calculated above
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
Conversion factor
This equation calculates the dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient. The above equation is based
on Little (1992a; Equation 5), which provides the equation as N = Kol x A/Q1 where A is the total surface
area for mass transfer and Ql is water flow in volume per time.
E-ll
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-5. Overall mass transfer coefficient
Name
Kol
beta
Dw
Da
Hprime
( 2.5 i r1
J^,-\ 7 /? i
*°I-PA(D.+ D.^xHprime)
Description
Overall mass transfer coefficient (cm/s)
Proportionality constant (cm-sA-l/3)
Diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
Diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Value
Calculated above
216
Chemical-specific
Chemical-specific
Calculated in Equation E-3
This equation calculates the overall mass transfer coefficient. The above equation corresponds to Equation
17 in McKone (1987) and was modified to use the dimensionless Henry's law constant. McKone (1987)
noted that the proportionality constant, beta, was a dimensionless value. Little (1992b) indicated that beta
is not dimensionless. The correct units are noted above. The value for beta was derived using data for
benzene and verified for chemicals of varying volatility (Coburn, 1996).
E-12
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-6. Constituent mass emitted in the shower for a given time step
For Et > Emax,
Es = Emax
For Et < Emax,
Es= Et
Where,
Et = Cin x ShowerRate x ts x fern
Emax = (yeq - ys,t) x Vs x 1000
Name
Es
Emax
Et
yeq
ys,t
Vs
Cin
ShowerRate
ts
fern
Rprime
1000
Description
Constituent mass emitted in the shower for a given time step
(mg)
Maximum possible mass of constituent emitted from shower
during time step (mg)
Potential mass of constituent emitted from shower during
time step (mg)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in equilibrium between
water and air (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Volume of shower (m3)
Liquid-phase constituent concentration in the incoming water
(mg/L)
Rate of flow from showerhead (L/min)
Time step (min)
Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
(dimensionless)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated above
Hprime x Cin
Calculated in Equation E-9 (As
ys, t+ts for previous time step)
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
0.2
Calculated in Equation E-7
Calculated in Equation E-3
Conversion factor
The above equations are used to determine the mass of constituent emitted for a given time step. The
equilibrium concentration in air (y_eq) is calculated from Equation 1 in Little (1992a). If the mass emitted
based on the mass transfer coefficient (Et) is greater than the amount emitted to reach equilibrium (Emax),
the mass is set to the amount that results in the air concentration at equilibrium.
E-13
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-7. Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
fern = (l- Fsat] x (;- e~N\
Name
fern
Fsat
N
Description
Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
(dimensionless)
Fraction of gas-phase saturation (dimensionless)
Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient
(dimensionless)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-8
Calculated in Equation E-4
This equation is used to calculate the fraction of a given chemical emitted from a droplet of water in the
shower. The equation is based on Equation 5 in Little (1992a). The above equation is obtained by
rearranging the equation in Little given that ys_max/m = Cin and Fsat = ys/ys_max = ys/(m x Cin).
Equation E-8. Fraction of gas-phase saturation in shower
Name
Fsat
yeq
ys,t
Hprime
Cin
Vs,t
77V -K/
1'Sdt
yeq
Description
Fraction of gas-phase saturation in shower (dimensionless)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in equilibrium between
water and air (mg/L)
Current gas-phase constituent concentration in air (mg/L)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Constituent concentration in incoming water (mg/L)
Value
Calculated above
Eprime x Cin
Calculated in Equation E-9 (as
ys, t+ts for previous time step)
Calculated in Equation E-3
Provided in Table E-l
This equation is used to calculate the fraction of gas phase saturation in shower for each time step. The
equilibrium concentration in air (y_eq) is calculated from Equation 1 in Little (1992a).
E-14
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-9. Gas-phase constituent concentration
Name
ys, t+ts
ys,t
yb, t
Es
Qsb
Vs
ts
1000
[& - (Qsb
in the shower at end of time step
x (ys,t - yb, t\ x ts\\
Vs x 1000
Description
Gas-phase constituent concentration in
time step (mg/L)
the shower at end of
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Mass emitted in the shower for a given
Volumetric exchange rate between the
bathroom (L/min)
time step (mg)
shower and the
Volume of shower (m3)
Time step (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-10 (as
yb, t+ts for previous time step)
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation E-6
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
0.2
Conversion factor
This equation is used to calculate the gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at end of time step.
The equation is derived from Equation 9 in Little (1992a). Es is set to 0 when the shower is turned off (i.e.,
at the end of showering) to estimate the reduction in shower stall air concentrations after emissions cease.
E-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-10. Gas-phase constituent concentration in
yb, ti
Name
yb, t+ts
yb, t
ys, t+ts
yh, t
Qsb
Qbh
Vb
ts
1000
\\Qsb X (ys, t + ts- yb, t\ -
, 1 17 / 1 L
the bathroom at end of time step
Qbh x (yb, t - yh, tj\
Vb x 1000
Description
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
bathroom at end
bathroom at the
shower at the end
house at the
Volumetric exchange rate between the shower and the
bathroom (L/min)
Volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom and the
house (L/min)
Volume of bathroom (m3)
Time step (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation
E-9
Assumed deminimus, zero
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
Provided in Table E-l
0.2
Conversion factor
This equation is used to calculate the gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at end of time
step. The equation is derived from Equation 10 in Little (1992a).
E-16
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-ll. Average daily concentration in indoor air
C^air _ indot
Name
Cair_indoor
Cair_shower
Cair_bathroom
ShowerResTime
T_bathroom
ys,t
ys, t+ts
yb, t
yb, t+ts
ns
nb
1440
1000
\Cair_ shower x ShowerResTime} + \Catr_ bathroom x T bathroom]
1440
J] [(ys, t+ts + ys.t)/2\ x 1000
C^air shower
ns
y \(yb, t+ts + yb,t}/2\ x 1000
f~< , . ** L^ ' J
L^air bainroom
nb
Description
Average daily concentration in indoor air (mg/m3)
Average concentration in shower (mg/m3)
Average concentration in bathroom (mg/m3)
Total time spent in shower stall (min)
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower (min)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the end
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
end of time step (mg/L)
Number of time steps corresponding to time spent in the
shower (dimensionless)
Number of time steps corresponding to time spent in the
bathroom (dimensionless)
Minutes per day (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-2
Provided in Table E-l
Calculated in Equation E-9 (as
ys, t+ts for previous time step)
Calculated in Equation E-9
Calculated in Equation E-10 (as
yb, t+ts for previous time step)
Calculated in Equation E-10
Summed in model code
Summed in model code
Adjustment factor
Conversion factor
The above equations are used to calculate the time-weighted average daily indoor air concentration to
which a receptor is exposed. The equation assumes that receptors are only exposed to constituents in the
shower and bathroom.
E-17
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-1.3 References for Section E-l
Coburn, J., 1996. Memo to Dana Greenwood on Emission Flux Equations for
Showering, July 1.
Little, J.C., 1992a. Applying the two resistance theory to contaminant volatilization in
showers. Environmental Science and Technology 26(7): 1341 -1349.
Little, J.C., 1992b. Applying the two resistance theory to contaminant volatilization in
showers. Environmental Science and Technology 26(4); 836-837.
McKone, T.E., 1987. Human exposure to volatile organic compounds in household tap water:
The indoor inhalation pathway. Environmental Science and Technology 21:1194-1201.
U.S. EPA, 1996. Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document. EPA/540/R95/128.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. May.
U.S. EPA, 1997a. Exposure Factors Handbook, Volume 1, General Factors.
EPA/600/P-95/002Fa. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2000. Volatilization Rates from Water to Indoor Air, Phase II. EPA/600/R-00/096.
National Center for Environmental Assessment-Washington Office, Office of Research
and Development, Washington, DC. October.
E-2 Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties for
the Shower Model
To calculate inhalation HBNs, the shower model requires input of several
chemical-specific properties, including solubility (Sol), Henry's law constant (HLC), and
diffusion coefficients in air (DJ and water (DJ. This attachment describes the data
sources and methodologies used to collect and develop these properties. Table E.2 lists
by constituent the chemical-specific properties used to calculate inhalation HBNs, along
with the data source for each value.
E-2.1 Data Collection Procedure
To select data values available from multiple sources, we created a hierarchy of
references based on the reliability and availability of data in such sources. Our first
choice for data collection and calculations was EPA reports and software. When we
could not find data or equations from EPA publications, we consulted highly recognized
sources, including chemical information databases on the Internet. These on-line sources
E-18
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document _ Appendix E
are compilations of data that provide the primary references for data values. The specific
hierarchy varied among properties as described in subsequent sections.
For dioxins, the preferred data source in all cases was the Exposure and Human
Health Reassessment of 2,3, 7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related
Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3 (Dioxin Reassessment) (U.S. EPA, 2000). We used the
Mercury Study Report to Congress (U.S. EPA, 1997a) as the preferred source for
mercury properties. If values were unavailable from these sources, we followed the same
reference hierarchy that was used for other constituents.
All data entry for chemical and physical properties was checked by comparing
each entry against the original online or hardcopy reference. All property calculation
programs were checked using hand calculations to ensure that they were functioning
correctly.
E-2.2 Solubility (Sol)
For solubility (Sol) values, we looked for data by searching the following sources
in the following order:
1. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) (U.S. EPA, 1997b);
2. CHEMFATE Chemical Search (SRC, 1999);
3. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB) (U.S. NLM, 2001);
4. ChemFinder (CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001).
For mercury, we obtained a solubility for elemental mercury from The Merck Index: An
Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals (Budavari, 1996).
E-2.3 Henry's Law Constant (HLC)
Collection of Henry's law constant (HLC) data proceeded by searching sources in
the following order:
1. SCDM;
2. CHEMFATE;
3. HSDB.
When we could not find data from these sources, we calculated HLC using
equation 15-8 from Lyman, Reehl, and Rosenblatt (1990):
Sol
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
where
HLC = Henry's law constant (atm-mVmolej
Pvp = vapor pressure (atm)
Sol = solubility (mol/m3).
E-2.4 Diffusion Coefficient in Water (Dw)
For all chemicals, we calculated the diffusion coefficient in water (Dw) by hand
because few empirical data are available. The preferred calculation was equation 17-6
from the WATER9 model (U.S. EPA, 2001):
f \( \ ~°'6
v ~ ' I 298.16 A P J
where
Dw = diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
T = temperature (degrees C)
MW = molecular weight (g/g-mol)
p = density (g/cc).
When we did not know chemical density, we used equation 3.16 from Process
Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and Heavy Metals in Surface
Waters (Process Coefficients) (U.S. EPA, 1987), which only requires molecular weight:
Dw = 0.00022 x
where
Dw = diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
MW = molecular weight (g/mol).
E-20
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-2.5 Diffusion Coefficient in Air (DJ
All diffusion coefficients in air (Da) were calculated values because few empirical
data are available. Similar to Dw, we first consulted WATER9 and then used U.S. EPA
(1987). Equation 17-5 in WATER9 calculates diffusivity in air as follows:
D =
0.0029(r+273.16)15Jo.034 + ! (l-0.0000ISMfF
V MW\
0.333
I 2.5/7 J
where
Da = diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
T = temperature (degrees C)
MW = molecular weight (g/g-mol)
p = density (g/cc).
When density was not available, we used equation 3.17 from Process Coefficients
(U.S. EPA, 1987):
Da = 1.9 x MW'm
where
Da = diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
MW = molecular weight (g/mol).
For dioxins and furans, we used an equation from the Dioxin Reassessment (U.S.
EPA, 2000) to estimate diffusion coefficients from diphenyl's diffusivity:
D^_ _ (MWb\
~
where
Db \MWa)
Da = diffusion coefficient of constituent in air (cm2/s)
Db = diffusion coefficient of diphenyl at 25 degrees C (0.068
cm2/s)
MWa = molecular weight of constituent (g/mole)
MWb = molecular weight of diphenyl (154 g/mole) .
E-21
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties
Constituent
Acetaldehyde (ethanal)
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid (propenoic acid)
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo (b)fluoranthene
Benzyl chloride
Bis (2 -ethylhexyl) phthalate
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis (2 -chloroisopropyl) ether
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane (methyl bromide)
Butadiene, 1,3-
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene, 2-
(Chloroprene)
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Chloroform
CASRN
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
62-53-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-44-7
117-81-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
56-23-5
75-15-0
57-74-9
126-99-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
Da
(cm2/s)
(a)
0.128
1.06E-01
1.34E-01
1.12E-01
1.07E-01
1.03E-01
1.14E-01
2.28E-02
8.30E-02
5.09E-02b
8.95E-02
3.55E-02
2.55E-02
4.76E-02b
6.34E-02
1.73E-02
5.67E-02
4.01E-02
5.63E-02
l.OOE-01
l.OOE-01
5.71E-02
1.06E-01
2.15E-02
8.41E-02
7.21E-02
2.18E-02
3.66E-02
1.04E-01
7.70E-02
Dw
(cm2/s)
(a)
0
1.15E-05
1.41E-05
1.22E-05
1.26E-05
1.20E-05
1.23E-05
5.84E-06
1.01E-05
5.89E-06b
1.03E-05
7.59E-06
6.58E-06
5.51E-06b
8.81E-06
4.18E-06
8.71E-06
7.40E-06
1.07E-05
1.35E-05
1.03E-05
9.78E-06
1.30E-05
0
l.OOE-05
9.48E-06
5.48E-06
1.06E-05
1.16E-05
1.09E-05
HLC
(atm-
m3/mol)
(c)
7.89e-05
3.88e-05
3.46e-05
1.22e-04
l.OOe-09
1.17e-07
1.03e-04
1.70e-04
1.90e-06
3.35e-06
5.55e-03
3.88e-ll
1.13e-06
l.lle-04
4.15e-04
1.02e-07
1.80e-05
1.34e-04e
1.60e-03
6.24e-03
7.36e-02
3.04e-02
3.03e-02
4.86e-05
1.19e-02f
3.70e-03
7.24e-08f
7.83e-04
8.82e-03
3.67e-03
Sol
(mg/L)
(c)
l.OOe+06
l.OOe+06
l.OOe+06
2.13e+05
6.40e+05
l.OOe+06
7.40e+04
1.80e-01
3.60e+04
9.40e-03
1.75e+03
5.00e+02
1.62e-03
1.50e-03
5.25e+02
3.40e-01
1.72e+04
1.31e+03
6.74e+03
1.52e+04
7.35e+02
7.93e+02
1.19e+03
5.60e-02
1.74e+03
4.72e+02
l.lle+01
2.60e+03
5.68e+03
7.92e+03
E-22
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
Chloromethane (methyl chloride)
Chlorophenol, 2-
Chloropropene, 3- (allyl chloride)
Chrysene
Cresol, o-
Cresol,
Cresol, p-
Cresols (total)
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
DDT, p,p'-
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane, 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine, 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane, 1,1-
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
Dichloroethylene, 1,1-
Dichloropropane, 1,2-
Dichloropropene, trans- 1,3-
Dichloropropene, 1,3- (isomer
mixture)
Dichloropropene, cis-1,3-
Dieldrin
Dimethyl formamide, N,N- (DMF)
Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene, 7,12-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,4-
Dioxane, 1,4-
Diphenylhydrazine, 1,2-
Epichlorohydrin
CASRN
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
218-01-9
95-48-7
108-39-4
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
50-29-3
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
75-35-4
78-87-5
10061-02-6
542-75-6
10061-01-5
60-57-1
68-12-2
57-97-6
121-14-2
123-91-1
122-66-7
106-89-8
Da
(cm2/s)
(a)
0.124
0.0661
9.36E-02
2.61E-02
7.59E-02
0.0729
7.24E-02
7.37E-02
6.02E-02
7.59E-02
1.83E-02
0.0236
0.0321
0.0562
0.055
4.75E-02b
7.60E-02
8.36E-02
8.54E-02
8.63E-02
7.33E-02
7.63E-02
7.63E-02
7.65E-02
2.33E-02
9.72E-02
4.71E-02b
3.75E-02
8.74E-02
0.0343
0.0888
Dw
(cm2/s)
(a)
1.36E-05
0
1.08E-05
6.75E-06
9.86E-06
0
9.24E-06
9.48E-06
7.85E-06
9.35E-06
4.44E-06
6.02E-06
8.90E-06
8.92E-06
8.68E-06
5.50E-06b
1.08E-05
1.06E-05
1.09E-05
1.10E-05
9.73E-06
1.01E-05
1.01E-05
1.02E-05
6.01E-06
1.12E-05
5.45E-06b
7.90E-06
1.05E-05
7.25E-06
1.11E-05
HLC
(atm-
m3/mol)
(c)
8.82e-03
3.91e-04
1.10e-02
9.46e-05
1.20e-06
8.65e-07
7.92e-07
9.52e-07
1.16e+00
1.02e-04f
8.10e-06
1.47e-08
1.47e-04
1.90e-03
2.40e-03
4.00e-09
3.43e-01
5.62e-03
9.79e-04
2.61e-02
2.80e-03
1.80e-03j
1.77e-02
2.40e-03j
1.51e-05
7.39e-08j
3.11e-08
9.26e-08
4.80e-06
1.53e-06
3.04e-05
Sol
(mg/L)
(c)
5.33e+03
2.20e+04
3.37e+03
1.60e-03
2.60e+04
2.27e+04
2.15e+04
2.34e+04
6.13e+01
4.30e+04f
2.50e-02
2.49e-03
1.23e+03
1.56e+02
7.38e+01
3.11e+00
2.80e+02
5.06e+03
8.52e+03
2.25e+03
2.80e+03
2.72e+03
2.80e+03
2.72e+03
1.95e-01
1.00e+06f
2.50e-02
2.70e+02
l.OOe+06
6.80e+01
6.59e+04
E-23
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
Epoxybutane, 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Ethoxyethanol , 2-
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide
(1,2-dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene thiourea
Ethylene oxide
Formaldehyde
Furfural
HCH, gamma- (Lindane)
HCH, beta-
HCH, alpha-
Heptachlor epoxide
Heptachlor
Hexachloro-l,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(HxCDDs)
Hexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs)
Hexachloroethane
Hexane
Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Methoxyethanol, 2-
Methyl methacrylate
CASRN
106-88-7
111-15-9
110-80-5
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
96-45-7
75-21-8
50-00-0
98-01-1
58-89-9
319-85-7
319-84-6
1024-57-3
76-44-8
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
34465-46-8
55684-94-1
67-72-1
110-54-3
193-39-5
78-59-1
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
110-49-6
109-86-4
80-62-6
Da
(cm2/s)
(a)
9.32E-02
0.057
8.19E-02
6.86E-02
4.31E-02
1.17E-01
8.69E-02
1.34E-01
1.67E-01
8.53E-02
2.74E-02
0.0277
2.75E-02
2.19E-02
2.23E-02
2.67E-02
2.90E-02
2.72E-02
4.27E-02j
4.36E-02j
3.21E-02
7.28E-02
4.48E-02
5.25E-02
7.15E-02
9.64E-02
1.58E-01
6.59E-02
0.0952
7.53E-02
Dw
(cm2/s)
(a)
1.05E-05
0
9.76E-06
8.48E-06
1.05E-05
1.36E-05
1.01E-05
1.46E-05
1.74E-05
1.07E-05
7.30E-06
7.40E-06
7.35E-06
5.58E-06
5.70E-06
7.03E-06
7.85E-06
7.22E-06
4.12E-06b
4.23E-06b
8.89E-06
8.12E-06
5.19E-06
7.53E-06
3.01E-05
1.06E-05
1.65E-05
8.71E-06
1.10E-05
9.25E-06
HLC
(atm-
m3/mol)
(c)
1.80e-04f
1.80e-06j
1.23e-07
7.88e-03
7.43e-04
6.00e-08
3.08e-10
1.48e-04
3.36e-07
4.00e-06
1.40e-05
7.43e-07
1.06e-05
9.50e-06
1.10e-03
8.15e-03
1.32e-03
2.70e-02
1.10e-05d
1.10e-05d
3.89e-03
1.43e-02
1.60e-06
6.64e-06
7.10e-03k
2.47e-04
4.55e-06
3.11e-07e
8.10e-08f
3.37e-04
Sol
(mg/L)
(c)
9.50e+04f
2.29e+05j
l.OOe+06
1.69e+02
4.18e+03
l.OOe+06
6.20e+04
1.00e+06g
5.50e+05
1.10e+05
6.80e+00
2.40e-01
2.00e+00
2.00e-01
1.80e-01
3.23e+00
5.00e-03
1.80e+00
4.40e-06d
1.30e-05d
5.00e+01
1.24e+01
2.20e-05
1.20e+04
5.62e-02h
2.54e+04
l.OOe+06
l.OOe+061
1.00e+06g
1.50e+04
E-24
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methylcholanthrene, 3-
Methylene chloride (dichloromethane)
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane, 2-
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(PeCDDs)
Pentachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Propylene oxide (1,2-epoxypropane)
Pyridine
Styrene
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
(2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans (TCDFs) *
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
CASRN
1634-04-4
108-10-1
78-93-3
56-49-5
75-09-2
10595-95-6
62-75-9
100-75-4
86-30-6
55-18-5
924-16-3
930-55-2
621-64-7
91-20-3
98-95-3
79-46-9
36088-22-9
30402-15-4
87-86-5
108-95-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
75-56-9
110-86-1
100-42-5
1746-01-6
55722-27-5
79-34-5
630-20-6
127-18-4
Da
(cm2/s)
(a)
0.0755
0.0698
0.0917
2.41E-02
9.99E-02
8.41E-02
9.88E-02
6.99E-02
2.84E-02
7.38E-02
4.22E-02
8.00E-02
5.64E-02
6.05E-02
6.81E-02
8.47E-02
0.0447j
4.57E-02j
2.95E-02
8.34E-02
5.95E-02
2.33E-02
1.10E-01
9.31E-02
7.13E-02
4.70E-02j
4.82E-02j
4.89E-02
4.82E-02
5.05E-02
Dw
(cm2/s)
(a)
0
0
0
6.14E-06
1.25E-05
9.99E-06
1.15E-05
9.18E-06
7.19E-06
9.13E-06
6.83E-06
1.01E-05
7.76E-06
8.38E-06
9.45E-06
1.02E-05
4.38E-06b
4.51E-06b
8.01E-06
1.03E-05
9.75E-06
5.98E-06
1.21E-05
1.09E-05
8.81E-06
4.68E-06b
4.84E-06b
9.29E-06
9.10E-06
9.45E-06
HLC
(atm-
m3/mol)
(c)
5.87e-04f
1.38e-04
5.59e-05
9.40e-07
2.19e-03
1.406-06'
1.20e-06
2.80e-07
5.00e-06
3.63e-06
3.16e-04
1.20e-08
2.25e-06
4.83e-04
2.40e-05
1.23e-04
2.60e-06d
5.00e-06d
2.44e-08
3.97e-07
1.63e-08
2.60e-03
1.23e-04f
8.88e-06
2.75e-03
3.29e-05d
1.40e-05d
3.45e-04
2.42e-03
1.84e-02
Sol
(mg/L)
(c)
5.13e+04f
1.90e+04
2.23e+05
3.23e-03
1.30e+04
1.97e+04
l.OOe+06
7.65e+04
3.51e+01
9.30e+04
1.27e+03
l.OOe+06
9.89e+03
3.10e+01
2.09e+03
1.70e+04
1.18e-04d
2.40e-04d
1.95e+03
8.28e+04
6.20e+03
7.00e-02
4.05e+05f
l.OOe+06
3.10e+02
1.93e-05d
4.20e-04d
2.97e+03
1.10e+03
2.00e+02
E-25
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-2. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine, o-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (bromoform)
Trichloro-l,2,2-trifluoro-ethane, 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethylene (TCE)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 1 1)
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-
Trichloropropane, 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene, p-
Xylene, o-
Xylene, m-
Xylenes (total)
CASRN
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
79-00-5
71-55-6
79-01-6
75-69-4
88-06-2
96-18-4
121-44-8
108-05-4
75-01-4
106-42-3
95-47-6
108-38-3
1330-20-7
Da
(cm2/s)
(a)
0.078
7.72E-02b
0.0724
0.0216
3.58E-02
3.76E-02
3.96E-02
6.69E-02
6.48E-02
6.87E-02
6.55E-02
3.14E-02
5.75E-02
6.63E-02
8.51E-02
1.07E-01
6.84E-02
6.91E-02
6.85E-02
0.0687
Dw
(cm2/s)
(a)
0
8.94E-06b
0
0
1.04E-05
8.59E-06
8.40E-06
l.OOE-05
9.60E-06
1.02E-05
1.01E-05
8.09E-06
9.24E-06
7.84E-06
l.OOE-05
1.20E-05
8.45E-06
8.56E-06
8.47E-06
0
HLC
(atm-
m3/mol)
(c)
6.64e-03
7.92e-10
2.72e-06
6.00e-06
5.35e-04
4.81e-01
1.42e-03
9.13e-04
1.72e-02
1.03e-02
9.70e-02
7.79e-06
4.09e-04
1.38e-04f
5.11e-04
2.70e-02
7.66e-03
5.19e-03
7.34e-03
6.73e-03
Sol
(mg/L)
(c)
5.26e+02
3.37e+04
1.66e+04
7.40e-01
3.10e+03
1.70e+02
3.46e+01
4.42e+03
1.33e+03
1.10e+03
1.10e+03
8.00e+02
1.75e+03
5.50e+04f
2.00e+04
2.76e+03
1.85e+02
1.78e+02
1.61e+02
1.75e+02
Da = air diffusivity; Dw = water diffusivity; HLC = Henry's law constant; Sol = aqueous solubility
CASRN = Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number
* Values used for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (CAS #51207-31-9).
Data Sources:
a Calculated based on WATER9 (U.S. EPA, 2001).
b Calculated based on U.S. EPA, 1987.
c SCDM (U.S. EPA, 1997b).
d U.S. EPA, 2000.
e Calculated based on Lyman, Reehl, and Rosenblatt, 1990.
f CHEMFATE (SRC, 1999).
8 ChemFinder.com (CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001).
h The Merck Index (Budavari, 1996).
1 HSDB (U.S. NLM, 2001).
j Calculated based on U.S. EPA, 2000.
k U.S. EPA, 1997a.
E-26
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-2.6 References for Section E-2
Budavari, S. (ed), 1996. The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and
Biologicals. 12th edition. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co.
CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001. ChemFinder.com database and internet searching.
http://chemfmder.cambridgesoft.com. Accessed July 2001.
Lyman, W.J., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt, 1990. Handbook of Chemical Property
Estimation Methods: Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC), 1999. CHEMFATE Chemical Search,
Environmental Science Center, Syracuse, NY.
http://esc.syrres.com/efdb/Chemfate.htm. Accessed July 2001.
U.S. EPA, 1987. Process Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and
Heavy Metals in Surface Waters. Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO).
U.S. EPA, 1997a. Mercury Study Report to Congress. Volume IV: An Assessment of
Exposure to Mercury in the United States. EPA-452/R-97-006. Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC: GPO.
U.S. EPA, 1997b. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM). SCDMWIN 1.0 (SCDM
Windows User's Version), Version 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington DC: GPO.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/scdm/index.htm. Accessed July 2001.
U.S. EPA, 2000. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3.
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC: GPO.
U.S. EPA, 2001. WATER9. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/index.html.
Accessed July 2001.
U.S. NLM (U.S. National Library of Medicine), 2001. Hazardous Substances Data Bank
(HSDB). http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen/HSDB. Accessed July
2001.
E-27
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3 Human Health Benchmarks used in the IWEM Tool
Human health benchmarks for chronic oral and inhalation exposures are an
important component of the IWEM 1 tool. The EPA uses reference doses (RfDs) and
reference concentrations (RfCs) to evaluate noncancer risk from oral and inhalation
exposures, respectively. Oral cancer slope factors (CSFs), inhalation unit risk factors
(URFs), and inhalation CSFs are used to evaluate risk for carcinogens.
This section provides the toxicity benchmarks we used to develop the HBNs that
we will use in developing Reference Ground-Water Concentrations for IWEM. Section
E-3.1 describes the data sources and general hierarchy used to collect these benchmarks.
Section E-3.2 provides the benchmarks along with discussions of individual human
health benchmarks extracted from a variety of sources.
E-3.1 Methodology and Data Sources
Several sources of health benchmarks are available. Human health benchmarks
were obtained from these sources in the following order of preference:
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
Superfund Technical Support Center Provisional Benchmarks
Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST)
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) minimal risk
levels (MRLs)
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) chronic inhalation
reference exposure levels (RELs) and cancer potency factors.
EPA health assessment documents
Various other EPA health benchmark sources.
For dioxins and dibenzofurans, World Health Organization (WHO) toxicity equivalency
factors (TEFs) from Van den Berg et al. (1998) were applied to the oral and inhalation
CSF for 2,3,7,8-TCDD to obtain CSFs for all other dioxins and furans (see Section E-
3.2.4).
E-3.1.1 Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
Benchmarks in IRIS are prepared and maintained by EPA, and values from IRIS
were used to develop HBNs for the IWEM tool whenever IRIS benchmarks were
available. IRIS is EPA's electronic database containing information on human health
effects (U.S. EPA, 200la). Each chemical file contains descriptive and quantitative
information on potential health effects. Health benchmarks for chronic noncarcinogenic
health effects include RfDs and RfCs. Cancer classification, oral CSFs, and inhalation
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
URFs are included for carcinogenic effects. IRIS is the official repository of Agency-
wide consensus of human health risk information.
Inhalation CSFs are not available from IRIS, so they were calculated from
inhalation URFs (which are available from IRIS) using the following equation:
inh CSF = inh URF x 70 kg - 20 m3/d x 1000 ng/mg
In this equation, 70 kg represents average body weight; 20 m3/d represents average
inhalation rate; and 1000 i-ig/mg is a units conversion factor (U.S. EPA, 1997). These
standard estimates of body weight and inhalation rate are used by EPA in the calculation
of the URF, and, therefore, the values were used to calculate inhalation CSFs.
E-3.1.2 Superfund Provisional Benchmarks
The Superfund Technical Support Center (EPA's National Center for
Environmental Assessment [NCEA]) derives provisional RfCs, RfDs, and CSFs for
certain chemicals. These provisional health benchmarks can be found in Risk
Assessment Issue Papers. Some of the provisional values have been externally peer
reviewed, and some (e.g., trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene) come from previously
published EPA Health Assessment Documents. These provisional values have not
undergone EPA's formal review process for finalizing benchmarks and do not represent
Agency-wide consensus information. Specific provisional values used in the IWEM tool
are described in Section E-3.2.5.
E-3.1.3 Health Effects Summary Tables (HEAST)
HEAST is a listing of provisional noncarcinogenic and carcinogenic health
toxicity values (RfDs, RfCs, URFs, and CSFs) derived by EPA (U.S. EPA, 1997).
Although the health toxicity values in HEAST have undergone review and have the
concurrence of individual EPA program offices, either they have not been reviewed as
extensively as those in IRIS or their data set is not complete enough to be listed in IRIS.
HEAST benchmarks have not been updated in several years and do not represent
Agency-wide consensus information.
E-3.1.4 ATSDR Minimal Risk Levels
The ATSDR MRLs are substance-specific health guidance levels for
noncarcinogenic endpoints (ATSDR, 2001). An MRL is an estimate of the daily human
exposure to a hazardous substance that is likely to be without appreciable risk of adverse
noncancer health effects over a specified duration of exposure. MRLs are based on
noncancer health effects only and are not based on a consideration of cancer effects.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
MRLs are derived for acute, intermediate, and chronic exposure durations for oral and
inhalation routes of exposure. Inhalation and oral MRLs are derived in a manner similar
to EPA's RfCs and RfDs, respectively (i.e., ATSDR uses the no-observed-adverse-effect-
level/uncertainty factor (NOAEL/UF) approach); however, MRLs are intended to serve
as screening levels and are exposure duration-specific. Also, ATSDR uses EPA's 1994
inhalation dosimetry methodology in the derivation of inhalation MRLs. A chronic
inhalation MRL for mixed xylenes was used as a surrogate for each of the xylene
isomers.
E-3.1.5 CalEPA Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels
CalEPA has developed cancer potency factors for chemicals regulated under
California's Hot Spots Air Toxics Program (CalEPA, 1999a). The cancer potency factors
are analogous to EPA's oral and inhalation CSFs. CalEPA has also developed chronic
inhalation RELs, analogous to EPA's RfC, for 120 substances (CalEPA, 1999b, 2000).
CalEPA used EPA's 1994 inhalation dosimetry methodology in the derivation of
inhalation RELs. The cancer potency factors and inhalation RELs have undergone
internal peer review by various California agencies and have been the subject of public
comment. A chronic inhalation REL for mixed cresols was used as a surrogate for each
of the cresol isomers.
E-3.1.6 Other EPA Health Benchmarks
EPA has also derived health benchmark values in other risk assessment
documents, such as Health Assessment Documents (HADs), Health Effect Assessments
(HEAs), Health and Environmental Effects Profiles (HEEPs), Health and Environmental
Effects Documents (HEEDs), Drinking Water Criteria Documents, and Ambient Water
Quality Criteria Documents. Evaluations of potential carcinogenicity of chemicals in
support of reportable quantity adjustments were published by EPA's Carcinogen
Assessment Group (CAG) and may include cancer potency factor estimates. Health
toxicity values identified in these EPA documents are usually dated and are not
recognized as Agency-wide consensus information or verified benchmarks, however, and
as a result they are used in the hierarchy only when values are not available from IRIS,
HEAST, Superfund provisional values, ATSDR, or CalEPA. Section E-3.2.6 describes
the specific values from these alternative EPA sources that were used in the IWEM tool.
E-30
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3.2 Human Health Benchmark Values
The chronic human health benchmarks used to calculate the HBNs in the IWEM
tool are summarized in Table E-3, which provides the Chemical Abstract Service
Registry Number (CASRN), constituent name, RfD (mg/kg-d), RfC (mg/m3), oral CSF
(mg/kg-d"1), inhalation URF [(u-g/m3)"1], inhalation CSF (mg/kg-d"1), and reference for
each benchmark. A key to the references cited and abbreviations used is provided at the
end of the table.
For a majority of the IWEM constituents, human health benchmarks were
available from IRIS (U.S. EPA, 2001a), Superfund Provisional Benchmarks, or HEAST
(U.S. EPA, 1997). Benchmarks also were obtained from ATSDR (2001) or CalEPA
(1999a, 1999b, 2000). This section describes benchmarks obtained from other sources,
along with the Superfund Provisional values and special uses (e.g., benzene, vinyl
chloride) of IRIS benchmarks.
E-31
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values
m
CO
ro
Constituent Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde (ethanal)
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid (propenoic acid)
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo {b } fluoranthene
Benzyl chloride
Benzyl alcohol
Beryllium
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
CASRN
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-44-7
100-51-6
7440-41-7
111-44-4
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
6.0E-02
l.OE-01
l.OE-01
2.0E-02
2.0E-04
5.0E-01
l.OE-03
3.0E-05
5.0E-03
3.0E-01
4.0E-04
3.0E-04
7.0E-02
3.0E-03
3.0E-01
2.0E-03
RfDRef
\
\
I
H
I
I
H
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
H
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
4.5E+0
5.4E-1
1.7E+01
5.7E-3
1.5E+00
1.2E+00
5.5E-02
2.3E+02
7.3E+00
1.2E+00
1.7E-01
1.1E+00
CSFo
Ref
I
\
\
\
I
C99a
\
\
\
C99a
I
\
RfC
(mg/m3)
9.0E-03
3.1E+01
6.0E-02
2.0E-05
l.OE-03
2.0E-03
l.OE-03
6.0E-02
RfC Ref
\
A
\
I
I
\
\
COO
URF
(per
Hg/m3)
2.2E-06
1.3E-03
6.8E-05
4.9E-03
1.6E-06
1.1E-04
7.8E-06
6.7E-02
1.1E-03
1.1E-04
4.9E-05
3.3E-04
URF Ref
\
I
\
\
C99a
C99a
\
\
C99a
C99a
C99a
\
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
7.7E-03
4.6E+00
2.4E-01
1.7E+01
5.6E-03
3.9E-01
2.7E-02
2.3E+02
3.9E+00
3.9E-01
1.7E-01
1.2E+00
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
\
calc
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
m
do
CO
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Bis (2 -chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2 -ethylhexyl) phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane (methyl
bromide)
Butadiene, 1,3-
Butanol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-
(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene, 2-
(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline, p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Chloroform
Chloromethane (methyl
chloride)
Chlorophenol, 2-
CASRN
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
56-23-5
75-15-0
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
4.0E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
1.4E-03
l.OE-01
2.0E-01
l.OE-03
5.0E-04
7.0E-04
l.OE-01
5.0E-04
2.0E-02
4.0E-03
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
l.OE-02
5.0E-03
RfDRef
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
H
I
\
\
\
I
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
7.0E-02
1.4E-02
6.2E-02
1.3E-01
3.5E-01
2.7E-01
8.4E-02
1.3E-02
CSFo
Ref
H
I
I
I
\
H
\
H
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE-02
5.0E-03
2.0E-02
7.0E-03
7.0E-01
7.0E-04
7.0E-03
6.0E-02
l.OE+01
l.OE-01
9.0E-02
1.4E-03
RfC Ref
C99b
I
COO
SF
I
\
H
SF
\
A
I
AC
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
l.OE-05
2.4E-06
1.8E-05
2.8E-04
1.5E-05
l.OE-04
7.8E-05
2.4E-05
1.8E-06
URF Ref
H
C99a
AC
I
I
\
H
AC
H
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
3.5E-02
8.4E-03
6.2E-02
9.8E-01
5.3E-02
3.5E-01
2.7E-01
8.4E-02
6.3E-03
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
AC
calc
calc
calc
calc
AC
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Chloropropene, 3- (allyl
chloride)
Chromium (UT)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol, p-
Cresol, o-
Cresol, m-
Cresols (total)
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
DDD
DDE
DDT, p,p'-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane,
1,2-
CASRN
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
106-44-5
95-48-7
108-39-4
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
84-74-2
117-84-0
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
1.5E+00
3.0E-03
2.0E-02
RfDRef
\
\
SF
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.2E-01
CSFo
Ref
C99a
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE-03
RfC Ref
I
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
6.0E-06
1.1E-05
URF Ref
C99a
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
2.1E-02
3.9E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
(only a drinking water action level is available for this metal)
5.0E-03
5.0E-02
5.0E-02
5.0E-02
l.OE-01
1.7E-05
5.0E+00
5.0E-04
l.OE-01
2.0E-02
H
I
\
surr (I)
I
solv
I
I
I
H
2.4E-01
3.4E-01
3.4E-01
6.1E-02
7.3E+00
1.4E+0
I
I
I
H
TEF
H
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
4.0E-01
2.0E-05
2.0E-04
surr
(COO)
surr
(COO)
surr
(COO)
COO
I
solv
I
9.7E-05
1.2E-03
6.9E-07
I
C99a
H
3.4E-01
4.2E+00
2.4E-03
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
m
CO
-------
m
clo
en
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Dichlorobenzene, 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine, 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane
(Freon 12)
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
Dichloroethane, 1,1-
Dichloroethylene, 1,1-
Dichloroethylene, trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene, cis-1,2-
Dichlorophenol, 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid,
2,4- (2,4-D)
Dichloropropane, 1,2-
Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene, cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene, 1,3- (mixture
of isomers)
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine, 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide, N,N-
(DMF)
Dimethylbenz{a } anthracene ,
7,12-
CASRN
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
107-06-2
75-34-3
75-35-4
156-60-5
156-59-2
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
10061-02-6
10061-01-5
542-75-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
9.0E-02
2.0E-01
l.OE-01
9.0E-03
2.0E-02
l.OE-02
3.0E-03
l.OE-02
9.0E-02
3.0E-02
3.0E-02
3.0E-02
5.0E-05
8.0E-01
2.0E-04
l.OE-01
RfDRef
\
I
H
I
I
H
\
\
A
\
\
\
\
\
I
H
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
2.4E-2
4.5E-01
9.1E-2
6.0E-1
6.8E-2
l.OE-1
l.OE-1
l.OE-01
1.6E+01
4.7E+03
1.4E-02
CSFo
Ref
H
I
I
I
H
\
\
\
\
H
H
RfC
(mg/m3)
2.0E-01
8.0E-01
2.0E-01
2.4E+00
5.0E-01
7.0E-02
4.0E-03
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
3.0E-02
RfC Ref
H
I
H
A
H
COO
\
SUIT (T)
surr (T)
\
I
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
1.1E-05
3.4E-04
2.6E-05
1.6E-06
5.0E-05
4.0E-06
4.0E-06
4.0E-06
4.6E-03
7.1E-02
URF Ref
C99a
C99a
I
C99a
I
surr (\)
surr (\)
\
\
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
3.9E-02
1.2E+00
9.1E-02
5.6E-03
1.8E-01
1.4E-02
1.4E-02
1.4E-02
1.6E+01
2.5E+02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
m
CO
en
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Dimethylbenzidine, 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol, 2,4-
Dinitrobenzene, 1,3-
Dinitrophenol, 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,6-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,4-
Dioxane, 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine, 1,2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and
1 1, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Ethoxyethanol, 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-
dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
CASRN
119-93-7
105-67-9
99-65-0
51-28-5
606-20-2
121-14-2
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
111-15-9
110-80-5
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
75-21-8
106-93-4
107-21-1
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E-02
l.OE-04
2.0E-03
l.OE-03
2.0E-03
2.5E-02
4.0E-05
6.0E-03
3.0E-04
2.0E-03
3.0E-01
4.0E-01
9.0E-01
2.0E-01
9.0E-02
l.OE-01
2.0E+00
RfDRef
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
I
H
H
H
I
I
H
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
9.2E+00
6.8E-01
6.8E-01
1.1E-2
8.0E-1
9.9E-3
2.9E+02
l.OE+0
8.5E+1
CSFo
Ref
H
surr (I)
surr (I)
I
I
I
RQ
H
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
3.0E+00
l.OE-03
2.0E-02
3.0E-01
2.0E-01
l.OE+00
3.0E-02
2.0E-04
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
COO
I
I
coo
I
I
coo
H
COO
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
8.9E-05
7.7E-06
2.2E-04
1.2E-06
1.1E-06
l.OE-04
2.2E-04
URF Ref
C99a
C99a
I
I
SF
H
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
3.1E-01
2.7E-02
7.7E-01
4.2E-03
3.9E-03
3.5E-01
7.7E-01
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
-------
m
do
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH, beta-
HCH, gamma- (Lindane)
HCH, alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-l,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(HxCDDs)
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
(HxCDFs)
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane, n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indeno{l,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
CASRN
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
34465-46-8
55684-94-1
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
8.0E-05
4.0E-02
0.12
2.0E-01
2.0E+00
3.0E-03
3.0E-04
8.0E-03
5.0E-04
1.3E-05
3.0E-04
8.0E-04
6.0E-03
l.OE-03
3.0E-04
1.1E+01
3.0E-03
3.0E-01
2.0E-01
5.0E-04
RfDRef
I
I
SUIT (I)
I
H
I
I
A
I
I
SF
I
I
I
I
SF
I
I
I
A
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.1E-01
1.8E+00
1.3E+00
6.3E+00
4.5E+00
9.1E+00
7.8E-2
1.6E+0
1.56E+04
1.56E+04
1.4E-02
1.2E+00
9.5E-04
CSFo
Ref
H
I
H
I
I
I
I
I
WH098
WH098
I
C99a
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
9.8E-03
5.0E-02
2.0E-04
2.0E-01
2.0E+00
RfC Ref
A
H
I
I
C99b
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
1.3E-05
1.3E-05
5.3E-04
3.1E-04
1.8E-03
1.3E-03
2.6E-03
2.2E-05
4.6E-04
3.3E+00
3.3E+00
4.0E-06
1.1E-04
URF Ref
C99a
I
I
C99a
I
I
I
I
I
WH098
WH098
I
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
4.6E-02
4.6E-02
1.9E+00
1.1E+00
6.3E+00
4.6E+00
9.1E+00
7.7E-02
1.6E+00
1.5E+04
1.5E+04
1.4E-02
3.9E-01
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
WH098
WH098
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol, 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Methyl parathion
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl tert-butyl ether
(MTBE)
Methylcholanthrene, 3-
Methylene bromide
(dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride
(dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
CASRN
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
110-49-6
298-00-0
80-62-6
108-10-1
78-93-3
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
924-16-3
621-64-7
55-18-5
62-75-9
86-30-6
10595-95-6
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
RfDRef
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
CSFo
Ref
RfC
(mg/m3)
RfC Ref
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
URF Ref
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
CSFi Ref
(only a drinking water action level is available for this metal)
4.7E-02
l.OE-04
l.OE-04
5.0E-01
5.0E-03
l.OE-03
2.0E-03
2.5E-04
1.4E+00
8.0E-02
6.0E-01
l.OE-02
6.0E-02
5.0E-03
8.00E-06
2.00E-02
I
surr (I)
I
I
\
H
H
\
I
H
I
H
I
\
SF
SF
7.5E-03
5.4E+00
7.0E+00
1.5E+02
5.1E+01
4.9E-03
2.2E+01
I
\
I
I
I
I
\
3.0E-04
7.0E-04
4.0E+00
2.0E-02
9.0E-02
7.0E-01
8.0E-02
l.OE+00
3.0E+00
3.0E+00
I
H
COO
\
COO
I
H
I
I
H
6.3E-03
4.7E-07
1.6E-03
2.0E-03
4.3E-02
1.4E-02
2.6E-06
6.3E-03
C99a
I
\
C99a
I
I
C99a
C99a
2.2E+01
1.6E-03
5.6E+00
7.0E+00
1.5E+02
4.9E+01
9.1E-03
3.7E+00
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
C99a
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
m
CO
oo
-------
m
do
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
N-Nitrosopiperidine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane, 2-
Octamethyl
pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(PeCDDs)
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
(PeCDFs)
Pentachloronitrobenzene
(PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine, 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls
(Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide (1,2-
epoxypropane)
CASRN
100-75-4
930-55-2
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
36088-22-9
30402-15-4
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
5.0E-04
2.0E-03
6.0E-03
8.0E-04
3.0E-03
3.0E-02
6.0E-01
8.0E-05
6.0E-03
2.0E-04
2.0E+00
2.0E-05
7.5E-02
RfDRef
I
I
I
H
H
\
I
\
I
I
I
H
\
SUIT (\)
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
2.1E+00
1.56E+05
7.8E+04
2.6E-01
1.2E-01
4.0E-01
2.4E-01
CSFo
Ref
I
WH098
WH098
H
\
\
\
RfC
(mg/m3)
3.0E-03
2.0E-03
2.0E-02
2.0E-01
1.2E-01
3.0E-02
RfC Ref
I
H
\
COO
H
\
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
2.7E-03
6.1E-04
2.7E-03
3.3E+01
1.7E+01
5.1E-06
l.OE-04
3.7E-06
URF Ref
C99a
I
H
WH098
WH098
C99a
\
\
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
9.5E+00
2.1E+00
9.5E+00
1.5E+05
7.5E+04
1.8E-02
4.0E-01
1.3E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
WH098
WH098
calc
\
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
m
hU
O
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,
2,3,7,8-(2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran,
2,3,7,8- (2,3,7,8-TCDF)
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol, 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate
(Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram (Thiuram)
Toluene
Toluenediamine, 2,4-
Toluidine, o-
Toluidine, p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated
camphenes)
CASRN
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
1746-01-6
51207-31-9
79-34-5
630-20-6
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
3.0E-02
l.OE-03
5.0E-03
5.0E-03
3.0E-04
2.0E-01
3.0E-04
6.0E-02
3.0E-02
l.OE-02
3.0E-02
5.0E-04
8.0E-05
5.0E-03
2.0E-01
RfDRef
\
I
I
I
\
\
\
SF
\
\
\
\
surr (\)
\
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.8E-01
1.56E+05
1.56E+04
2.0E-01
2.6E-02
5.2E-02
3.2E+00
2.4E-01
1.9E-01
1.1E+00
CSFo
Ref
RQ
DA85
WH098
I
\
HAD
H
H
H
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
7.0E-03
l.OE+00
3.0E-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
EPA86
\
A
\
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
3.3E+01
3.3E+00
5.8E-05
7.4E-06
5.8E-07
1.1E-03
6.9E-05
3.2E-04
URF Ref
H
WH098
I
\
HAD
C99a
AC
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
1.5E+05
1.5E+04
2.0E-01
2.6E-02
2.0E-03
3.9E+00
2.4E-01
1.1E+00
CSFi Ref
H
WH098
calc
calc
HAD
calc
AC
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
m
4^
O
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Tribromomethane
(bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane, 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-
trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon
11)
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy) propionic
acid, 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid,
2,4,5-
Trichloropropane, 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene, sym-
(1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene)
Tris(2,3-
dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene, p-
CASRN
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
106-42-3
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E-02
3.0E+01
l.OE-02
2.8E-01
4.0E-03
3.0E-01
l.OE-01
8.0E-03
l.OE-02
6.0E-03
3.0E-02
7.0E-03
l.OE+00
3.0E-03
2.0E+00
RfDRef
\
\
\
SF
\
\
I
\
I
I
I
H
H
I
surr (H)
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
7.9E-03
5.7E-02
1.1E-02
1.1E-02
7.0E+00
9.8E+00
7.2E-01
CSFo
Ref
\
\
HAD
I
H
RQ
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
3.0E+01
2.0E-01
2.2E+00
6.0E-01
7.0E-01
5.0E-03
7.0E-03
2.0E-01
l.OE-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
H
H
SF
COO
H
SF
I
\
I
surr (A)
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
1.1E-06
1.6E-05
1.7E-06
3.1E-06
4.4E-06
URF Ref
\
\
HAD
I
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
3.9E-03
5.6E-02
6.0E-03
1.1E-02
1.5E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
HAD
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
m
-------
Table E-3. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Xylene, m-
Xylene, o-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CASRN
108-38-3
95-47-6
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E+00
2.0E+00
2.0E+00
3.0E-01
RfDRef
H
H
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
CSFo
Ref
RfC
(mg/m3)
4.0E-01
4.0E-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
SUIT (A)
SUIT (A)
A
URF
(per
|ig/m3)
URF Ref
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
CSFi Ref
Key:
CASRN
CSFo
CSFi
a Sources:
A
AC
calc
C99a
C99b
COO
DA85
EPA86
HAD
Chemical Abstract Service registry number.
oral cancer slope factor.
inhalation cancer slope factor.
RfD
RfC
URF
ATSDR MRLs (ATSDR, 2001) H
developed for the Air Characteristic Study (U.S. EPA, 1999g) I
calculated RQ
SF
CalEPA cancer potency factor (CalEPA, 1999a) solv
CalEPA chronic REL (CalEPA, 1999b) surr
CalEPA chronic REL (CalEPA, 2000) TEF
Dioxin Assessment (U.S. EPA, 1985) WH098
Pyridine Health Effects Profile (U.S. EPA, 1986b)
Health Assessment Document (U.S. EPA, 1986a, 1987)
reference dose.
reference concentration.
unit risk factor.
HEAST (U.S. EPA, 1997)
IRIS (U.S. EPA, 2001a)
reportable quantity adjustments (U.S. EPA, 1998d,e,f)
Superfund Risk Issue Paper (U.S. EPA, 1998a,b; 1999a,b,c,d,e,f; 2000,
2001b,c,d)
63 FR 64371-0402 (U.S. EPA, 1998c)
surrogate (source in parentheses; see section C.2.8)
toxicity equivalency factor (U.S. EPA, 1993)
World Health Organization (WHO) 1998 toxicity equivalency factor
scheme (Van den Berg et al., 1998)
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3.2.1 Benzene
The cancer risk estimates for benzene are provided as ranges in IRIS. The oral
CSF for benzene is 1.5E-02 to 5.5E-02 (mg/kg/d)'1 and the inhalation URF is 2.2E-06 to
7.8E-06 (pg/m3)' (U.S. EPA, 2001a). For IWEM, the upper range estimates were used
(i.e., 5.5E-02 (mg/kg/d)' and 7.8E-06 (pg/m3)' for the oral CSF and inhalation URF,
respectively).
E-3.2.2 Vinyl Chloride
Based on use of the linearized multistage model, IRIS recommends an oral CSF
of 7.2E-1 per mg/kg-d for vinyl chloride to account for continuous lifetime exposure
during adulthood; this value was used in the IWEM tool.1 Based on use of the linearized
multistage model, an inhalation URF of 4.4E-6 per |ig/m3 to account for continuous,
lifetime exposure during adulthood was recommended for vinyl chloride and was used
for IWEM; an inhalation CSF of 1.5E-2 per mg/kg-d was calculated from the URF.2
E-3.2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls
There are two inhalation CSFs available from IRIS for polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs): 0.4 per mg/kg-d for evaporated congeners and 2.0 per mg/kg-d for dust or
aerosol (high risk and persistence). The inhalation CSF for evaporated congeners was
used for IWEM.
E-3.2.4 Dioxin-like Compounds
Certain polychlorinated dibenzodioxin, polychlorinated dibenzofuran, and
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners are said to have "dioxin-like" toxicity,
meaning that they are understood to have toxicity similar to that of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo(p)dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD). Although EPA has not developed health
benchmarks for each specific compound with dioxin-like toxicity, these compounds have
been assigned individual "toxicity equivalency factors" (TEFs; Van den Berg et al.,
1998). TEFs are estimates of the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to the
toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is assigned a TEF of 1.0. TEF estimates are based on a
*A twofold increase of the oral CSF to 1.4 per mg/kg-d to account for continuous
lifetime exposure from birth was also recommended but was not used for IWEM.
2A twofold increase to 8.8E-6 per |ig/m3 for the inhalation URF, to account for
continuous lifetime exposure from birth, was also recommended but was not used for
IWEM.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
knowledge of a constituent's mechanism of action, available experimental data, and other
structure-activity information. We used the TEFs to calculate cancer slope factors for the
dioxin and furan congeners (and congener groups) in the IWEM tool.
The dioxin-like congeners (and groups of congeners) included in IWEM are as
follows:
2,3,7,8-TCDD,
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran(2,3,7,8-TCDF)
Pentachlorodibenzodioxins (PeCDDs)
Pentachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs)
Hexachlorodibenzodioxins (HxCDDs)
Hexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs).
2,3,7,8-TCDF has a TEF of 0.1. The dioxin-like PeCDD congener is 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD,
which has a TEF of 1.0. The dioxin-like PeCDF congeners include 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF and
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF which have TEFs of 0.05 and 0.5, respectively. The dioxin-like
HxCDD congeners include 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD, 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD, and 1,2,3,6,7,8-
HxCDD, which have TEFs of 0.1. The dioxin-like HxCDF congeners include
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF, 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF, 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF, and 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF,
which also have TEFs of 0.1. Table E-4 shows the TEFs that we used to calculate CSFs
for the dioxin and furan congeners (and congener groups) for the purpose of developing
HBNs for the Tier 1 tool.
Table E-4. TEFs Used for Dioxin and Furan Congeners
Constituent Name
TEF
CSFo
(mkd)1
CSFo
Source
URF
(Hg/m3)1
URF
Source
CSFi
(mkd)1
CSFi Source
Dioxins
Pentachlorodibenzodioxins
2,3,7,8-TCDD
Hexachlorodibenzodioxins
1
1
0.1
1.56+05
1.56+5
1.56+4
WHO 1998
EPA, 1985
WHO 1998
3.3E+01
3.3E+01
3.3E+00
WHO 1998
EPA, 1997
WHO 1998
1.56+05
1.56+5
1.56+4
WHO 1998
EPA, 1985
WHO 1998
Furans
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.56+4
7.8+4
1.56+4
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
3.3E+00
1.7E+01
3.3E+00
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
1.56+4
7.8+4
1.56+4
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 98 = TEFs presented in Van den Berg et al. (1998)
EPA, 1997 = HEAST (U.S. EPA, 1997).
E-44
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
The human health benchmarks calculated using the TEFs for 1,2,3,4,7,8-
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran were surrogates for
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (HxCDDs) and hexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs),
respectively. The human health benchmarks for 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
and 2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran were used to represent pentachlorodibenzodioxins
(PeCDDs) and pentachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs), respectively. The human health
benchmarks for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) and
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran were used to represent tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(TCDDs) and tetrachlorodibenzofurans (TCDFs), respectively. When TEFs varied
within a class of dioxin-like compounds (i.e., pentachlorodibenzofurans), the TEF most
protective of human health was used.
E-3.2.5 Superfund Technical Support Center Provisional Benchmarks
Table E-5 lists the provisional human health benchmarks from the Superfund
Technical Support Center that were used for some of the IWEM constituents. A
provisional subchronic RfC of 2.0E-2 mg/m3 was developed by the Superfund Technical
Support Center (U.S. EPA, 1999a) for carbon tetrachloride; a provisional chronic RfC of
7.0E-3 mg/m3 was derived from this value by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to
account for the use of a subchronic study.
Table E-5. Provisional Human Health Benchmarks Developed by the Superfund
Technical Support Center
CASRN
108-90-7
7440-48-4
100-41-4
87-68-3
110-54-3
62-75-9
86-30-6
79-34-5
71-55-6
71-55-6
96-18-4
Chemical Name
Chlorobenzene
Cobalt (and compounds)
Ethylbenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexane
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
(N-methyl-N-nitroso-
methanamine)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloropropane, 1,2,3-
Benchmark
Type
RfC
RfD
URF
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
Benchmark
Value
6.0E-02
2.0E-02
1.1E-06
3.0E-04
1.1E+01
8.0E-06
2.0E-02
6.0E-02
2.8E-01
2.2E+00
5.0E-03
Units
mg/m3
mg/kg-d
Oig/mS)-1
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/m3
mg/m3
Reference
U.S. EPA, 1998a
U.S. EPA, 2001b
U.S. EPA, 1999b
U.S. EPA, 1998b
U.S. EPA, 1999c
U.S. EPA, 2001c
U.S. EPA, 2001d
U.S. EPA, 2000
U.S. EPA, 1999d
U.S. EPA, 1999e
U.S. EPA, 1999f
E-45
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3.2.6 Benchmarks From Other EPA Sources
For some IWEM constituents, human health benchmarks were not available from
IRIS, the Superfund Technical Support Center, HEAST, ATSDR, or CalEPA, but were
available from other EPA sources:
The provisional oral CSF of 5.2E-2 per mg/kg-d, provisional inhalation
URF of 5.8E-7 per |ig/m3, and the provisional inhalation CSF of 2.0E-3
per mg/kg-d developed for tetrachloroethylene by EPA in a Health
Assessment Document (HAD) (U.S. EPA, 1986a) were used.
For trichloroethylene, provisional cancer benchmarks developed by EPA
in a HAD (U.S. EPA, 1987) were used and include the oral CSF of 1.1 E-2
per mg/kg-d, inhalation URF of 1.7E-6 per |ig/m3, and inhalation CSF of
6.0E-3 per mg/kg-d.
A provisional RfD of 1.7E-5 mg/kg-d and a provisional RfC of 2.0E-5
mg/m3 were derived for cyclohexanol in the final listing rule for solvents
(63 FR 64371) and were used (U.S. EPA, 1998c).
An acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 2.0E-03 mg/kg-d from inhalation
(7.0E-3 mg/m3) was identified for pyridine (U.S. EPA, 1986b).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 293 per mg/kg-d for ethyl
methanesulfonate in a reportable quantity adjustment evaluation (U.S.
EPA, 1998d).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 0.18 per mg/kg-d for
safrole in a reportable quantity adjustment evaluation (U.S. EPA, 1998e).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 9.8 per mg/kg-d for
tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate in a reportable quantity adjustment
evaluation (U.S. EPA, 1998fj.
The cancer slope factor for dibenzo(a.h)anthracene was calculated using a
TEF approach developed for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (U.S.
EPA, 1993). The TEF approach assigns dibenzo(a.h)anthracene a TEF of
1 relative to the toxicity of benzo(a)pyrene. The oral CSF for
dibenzo(a.h)anthracene is therefore the same as the IRIS (U.S. EPA,
2001a) value for benzo(a)pyrene: 7.3.E+00 (mg/kg-d) \
E-46
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
E-3.2.7 Air Characteristic Study Provisional Benchmarks
Provisional inhalation health benchmarks were developed in the Air
Characteristic Study (U.S. EPA, 1999g) for several constituents lacking IRIS, HEAST,
alternative EPA, or ATSDR values. For 2-chlorophenol, a provisional RfC was
developed using route-to-route extrapolation of the oral RfD. Using route-to-route
extrapolations based on oral CSFs from IRIS and HEAST, the Air Characteristic Study
developed provisional inhalation URFs and inhalation CSFs for bromodichloromethane,
chlorodibromomethane, and o-Toluidine.
These provisional inhalation benchmark values are summarized in Table E-6
below. Additional details on the derivation of these inhalation benchmarks can be found
in the Revised Risk Assessmentfor the Air Characteristic Study (U.S. EPA, 1999g).
Table E-6. Provisional Inhalation Benchmarks Developed in the Air
Characteristic Study
CASRN
75-27-4
124-48-1
95-57-8
95-53-4
Chemical Name
Bromodichloromethane
(dichlorobromomethane)
Chlorodibromomethane
(dibromochloromethane)
2-Chlorophenol (o-)
o-Toluidine (2-methylaniline)
RfC
(mg/m3)
1.4E-03
RfC Target
Effect
Reproductive,
developmental
URF
(lig/m3)1
1.8E-05
2.4E-05
6.9E-05
CSFi
(mg/kg-d)1
6.2E-02
8.4E-02
2.4E-01
E-3.2.8 Surrogate Health Benchmarks
For several IWEM constituents, IRIS benchmarks for similar chemicals were used
as surrogate data. The rationale for these recommendations is as follows:
cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene and trans-1,3-dichloropropylene were based on
1,3-dichloropropene. The studies cited in the IRIS file for 1,3-
dichloropropene used a technical-grade chemical that contained about a
50/50 mixture of the cis- and trans-isomers. The RfD is 3E-02 mg/kg-d
and the RfC is 2E-02 mg/m3. The oral CSF for 1,3-dichloropropene is 0.1
(mg/kg-d) ~* and the inhalation URF is 4E-06 (jig/m3)"1.
E-47
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The IRIS oral CSF for the 2,4-/2,6-dinitrotoluene mixture (6.8E-01 per
mg/kg-d) was used as the oral CSFs for 2,4-dinitrotoluene and 2,6-
dinitrotoluene.
The RfDs for o- and m-cresol (both 5E-02 mg/kg/d) are cited on IRIS. The
provisional RfD for p-cresol (5E-03 mg/kg/d) is from HEAST. Cresol
mixtures contain all three cresol isomers. Based on the hierarchy
described above (i.e., IRIS is preferred over HEAST because IRIS is
EPA's official repository of Agency-wide consensus human health risk
information), the RfD for m-cresol (5E-02 mg/kg-d) was used as a
surrogate for cresol mixtures.
Fluoride was based on fluorine. The IRIS RfD for fluorine (0.12 mg/kg-d)
is based on soluble fluoride and related to the endpoint of skeletal
fluorisis.
The RfD for methyl mercury (1E-04 mg/kg-d) was used as a surrogate for
elemental mercury.
The RfD for Arochlor 1254 (2E-05 mg/kg-d) was used as a surrogate for
PCBs.
Thallium was based on thallium chloride. There are several thallium salts
that have RfDs in IRIS. The lowest value among the thallium salts (8E-05
mg/kg-d) is routinely used to represent thallium in risk assessments.
p-Xylene was based on total xylenes. An RfD of 2 mg/kg-d is listed for
total xylenes, m-xylene, and o-xylene in IRIS. Total xylenes contain a
mixture of all three isomers; therefore, the RfD likely is appropriate for p-
xylene.
E-3.2.9 Chloroform
EPA has classified chloroform as a Group B2, Probable Human Carcinogen,
based on an increased incidence of several tumor types in rats and mice (U.S. EPA,
200la). However, based on an evaluation initiated by EPA's Office of Water (OW), the
Office of Solid Waste (OSW) now believes the weight of evidence for the carcinogenic
mode of action for chloroform does not support a mutagenic mode of action; therefore, a
nonlinear low-dose extrapolation is more appropriate for assessing risk from exposure to
chloroform. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB), the World Health Organization
(WHO), the Society of Toxicology, and EPA all strongly endorse the nonlinear approach
for assessing risks from chloroform.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Although OW conducted its evaluation of chloroform carcinogenicity for oral
exposure, a nonlinear approach for low-dose extrapolation would apply to inhalation
exposure to chloroform as well, because chloroform's mode of action is understood to be
the same for both ingestion and inhalation exposures. Specifically, tumorigenesis for
both ingestion and inhalation exposures is induced through cytotoxicity (cell death)
produced by the oxidative generation of highly reactive metabolites (phosgene and
hydrochloric acid), followed by regenerative cell proliferation (U.S. EPA, 1998g).
Chloroform-induced liver tumors in mice have only been seen after bolus corn oil dosing
and have not been observed following administration by other routes (i.e., drinking water
and inhalation). As explained in EPA OW's March 31, 1998, and December 16, 1998,
Federal Register notices pertaining to chloroform (U.S. EPA, 1998g and 1998h,
respectively), EPA now believes that "based on the current evidence for the mode of
action by which chloroform may cause tumorigenesis, ...a nonlinear approach is more
appropriate for extrapolating low-dose cancer risk rather than the low-dose linear
approach..."(U.S. EPA, 1998g). OW determined that, given chloroform's mode of
carcinogenic action, liver toxicity (a noncancer health effect) actually "is a more sensitive
effect of chloroform than the induction of tumors" and that protecting against liver
toxicity "should be protective against carcinogenicity given that the putative mode of
action understanding for chloroform involves cytotoxicity as a key event preceding tumor
development" (U.S. EPA, 1998g).
The recent evaluations conducted by OW concluded that protecting against
chloroform's noncancer health effects protects against excess cancer risk. EPA now
believes that the noncancer health effects resulting from inhalation of chloroform would
precede the development of cancer and would occur at lower doses than would tumor
development. Although EPA has not finalized a noncancer health benchmark for
inhalation exposure (i.e., an RfC), ATSDR has developed an inhalation MRL for
chloroform. Therefore, ATSDR's chronic inhalation MRL for chloroform (0.1 mg/m3)
was used in IWEM.
E-3.3 References for Section E-3
ATSDR, 2001. Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) for Hazardous Substances.
http://atsdrl.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/mrls.html
CalEPA, 1999a. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part II.
Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Factors.
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Berkeley, CA. Available
online at http://www.oehha.org/scientific/hsca2.htm.
CalEPA, 1999b. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part III.
Technical Support Document for the Determination of Noncancer Chronic
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Reference Exposure Levels. SRP Draft. Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, Berkeley, CA. Available online at
http://www.oehha.org/hotspots/RAGSII.html.
CalEPA, 2000. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part 111.
Technical Support Document for the Determination ofNoncancer Chronic
Reference Exposure Levels. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment,
Berkeley, CA. Available online (in 3 sections) at
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/22RELS2k.html,
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/42kChREL.html,
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/Jan2001ChREL.html.
U.S. EPA, 1985. Health Assessment Document for PolychlorinatedDibenzo-p-Dixons.
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, EPA/600/8-84/94F.
U.S. EPA, 1986a. Addendum to the Health Assessment Document for
Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene). Updated Carcinogenicity Assessment
for Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene, PERC, PCE). External Review
Draft. EPA/600/8-82-005FA. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development, Washington DC.
U.S. EPA, 1986b. Health and Environmental Effects Profile for Pyridine. EPA/600/x-
86-168. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. EPA, 1987. Addendum to the Health Assessment Document for Trichloroethylene.
Updated Carcinogenicity Assessment for Trichloroethylene. External Review
Draft. EPA/600/8-82-006FA. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development, Washington DC.
U.S. EPA, 1993. Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Risk Assessment of Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/R-93-
089.
U.S. EPA, 1994. Methods for Derivation of Inhalation Reference Concentrations and
Application of Inhalation Dosimetry. EPA/600/8-90-066F. Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC.
E-50
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
U.S. EPA, 1997. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). EPA-540-R-97-
036. FY 1997 Update. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 1998a. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional Chronic
RfCfor Chlorobenzene (CASRN108-90-7). 98-020/09-18-98. National Center
for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 1998b. Risk Assessment Paper for: Evaluation of the Systemic Toxicity of
Hexachlorobutadiene (CASRN 87-68-3) Resulting from Oral Exposure. 98-
009/07-17-98. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund
Technical Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. EPA, 1998c. Hazardous waste management system; identification and listing of
hazardous waste; solvents; final rule. Federal Register 63 FR 64371-402.
U.S. EPA, 1998d. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Ethyl Methanesulfonate
(62-50-0) in Support of Reportable Quantity Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA
Section 102. Prepared by Carcinogen Assessment Group, Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA, 1998e. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Safrole (94-59-7) in
Support of Reportable Quantity Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA Section 102.
Prepared by Carcinogen Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA, 1998f. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Tris(2,3-
dibromopropyl)phosphate (126-72-7) in Support of Reportable Quantity
Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA Section 102. Prepared by Carcinogen
Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA, 1998g. National primary drinking water regulations: disinfectants and
disinfection byproducts notice of data availability; Proposed Rule. Federal
Register W (61): 15673-15692. March 31.
U.S. EPA, 1998h. National primary drinking water regulations: disinfectants and
disinfection byproducts; final rule. Federal Register 63 (241): 69390-69476.
December 16.
E-51
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
U.S. EPA, 1999a. Risk Assessment Paper for: The Derivation of a Provisional
Subchronic RfCfor Carbon Tetrachloride (CASRN 56-23-5). 98-026/6-14-99.
National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support
Center, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999b. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Evaluating the Carcinogenicity of
Ethylbenzene (CASRN 100-41-4). 99-011/10-12-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999c. Risk Assessment Paper for: An Updated Systemic Toxicity Evaluation
of n-Hexane (CASRN 110-54-3). 98-019/10-1-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999d. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of Provisional Oral
Chronic RfD and Subchronic RfDsfor 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (CASRN 71-55-6).
98-025/8-4-99. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund
Technical Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999e. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of Provisional Chronic
and Subchronic RfCsfor 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (CASRN 71-55-6). 98-025/8-4-
99. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical
Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999f. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of the Systemic Toxicity of
1,2,3-Trichloropropane (CASRN 96-18-4). 98-014/8-13-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 1999g. Revised Risk Assessment for the Air Characteristic Study. EPA-530-
R-99-019a. Volume 2. Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2000. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CASRN 79-34-5). 00-122/12-20-00. National Center
for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 2001a. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington,
DC. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/iris/
E-52
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
U.S. EPA, 2001b. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for
Cobalt and Compounds (CASRN 7440-48-4). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center
for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 2001c. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for N-
Nitrosodimethylamine (CASRN 62-75-9). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
U.S. EPA, 2001d. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine (CASRN 86-30-6). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
Van den Berg, M., L. Birnbaum, A.T.C. Bosveld, et al, 1998. Toxic equivalency factors
(TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and wildlife. Environmental Health
Perspectives 106:775-792.
E-53
-------
APPENDIX F
TIER 1 LCTV TABLES
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table F-l. Landfill No-Liner LCTVs F-l-1
Table F-2. Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs F-2-1
Table F-3. Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs F-3-1
Table F-4. Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs F-4-1
Table F-5. Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs F-5-1
Table F-6. Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs F-6-1
Table F-7. Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs F-7-1
Table F-8. Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs F-8-1
Table F-9. Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs F-9-1
Table F-10. Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner) F-10-1
F-i
-------
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Table F-l: Landfill No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-ch loroethyljether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.3E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.3
2.2
2.2
58
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.3
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.014
0.11
4.3
0.011
0.012 c
0.026
1.0E+03b'c
0.2
0.015
0.011
0.014
0.030 "
0.22
0.19
0.18
0.31
0.25
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.3E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.4
2.2
2.2
59
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.3
5.4
5.4
1.0E+03b
0.013
27
9.4E-03 d
97 c
0.27
17C
0.023
0.016
3.8
0.2
16
19"
0.14
2.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.2
80"
5.4
13C
0.054
0.027
5.9
0.048
0.030 "
1.1
0.22
1.1
2.8
1.2
0.55
0.27
81
0.19
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.49
1.0E+03b
6.9
1.0E+03b
33
0.088
2.1
0.42
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.13
4.6
0.059
0.030"
0.049
0.44
66
0.74
0.57
0.022
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.4E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.4
2.2
2.2
59
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.5E-05
4.1E-05"
0.77 c
0.037
1.9E-04
4.3E-04
3.9E-03
9.3E-07
7.8E-04
4.8E-03C
1.0E+03b'c
6.00E-04
3.10E-03
1.0E+03b'c
3.9E-03
2.1E-03
0.030"
2.1E-03
2.7E-03
0.016
4.3E-03C
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.091
13
2.3E-03
1.4C
4.9
0.097 c
3.6E-03
5.7
0.32 c
0.037 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.50E-03
0.013
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-03
8.9E-05
2.2E-03
0.030 "
6.9
1.8E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"
0.039 c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-1-1
-------
Table F-l: Landfill No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
156-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
3.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.5E+12
2.2
2.2
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.1E+06
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
3
5.5E-04
1.3
0.17
9.9E-03 "
7.0E-03 d
0.15
0.22
0.016
0.15
0.016
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
3.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.6E+12
2.2
2.2
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.20E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.1
2.7
2.7
0.27
2.7
5.5
9.2E-04
270
1.0E+03b'c
4.9
11
0.36"
0.26*
0.54
1.1
0.49
0.16
0.54
7
1.6
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
58
0.55"
5.4
1.1
6.7
5.4E-03
0.11
0.11
0.054
1.0E+03b'c
1.4
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
2.9
8.6E-04
8.0E-03
1.7
6.7
1.3
0.45"
0.32"
0.47
0.044
0.13
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
3.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.6E+12
2.2
2.2
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.00E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.20E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
13
1.0E+03b'c
1.9E-04
8.9E-03
4.8E-04
6.7E-04"
4.7E-04"
3.6E-04
4.5E-03
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
4.7E-08
0.015
2.3E-05
3. 1 E-04
3. 1 E-04
0.019
2.70E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.22
2.9E-03
11 c
0.012"
1.5E-03
4.9E-04
6.4E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 a
0.4
0.044
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-1-2
-------
Table F-l: Landfill No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
CAS#
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
110-49-6
78-93-3
108-10-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.2E+06
7.4E+06
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.02 a
1.6
1.3E-03
8.7
0.26 c'd
0.25*
8.0E-03 a
1.0E+03b'c
6.3E-03 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.037
5.8E-03
10"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.3E+06
7.6E+06
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.33
0.020 a
1.0E+03"
22
16
160
11
8.5
5.4
110
4.3E-03
2.5 c
6.3
11
110
0.16
04 >'»''<>
0.56"
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.018
0.12 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.055
0.023
600 c
0.16
16
11
0.028
2.5
7.2E-03
5.7E-03
27
10"
0.054
0.11
32
4.3
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
0.53
1.0E+03"
660
7.3
0.025
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
110
49
0.4"
3.0"
1.0E+03b'c
1.5
1.0E+03"
2.1E-03
0.015
1.0E+03"
970
1.0E+03"
73
2.7
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.3E+06
7.6E+06
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03"
2.9E-05
1.0E+03"
1.9E-03
1.2E-04
0.4"
120C
8.0E-03'
1.0E+03b'c
3.0E-03
3.8E-04
1.0E+03b'c
0.30C
0.015
110C
0.23
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
0.024
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
3.3
0.038
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.5E-03
2.3E-04
1.0E+03b'c
6.9 c
7.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-1-3
-------
Table F-l: Landfill No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Fetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Fetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
CAS#
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
3.71 E-03 1.90E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
9.40E-01
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
4.6
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.1E+09
6.1
3
4.4E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.00E+30
1.00E+30
1.70E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.011
2. 2 E-03
83 c
0.12
0.22
4.1E-04C
0.014*
0.014*
0.011
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
4.6
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.2E+09
6.1
3
4.5E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
84"
1.3c'd
0.54
3.3
0.28
1.1
1.1
0.027
4.30E-04
1.1
0.11
1.0E+03b'c
0.12
0.18
1.6
32
4.3E-03
0.32
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
82 c
4.2
2.2C
0.054
0.3
0.37
0.016
11
0.017
3.4E-04 c
2.2
24
0.54
1.6
1.0E+03"'C
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
24
1.0E+03*
38
22
0.042
0.33
0.73
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.1
3.1
8
0.64*
0.70 a
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.6
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.2E+09
6.1
3
4.5E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.029
1.4E-06
4.2E-06
4.0E-05
3.0E-05
0.044
9.7E-06
1.0E-04
3.7E-09
2.8E-03C
9.2E-04
1.8E-03
40 c
8.9E-04
1.2 E-03
1.0E+03b'c
9.0E-06C
0.011
8.0E-03
4.10E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
5.1E-05
9.5E-05
8.8E-04
4.4E-05
3.3E-03
1.2
9.9E-03
0.019
2
1.9E-07
0.27 c
100 a
23 c
0.038
1.0E+03b'c
3.1E-05C
5.7E-03
8.3E-03
0.047
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-1-4
-------
Table F-l: Landfill No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
rrichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
rrichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
rrichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
rrichlorophenol 2,4,5-
rrichlorophenol 2,4,6-
rrichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
rrichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
rrichloropropane 1,2,3-
rriethylamine
rrinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
rris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
5.8E-03
2.2
0.50 a
0.18
0.16
0.021 d
0.012
0.011
0.11
4.4E-03
22
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.8E-03
0.27
11
1.1
1.0E+03b'c
0.56
0.67"
0.24
16
5.4
0.43
0.54
0.39
1.6
0.5
54
0.16
110
110
110
110
16
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.9
210C
1.9
0.64"
0.64*
0.50a
4.7
0.09
0.24
2.7
0.20 a
2.9
3.1
2.9
3.1
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.7E-05
8.9E-04
1 . 1 E-03
0.50a
0.028
4.9E-04"
4.9E-04"
0.019
0.019
3.7E-05
2.0E-04
3.0E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
17
0.08
0.50 a
0.044
6.72E-04 '
6.7E-04 d
0.015
0.62
5.5E-03
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-1-5
-------
Table F-2: Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
1 07-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
1 06-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1 .80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1 .90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.1E+06
6.2E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11.0
8.2E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.040
0.33
13
0.030
1.0E+03b'c
0.13
1.0E+03b'c
0.60
0.043
0.033
0.055
0.030a
0.61
0.55
0.50
1.3
1.0
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.1E+06
6.2E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11
8.4E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
9.4 c
15
15
1.0E+03b
0.043
74
0.032 d
1.0E+03b'c
0.74
53 c
0.068
0.050
12
0.45
45
52 e
0.45
6.0
1.0E+03b'c
3.7
220"
15
52 c
0.15
0.083
17
0.2
0.030a
3.0
0.6
3.0
17C
3.4
1.5
0.74
260
0.75
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.3
1.0E+03b
19
1.0E+03b
91
0.25
5.7
0.50"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.37
13
0.23
0.030 "
0.13
1.2
180
2.1
1.6
0.059
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.2E+06
6.4E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11
8.5E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.9E-04
1 .4E-04 d
1.0E+03b'c
0.10
1.3E-03
0.023 c
0.011
2.6E-06
69 c
520 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.0E-03
8.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.012
8.2E-03
0.030 "
0.013
7.9E-03
0.045
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.25
45
6.6E-03
1.0E+03b'c
13
5.1 c
0.010
16
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.087
0.036
1.0E+03b'c
6.0E-03
2.4E-04
8.4E-03
0.030a
43 c
5.2E-03
0.036
1.0E+03b
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-2-1
-------
Table F-2: Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
CAS#
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
1 08-39-4
95-48-7
1 06-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
1 08-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
1 56-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
1 1 9-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1 .42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
280
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
14.0
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.1E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
12
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
9.4
2.0E-03
3.7
0.46
0.027 "
0.019"
0.43
0.61
0.043
0.43
0.071
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
280
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
14.0
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.2E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
12
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.1
7.4
7.4
0.74
7.4
15
2.5E-03
740
1.0E+03b'c
13
30
0.45"
0.32*
1.5
3.0
0.70 a
0.45
1.5
31
4.5
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
220
1.5"
15
3.0
28 c
0.015
0.30
0.13a
0.15
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
8.0
2.4E-03
0.028
4.7
7.5a
3.5
0.45"
0.32"
0.70s
0.20
0.37
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
280
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
14.0
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.2E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
12
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.23 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
6.7E-04
0.025
1.3E-03
1.8E-03"
1.3E-03"
9.8E-04
0.02
5.9E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.4E-07
0.042
6.4E-05
8.6E-04
8.6E-04
0.053
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.0 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.77
7.9E-03
0.30C
0.034"
4.8E-03
1 .3E-03
0.018
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a
1.1
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-2-2
-------
Table F-2: Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
CAS#
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
1 6984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
1 93-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
570
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
4.3
0.063
27
0.4 a'd
0.74*
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.15
0.019
10"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
580
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.8
1.0E+03b'c
0.92 c
0.020 a
1.0E+03"
60
45
1.0E+03"
30
37
15
300
0.012
11 c
20
30
300
0.45
0.4 "'"
1.6"
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.065
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.15
0.22
1.0E+03b'c
0.45
45
30
0.086
8.0
0.20 a'c
0.016
74
10a.c
0.15
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
1.5
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
20
1.2
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
310
130
0.4 "
8.8 "
1.0E+03b'c
4.0
1.0E+03"
9.4E-03
0.043
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
580
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
7.4E-04
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03"
1.4E-03
1.0E+03b
5.3E-03
3.3E-04
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.011
0.035 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.043
1.0E+03b'c
0.62
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.12
1.0E+03b
0.067
0.11
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
9.1
0.10
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
5.4E-03
0.021 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-2-3
-------
Table F-2: Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
CAS#
110-49-6
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
1 08-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
1 00-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
22
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
660
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
3.71E-03 1.90E-03 13
4.83E-04
5.00E-04|| 200
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.031
6.E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.50
0.61
1.0E+03b'c
0.039*
0.039*
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
22
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
670
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
13
200
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.30
90
12
230"
3.5"
1.5
9.2
0.90
3.0
3.3
0.074
1.2E-03
3.0
0.32
1.0E+03b'c
13C
0.73 c
4.5
90
0.012
0.90
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
12
16C
0.15
1.0'
5.0"
0.045
30
0.055
1.0E+03b'c
9.4
300
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
200 "
7.3
120
1.0E+03*
100
62
0.12
0.91
2.0
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
3.0
5.0 "
22
0.64*
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
22
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
670
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.4E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
13
200
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.080
3.9E-06
1.2E-05
1.1E-04
8.4E-05
0.12
2.7E-05
2.8E-04
2.78E-08
1.0E+03b'c
3.7E-03
4.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
2.4E-03
3.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.068 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
1.4E-04
2.6E-04
2.4E-03
1.2E-04
9. 1 E-03
3.2
0.027
0.053
5.6
1.4E-06
1.0E+03b'c
100a
1.0E+03b'c
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
0.053"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-2-4
-------
Table F-2: Landfill Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
1 06-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.030
0.018
6.1
0.50a
0.52
0.46
0.059"
0.037
0.030
0.30
0.012
61
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.70 "
4.5
1.0E+03b'c
0.019
0.74
30
3.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.6
0.96"
0.73
45
15
1.0'
1.5
1.4
4.5
1.8
150
0.20 a
300 c
300 c
300 c
300 c
51
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.70 "
7.9
580 c
5.5
0.96"
0.96*
0.50"
13
0.32
0.67
7.3
0.20 "
7.9
8.5
7.9
8.6
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.011
1.8E-04
2.4E-03
3.1E-03
0.50 "
0.080
1.4E-03"
1.4E-03"
0.053
0.053
1.3E-04
6.1E-03
8.2E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.13
46
0.22
0.50a
0.12
1.8E-03"
1.8E-03"
0.041
1.7
0.015
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-2-5
-------
Table F-3: Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chloro benzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.8E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
3.4E+05
3.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.5E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
1.9E+04
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
0.50s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
0.50 '
0.030 "
100s
1.0E+03"'
6.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
3.4E+05
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.6E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
1.9E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
740"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03b
0.50 "
0.030 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
6.0 '
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
740"
1.0E+03"'
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
410
100a'
1.0E+03"
6.0s
1.0E+03"'
190
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
3.4E+05
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.6E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
2.0E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
170
1.0E+03b'c
270
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
7.8E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
43
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
110
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
620
1.0E+03"
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
190
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.88
0.50 '
0.030 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
90
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-3-1
-------
Table F-3: Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
CAS#
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
1 08-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
1 1 9-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.3E+04
2.9E+05
1.7E+04
6.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.4E+04
9.0E+04
3.7E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+05
3.5E+05
1.8E+04
4.5E+07
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
8.8E+07
8.7E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"
5.0"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5a
0.45*
0.32"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
0.4
1.0E+03"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.4E+04
3.0E+05
1.7E+04
6.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.5E+04
9.1E+04
3.7E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
3.5E+05
1.8E+04
4.6E+07
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.0E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
1.0E+03"
200 "
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.0
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32*
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70"
1.0E+03"
0.4
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
540
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
200 "
200"
200"
1.0E+03"
1.00E+03b'c
6.6
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.00E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.4E+04
3.0E+05
1.7E+04
6.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.5E+04
9.1E+04
3.8E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
3.5E+05
1.9E+04
5.0E+07
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
9.5E+07
9.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
82 c
0.45*
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
17
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
070 "
50
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-3-2
-------
Table F-3: Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
CAS#
121-14-2
606-20-2
1 1 7-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
1 1 0-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
1 6984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
1 1 0-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
C
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
2.0E+04
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.0E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.4E+05
1.6E+04
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.2E+04
1.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.1E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'e
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.00E+03b'c
5.0"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.0E+04
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.5E+05
1.6E+04
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.3E+04
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.2E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
32
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
04"
1.00E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.0E+04
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.5E+05
1.6E+04
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.3E+04
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.2E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13a
35
140
7.4
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
14
19C
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.13 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
890 c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-3-3
-------
Table F-3: Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
CAS#
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
1 1 0-49-6
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.2E+05
1.1E+05
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.7E+04
6.4E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+09
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.3E+07
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 a'c
10a'c
1.0E+03"
97
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.3E+05
1.1E+05
1.8E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.8E+04
6.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.8E+04
1.7E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+09
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.3E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b
0.20 af
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
10"
390
810
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
2.0 "
3.1
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03"
290
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.20"
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.00E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.3E+05
1 . 1 E+05
1.8E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.8E+04
6.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.9E+04
1.7E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.4E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
0.010
0.030
0.47
0.25
1.0E+03b'c
0.072
0.74
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
80
1.0E+03b'c
6.6
1.0E+03"'C
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.37
0.70
6.4
0.52
27
1.0E+03b'c
74
140
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
280
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-3-4
-------
Table F-3: Landfill Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
1 37-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
1 06-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
C
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
3.71 E-03 1.90E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
7.7E+05
5.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.1E+05
7.4E+04
6.8E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
3.8E+10
2.7E+04
4.3E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.0E+05
8.4E+04
1.1E+05
9.7E+04
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.64*
0.70"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
0.50 "
1.0'
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
7.8E+05
5.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
3.2E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
3.1E+05
7.4E+04
6.8E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
4.2E+10
2.7E+04
4.4E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.0E+05
8.4E+04
1.1E+05
9.8E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0'
5.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
1.0E+03"
400 "
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96*
0.50a
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
7.8E+05
5.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.5E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
3.2E+05
7.5E+04
6.9E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
4.2E+10
2.7E+04
4.4E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1 . 1 E+05
8.5E+04
1 . 1 E+05
9.9E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70 "
0.50
6.9
100
0.50a
1.0E+03"
0.96*
0.96"
0.50a
2.0s
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.20s
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70s
1.0E+03"
620
0.50 "
1.0E+03"
0.96*
0.96"
0.50s
2.0s
0.20s
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-3-5
-------
Table F-4: Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
1 06-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
1 06-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1 .80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1 .90E-03
7.30E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.3
1.3
380
1.3
1.3
3.6
36
1.3
1.3
110
110
1.3
1.0E+30
2.1
1.3
7.4E+10
1.3
190
1.3
1.3
4.0
1.3
1.3
1.5
130
1.3
1.3
1.3
4.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
9.7E+05
36
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
8.5E-03
0.080
2.7
6.4E-03
0.021 c
0.28
1.0E+03b'c
0.11
8.9E-03
8.3E-03
7.3E-03
0.030a
0.13
0.10
0.10
2.6
0.69
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
1.3
1.4
380
1.3
1.3
3.6
37
1.3
1.3
110
110
1.3
1.0E+30
2.2
1.4
7.5E+10
1.4
230
1.3
1.3
4.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
140
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
9.8E+05
37
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.0E+03b
6.9E-03
16
5.2E-03"
0.28 c
0.16
27 c
0.014
0.013
2.4
0.097
9.7
11"
0.53
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
0.68
7.7
3.2
20 c
0.033
0.021
3.4
0.025
0.030a
0.65
0.13
0.67
2.2
0.67
0.33
0.16
100
0.55
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.29
1.0E+03"
4.1
1.0E+03"
20
0.051
1.2
0.25
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
3.4
0.080
2.6
0.031
0.030 "
0.029
0.27
40
0.44
0.34
0.013
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0E+30
1.7
1.5
1.6
380
1.5
1.5
3.8
37
1.6
1.5
110
110
1.5
1.0E+30
2.6
1.6
7.5E+10
1.6
230
1.6
1.5
4.2
1.6
1.6
1.7
140
1.6
1.5
1.6
4.7
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
2.2E+06
37
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.5E-05
2.7E-05 d
2.1E-03
0.026
1.4E-04
2.9E-03
2.7E-03
6.4E-07
1.4E-03
8.6E-03 c
1.0E+03b'c
2.2E-04
2.2E-03
1.0E+03b'c
2.6E-03
1.3E-03
0.030 "
1.7E-03
1.8E-03
1.1E-02
0.029 c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
6.2E-02
8.4E+00
1.6E-03
3.8E-03
3.3E+00
0.66C
2.5E-03
4.0
0.57 c
0.067 c
1.0E+03b'c
2.8E-03
9.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03
6.2E-05
1.3E-03
0.030a
5.6
1.2E-03
9.0E-03
1.0E+03b
0.27 c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-4-1
-------
Table F-4: Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
1 06-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
1 56-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1 .42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.3
1.3
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
38
4.8E+03
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
5.3E+06
5.3E+06
3.3E+04
1.5
3.1
10
1.3
1.3
3.1E+04
1.3
1.3
5.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.6
1.4
150
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
5.5
2.8E-04
0.88
0.11
5.6E-03"
4.0E-03"
0.088
0.13
8.9E-03
0.088
7.5E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.3
1.3
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
38
4.9E+03
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.3
5.9E+06
5.9E+06
3.3E+04
1.5
3.1
11
1.3
1.3
3.1E+04
1.4
1.3
5.1
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.6
1.4
160
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.2
1.6
1.6
0.16
1.6
4.2
5.5E-04
160
1.0E+03b'c
3.3
6.6
0.22"
0.15*
0.33
0.65
0.29
0.10
0.3
3.4
1.0
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
40 c
30
0.054
3.2
0.66
12C
3.2E-03
0.065
0.065
0.032
1.0E+03b'c
1.0
0.15
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
2.2
5.1E-04
4.2E-03
1.1
4.4
0.78
0.45"
0.32"
0.28
0.022
0.081
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
940
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.9
1.5
1.5
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
42
4.9E+03
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.9
1.5
1.3E+07
1.3E+07
3.3E+04
1.8
3.2
12
1.5
1.5
3.1E+04
1.6
1.6
5.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0E+30
1.5
1.8
1.6
200
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
9.0 c
10"
0.066
0.064 c
1.2E-04
6.7E-03
3.9E-04
4.6E-04 '
3.2E-04 d
2.5E-04
2.6E-03
1.5E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.20 c
6.6E-08
0.010
1.6E-05
2.2E-04
2.2E-04
0.013
1.9E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.14
2.2E-03
8.9 c
8.5E-03"
1.0E-03
3.4E-04
4.4E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
3.3 c
94 c
0.13a
0.27
0.032
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-4-2
-------
Table F-4: Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
CAS#
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
110-49-6
1 09-86-4
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.8
150
7.6E+04
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.1
1.3
1.6
1.0E+30
1.4
3.5
1.3
7.3E+03
1.3
7.7
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
220
280
1.0E+30
3.3E+03
5.6
43
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.8E+03
1.9
17
1.4
1.3
550
1.3
1.3
3.4
1.3
1.3
1.1E+20
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020"'
1.0
1.7E-04
4.9
0.044
0.29*
8.0E-03a
0.66C
0.043C
1.0E+03b'c
0.078
2.5E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.9
150
8.3E+04
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.2
1.3
1.7
1.0E+30
1.5
3.8
1.3
8.3E+03
1.3
7.7
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
230
280
1.0E+30
3.3E+03
5.6
43
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.8E+03
1.9
17
1.4
1.3
550
1.3
1.3
3.4
1.4
1.3
1.8E+20
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.8
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.27
0.020"
1.0E+03"
13
9.7
49
6.5
3.8
3.6
65
2.6E-03
7.5 c
3.8
6.5
65
0.097
0.4 a'd
0.64"
8.0E-03a
1.1 c
0.041
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.13
390 c
0.097
9.7
6.5
0.041
1.6
3.3E-03
3.3E-03
16
1.0E+01 "f
0.065
0.032
19
2.6
50"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
0.32
1.0E+03"
400
4.82
3.7E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
67
29
0.4 "
3.5*
1.0E+03 b'c
0.95
710
9.4E-04
8.8E-03
1.0E+03"
670
580
44
1.6
9.8
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.1
150
8.8E+04
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.0
1.0E+30
1.6
4.3
1.5
8.6E+03
1.5
7.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.9
290
350
1.0E+30
3.4E+03
5.7
43
1.0E+30
5.0E+08
1.8E+03
2.2
17
1.6
1.5
550
1.5
1.6
3.5
1.6
1.5
1.8E+20
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
860
1.0E+03 b
4.9E-06
0.81
1.3E-03
1.0E-04
0.021
5.3E-03
8.0E-03 "
0.036
7.1E-03
2.6E-03
3.1 c
1.1E-05C
0.015
0.044 c
0.16
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
0.018
3.6E-04
4.5
1.0E+03"
2.3
0.0
0.4"
0.13
8.0E-03a
9.6E-01 c
3.5E-03
1.5E-03
71 c
2.6E-04C
7.1E-03
2.1E+01 c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-4-3
-------
Table F-4: Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
CAS#
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
1 00-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
1 37-26-8
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1 .OOE-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
68
1.3
4.9E+08
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
930
41
15
680
6.8
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.7E+19
1.0E+30
390
1.4
1.3
14
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.1
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.5
3.0
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
6.3E-03
1.5E-03
0.20 c
0.063
0.14
8.1E-06C
8.2E-03"
8.2E-03"
6.4E-03
2.5E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
75
1.3
4.9E+08
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
960
41
15
680
6.8
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2E+20
1.0E+30
390
1.4
1.3
14
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.1
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.6
3.2
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.46
0.32
2.0
0.16
0.74
0.77
0.016
2.6E-04
0.69
0.066
140 c
0.80
0.50
1.1
19
2.6E-03
0.19
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.19C
2.6
11 c
0.032
0.16
0.17
0.010
6.9
0.030
6.6E-06
1.1
4.7
0.33
0.98
1.0E+03b'c
2.6E-03
0.17
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
22
13
0.029
0.20
0.44
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.65
1.8
5.1
0.64*
0.70 a
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
83
1.5
5.0E+08
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.2E+03
41
15
680
7.0
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6E+20
1.0E+30
390
1.6
1.5
14
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
4.3
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.8
3.8
1.6
1.6
1.0E+30
1.6
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.020
9.8E-07
2.9E-06
2.8E-05
2.1E-05
0.032
6.7E-06
7.0E-05
1.8E-08
4.3E-07
2.6E-03
1.3E-03
0.095 c
6.1E-04
8.4E-04
1.3E-04
1.7E-07
6.7E-03
1.8E-03
2.9E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.043
3.5E-05
6.5E-05
6. 1 E-04
3. 1 E-05
2.3E-03
0.84
6.8E-03
0.013
1.4
9.2E-07
4. 1 E-05
90
0.055
0.026
2.0E-03C
6.0E-07
3.4E-03
1.9E-03
0.033
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-4-4
-------
Table F-4: Surface Impoundment No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
1 08-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
1 06-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
42
1.3
1.4
2.6
5.9
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
3.5
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.3
0.13
0.10
0.18
0.012"
6.7E-03
6.4E-03
0.063
2.5E-03
15
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
42
1.4
1.5
2.6
6.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
3.5
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.6
0.66
1.0E+03b'c
0.64
0.40"
0.14
9.8
3.5
0.26
0.32
0.21
1.0
2.6
32
0.10
74
72
74
73
13
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.8
140
2.2
0.38"
0.38*
0.50"
2.8
0.048
0.15
1.6
0.20 "
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.1
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
44
1.6
1.6
2.8
7.4
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
4.2
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
LCTV based
on Ingestion
4.6E-05
6.1E-04
7.7E-04
3.9E-03
0.019
3.4E-04 '
3.4E-04 d
0.014
0.014
2.3E-05
4.1E-05
2.0E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
11
0.055
0.16
0.030
4.7E-04"
4.7E-04"
0.011
0.44
3.8E-03
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-4-5
-------
Table F-5: Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
1 07-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
1 06-47-8
1 08-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
17
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
1.0E+30
4.8
3.9
4.1
3.7E+08
3.9
3.9
42.4
910
4.1
3.9
2.6E+04
2.6E+04
3.9
1.0E+30
17
4.5
1.0E+30
4.6
1.5E+08
4.2
3.9
55
4.2
4.5
6.0
1.1E+05
4.1
3.9
4.8
87
4.4
3.9
4.1
3.9
4.1
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.026
0.26
7.3
0.020
5.2 c
4.5
1.0E+03b'c
0.37
0.029
0.029
0.030
0.030 *'
0.48
0.35
0.32
57
5.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
17
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.8
4.0
4.2
3.7E+08
4.0
4.0
43
910
4.1
4.0
2.7E+04
2.6E+04
4.0
1.0E+30
17
4.5
1.0E+30
4.7
1.5E+08
4.3
4.0
55
4.2
4.5
6.1
1.1E+05
4.1
4.0
4.9
87
4.5
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
25 c
9.7
9.7
1.0E+03b
0.024
48
0.018"
1.0E+03b'c
0.48
310 c
0.047
0.048
7.0
0.29
29
34 e
8.7
4.4
1.0E+03b'c
2.3
140"
9.7
270 c
0.10
0.069
11
0.10
0.030 "
2.0
0.39
2.4
43 c
2.2
1.0
0.50
450
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.87
1.0E+03b
12
1.0E+03b
59
0.16
3.7
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.26
8.5
0.13
0.030a
0.090
1.0
120
1.3
1.0
0.040
1.0E+03b
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
17
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
5.6
4.5
4.8
3.7E+08
4.5
4.5
43
910
4.7
4.5
2.7E+04
2.6E+04
4.5
1.0E+30
21
5.0
1.0E+30
5.3
2.6E+08
4.8
4.5
55
4.7
5.1
6.8
1.1E+05
4.6
4.5
5.3
87
5.1
4.5
4.7
4.5
4.7
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.2E-04
9.0E-05"
1.0E+03b'c
7.6E-02
1 . 1 E-03
0.073 c
8.2E-03
1.9E-06
0.35C
2.1 c
1.0E+03b'c
1 .9E-03
6.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
8.2E-03
5.0E-03
0.030a
3.1E-02
5.8E-03
3.3E-02
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.18
29
4.8E-03
1.0E+03b'c
9.9
16C
7.5E-03
12
140 c
17C
1.0E+03b'c
0.023
0.030
1.0E+03b'c
4.2E-03
1.9E-04
5.2E-03
0.030 "
100 c
3.8E-03
0.027
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-5-1
-------
Table F-5: Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
CAS#
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
1 08-39-4
95-48-7
1 06-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
1 08-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
1 56-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
1 1 9-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
910
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.3
9.8
3.9
4.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
5.5
6.7
6.6
8.7
4.3
4.5
4.4
4.0
3.9
4.1
4.6
3.9
6.5
3.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.1
33
2.8E+03
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
4.7
4.4
75
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
8.4
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
61
1.1E-03
4.0
0.49
0.018*
0.012"
0.28
0.39
0.028
0.27
0.033
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
910
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
9.8
4.0
4.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
5.5
6.8
6.6
8.7
4.3
4.6
4.5
4.1
4.0
4.1
4.7
4.0
6.6
4.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.2
33
2.9E+03
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.8
4.4
75
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
8.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
8.0
5.0
5.0
0.50
5.2
24
1.6E-03
500
1.0E+03b'c
15
21
0.45"
0.32*
1.0
1.9
0.70 a
0.34
1.0
14
2.9
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
120
0.98"
9.7
2.2
180 c
9.7E-03
0.19
0.13"
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
5.2
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 "
200"
200"
1.0E+03"
13
1.5E-03
0.016
5.2
7.5a
2.5
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
0.092
0.24
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
910
4.6
4.6
4.6
4.8
10
4.5
4.6
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
6.4
7.2
7.0
9.1
4.9
5.3
5.2
4.6
4.5
4.7
5.1
4.5
7.6
4.5
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.0
34
3.7E+03
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
5.2
4.9
75
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
8.8
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.73 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
310C
1.0E+03b'c
4.4E-04
2.8E-02
2.0E-03
1.4E-03"
9.6E-04"
7.5E-04
0.011
4.3E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
6.9E-07
3. 1 E-02
5.5E-05
6.4E-04
6.4E-04
4.0E-02
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
6.6 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.50
9. 1 E-03
45 c
0.025 d
3.3E-03
1.0E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a
0.81
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-5-2
-------
Table F-5: Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
CAS#
1 22-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
1 93-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
1 1 0-49-6
1 09-86-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
5.5
4.0E+07
12
6.5E+06
1.0E+30
3.9
3.9
3.9
18
3.9
7.7
1.0E+30
6.3
79
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
110
3.9
3.9
3.9
10
5.8E+07
1.2E+08
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.1
3.9
2.3E+10
3.9
4.1
38
4.1
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
3.9
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
4.4
4.0E-03
14
0.4 a'd
2.9*
8.0E-03 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.78
6.9E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
5.5
4.0E+07
12
6.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.0
4.0
4.0
18
4.0
7.9
1.0E+30
6.4
82
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
110
4.0
4.0
4.0
10
5.8E+07
1.2E+08
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.1
4.0
2.3E+10
4.0
4.2
38
4.2
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
4.0
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.8C
0.020 a
1.0E+03"
39
29
400
19
17
16
190
7.8E-03
110C
11
19
190
0.29
0.4 ''"
6.4 c'd
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.34
2.0
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
29
20
0.46
4.9
9.4E-03
0.010
48
10a.c
0.19
0.10
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
1.0
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
21
0.080
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
200
87
0.4"
35"
1.0E+03b'c
4.0
1.0E+03"
2.7E-03
0.027
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
5.9
4.6E+07
12
6.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.5
4.5
4.5
22
4.5
9.1
1.0E+30
6.8
100
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
110
4.5
4.5
4.5
11
6.4E+07
1.3E+08
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.5
4.5
2.3E+10
4.5
4.7
38
4.8
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
4.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
7.2E-04
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1 . 1 E-04
1.0E+03"
4.0E-03
5.6E-04
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.095
0.073 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.097
1.0E+03b'c
0.477
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.12
1.0E+03b
0.074
8.4E-03
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
6.8
0.18
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.043 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.046
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-5-3
-------
Table F-5: Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
CAS#
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
1 08-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
1 00-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86 E-03
Inhalation
NC
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
3.9
3.9
9.3
7.7E+06
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
4.0
7.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.2
3.9
5.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.2
1.7E+14
1.1E+03
230
3.9E+11
95
6.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+08
5.1
3.9
220
3.9
4.4
4.1
5.6
50
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
7.3
46
4.3
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020
6.6E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.56
0.86 c
0.027 '
0.027 "
0.022
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
4.0
4.0
9.4
7.9E+06
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
4.1
7.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.3
4.0
5.6
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.2
1.7E+14
1.1E+03
230
3.9E+11
96
6.7
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+08
5.1
4.0
220
4.0
4.4
4.1
5.6
51
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
7.3
46
4.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
58
7.8
150"
2.3d
1.0
6.0
0.44
3.4
2.5
0.048
7.8E-04
2.7
0.21
1.0E+03b'c
21 c
7.0 c
4.9
58
7.8E-03
0.58
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
9.4
160 c
0.10
0.43
0.61
0.030
27
0.37
0.71 c
5.4
68
0.70"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
130
4.8
50
1.0E+03"
67
41
0.13
0.59
1.3
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.9
5.0 "
20
0.64*
0.70 "
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.5
4.5
11
9.0E+06
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
4.6
7.3
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.8
4.5
6.0
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.8
1.8E+14
1 . 1 E+03
230
3.9E+11
96
7.0
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.6E+08
5.6
4.5
220
4.5
5.0
4.7
6.0
51
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
8.0
54
4.9
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.059
2.9E-06
8.5E-06
8.5E-05
6.2E-05
0.12
2.0E-05
2.1E-04
2.9E-07
240 c
0.036
5.7E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.8E-03
2. 7 E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.019 c
0.030
0.026
9.1 E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.13
1.0E-04
1.9E-04
1.8E-03
9.5E-05
6.8E-03
3.1
0.020
0.039
4.1
1.5E-05
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.077
1.0E+03b'c
0.064 c
0.015
0.027
0.10
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-5-4
-------
Table F-5: Surface Impoundment Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
1 06-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
4.4
1.0E+30
5.5
4.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.7E+05
4.4
6.2
26
390
4.6
4.2
4.3
5.9
4.4
4.0
3.9
5.0
3.9
3.9
83
3.9
3.9
6.8
6.4
7.1
6.7
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
6.6E-03
4.6
0.50 a
0.35
1.8
0.039 d
0.023
0.021
0.20
7.8E-03
67
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
4.4
1.0E+30
5.5
4.6
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.7E+05
4.4
6.2
26
400
4.6
4.3
4.3
5.9
4.4
4.1
4.0
5.1
4.0
4.0
84
4.0
4.0
6.8
6.5
7.1
6.8
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.3
1.0E+03b'c
7.4E-03
0.67
23
2.1
1.0E+03b'c
6.4
0.96"
0.45
32
14
0.80
1.0
0.75
2.9
41
97
0.20 a
340 c
320 c
350 c
330 c
68
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
6.0
590 c
22
0.96"
0.96*
0.50a
9.0
0.17
0.44
4.8
0.20"
8.9
9.0
9.2
9.5
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.9
1.0E+30
5.9
5.1
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.7E+05
4.9
6.6
26
490
5.3
4.8
4.8
6.3
4.9
4.6
4.5
5.9
4.5
4.5
89
4.5
4.5
7.2
6.9
7.4
7.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.4E-04
1.8E-03
2.3E-03
0.50a
0.060
1.0E-03"
1.0E-03"
0.042
0.043
8. 1 E-05
8.8E-04
6.0E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
34
0.16
0.50s
0.094
1.4E-03"
1.4E-03"
0.033
1.4
0.011
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-5-5
-------
Table F-6: Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-ch loroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ch loroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+08
2.7E+05
9.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.4E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+06
1.0E+30
3.9E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.7E+06
9.1E+11
1.0E+30
3.4E+05
2.8E+05
6.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.7E+05
5.5E+05
2.8E+05
3.5E+05
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
0.50s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
0.50 '
0.030 "
100s
1.0E+03"
6.0 '
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+08
2.7E+05
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.5E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+06
1.0E+30
3.94E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.7E+06
9.4E+11
1.0E+30
3.5E+05
2.8E+05
6.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.8E+05
5.5E+05
2.9E+05
3.5E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
740"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
5.0 s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03"
0.50 "
0.030 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
6.0 "
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
740"
1.0E+03"
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
1.0E+03"
100s
1.0E+03"
6.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
2.8E+05
9.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.8E+06
9.4E+11
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
2.8E+05
6.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.9E+05
5.7E+05
3.0E+05
3.7E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
170
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.501 "
0.13
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
780
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
16.4
0.50 '
0.030 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-6-1
-------
Table F-6: Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs
Common Name
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
CAS#
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
156-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.3E+05
3.4E+05
3.3E+05
4.1E+05
4.0E+06
2.8E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.2E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.6E+06
4.3E+05
6.4E+07
3.8E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.4E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
2.2E+05
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"
5.0"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 "
0.45s
0.32"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
10"
1.0E+03"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.3E+05
3.4E+05
3.3E+05
4.1E+05
4.0E+06
2.8E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.2E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.7E+06
4.4E+05
6.4E+07
3.9E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.4E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+05
2.2E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
1.0E+03"
200 "
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
120
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32*
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70"
1.0E+03"
10:00 AM
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
610
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
200 "
200"
200"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
110.37
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
3.6E+05
3.6E+05
4.2E+05
4.1E+06
3.0E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.8E+06
4.4E+05
6.7E+07
4.0E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.6E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+05
2.2E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
810C
0.45*
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
300
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
11
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
900
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-6-2
-------
Table F-6: Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and 1 1, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
CAS#
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
7439-92-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
C
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
3.2E+05
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.4E+09
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.2E+05
2.7E+05
4.5E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.02 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'e
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.3E+05
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.5E+09
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.78E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.2E+05
2.8E+05
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
540
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.4"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.4E+05
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.7E+09
1.1E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
3.0E+05
2.2E+05
2.9E+05
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.5E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.7E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13a
36
1.0E+03"
130C
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
240
250 c
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.13 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-6-3
-------
Table F-6: Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs
Common Name
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
CAS#
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
110-49-6
109-86-4
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
9.2E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
6.8E+10
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
6.8E+05
1.8E+06
3.0E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
4.0E+05
2.7E+05
1.1E+06
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+06
2.9E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
6.2E+05
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 a'c
10a'c
1.0E+03"
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.2E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.9E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
7.0E+10
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
6.8E+05
1.8E+06
3.0E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
4.1E+05
2.7E+05
1.1E+06
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+06
2.9E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
6.3E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b
0.20 a'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
10"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
2.0 "
53
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03"
430
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.20"
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.7E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
7.5E+10
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
7.0E+05
1.9E+06
3.2E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
2.9E+05
4.2E+05
2.9E+05
1 . 1 E+06
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+06
3.0E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
6.3E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b
0.18
0.54
7.5
3.9
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
13
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 a
1.0E+03b'c
120
340
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
6.463
12.04
110
8.4
430
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-6-4
-------
Table F-6: Surface Impoundment Composite Liners LCTVs
Common Name
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
rhiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
3.4E+05
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
5.9E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.5E+05
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
9.3E+05
1.3E+06
3.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+06
4.0E+05
4.1E+05
7.3E+06
4.6E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.3E+09
2.9E+05
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.7E+06
1.5E+06
1.9E+06
1.6E+06
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.64*
0.70"
380
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
0.50 "
1.0'
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.5E+05
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.00E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.6E+05
2.7E+05
2.9E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
9.5E+05
1.3E+06
3.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+06
4.1E+05
4.1E+05
7.3E+06
4.6E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.3E+09
2.9E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.7E+06
1.5E+06
1.9E+06
1.6E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0'
5.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
570
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
1.0E+03b
400 "
1.0a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
0.50a
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.5E+05
1 . 1 E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.7E+05
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
9.9E+05
1.4E+06
3.3E+07
1.0E+30
3.1 E+06
4.2E+05
4.3E+05
7.3E+06
4.9E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.5E+09
3.0E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
1.8E+06
1.6E+06
1.9E+06
1.7E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70 "
8.4
120
120
0.50a
1.0E+03"
0.96*
0.96"
0.50a
2.0a
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
0.20s
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.50 "
1.0E+03"
0.96*
0.96"
0.50 "
2.0"
0.20"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-6-5
-------
Table F-7: Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
1 07-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
1 06-47-8
1 08-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
65
10
10
10
10
1.0E+30
12
10
11
1.1E+07
10
10
170
3.3E+03
11
10
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
10
1.0E+30
33
12
1.0E+30
12
8.6E+06
11
10
210
11
12
15
1.1E+05
11
10
14
330
12
10
11
10
11
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.087
1.0
24
0.055
9.1 c
8.1
1.0E+03b'c
0.95
0.078
0.10
0.077
0.030 "
1.4
0.94
0.86
67
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
66
11
11
11
11
1.0E+30
12
11
12
1.1E+07
11
11
170
3.3E+03
12
11
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
11
1.0E+30
35
13
1.0E+30
12
8.9E+06
12
11
210
12
12
16
1.1E+05
11
11
14
330
12
11
11
11
12
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
97 c
27
27
1.0E+03b
0.061
130
0.045 d
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
0.16
0.2
24
0.81
81
95 e
16
12
1.0E+03b'c
6.1
400"
27
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
0.26
30
0.27
0.030 "
5.6
1.1
6.9
160 c
6
2.8
1.4
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.4
1.0E+03b
34
1.0E+03b
170
0.44
10
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.71
23
0.33
0.030a
0.25
2.8
330
3.7
2.9
0.11
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
70
15
15
15
15
1.0E+30
17
15
16
1.1E+07
15
15
174
3.3E+03
16
15
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
15
1.0E+30
49
17
1.0E+30
17
2.7E+07
16
15
210
16
17
21
1.1E+05
16
15
19
340
17
15
16
15
16
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.7E-04
2.8E-04"
63 c
0.26
5.5E-04
0.26 c
0.03
6.3E-06
0.61 c
3.7 c
1.0E+03b'c
4.3E-03
0.024
1.0E+03b'c
0.027
0.016
0.030a
0.12
0.020
0.11
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.62
88
0.016
110C
33
59 c
0.025
39
250 c
29 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.054
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
0.014
6.5E-04
0.016
0.030 "
400 c
0.013
0.089
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-7-1
-------
Table F-7: Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDTp.p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
CAS#
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
1 08-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
1 56-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
1 1 9-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
3.3E+03
11
11
11
12
35
10
11
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
13
22
21
30
12
12
11
11
10
11
13
10
15
10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
15
130
3.1E+03
10
10
6.0E+16
13
12
290
10
10
10
10
1.0E+30
10
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
5.0"
150
2.7E-03
13
1.6
0.046 "
0.033 d
0.76
1.0
0.076
0.72
0.075
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.3E+03
11
11
11
12
35
11
12
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
14
22
21
31
12
12
12
11
11
11
13
11
16
11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
15
130
3.4E+03
11
11
6.1E+16
14
12
290
11
11
11
11
1.0E+30
11
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.0 "
27
14
14
1.4
15
85 c
4.60E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
48
59
0.45"
0.32*
2.8
5.4
0.70 a
1
2.7
35
8.1
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
300
2.7"
27
6.1
700 c
0.027
0.54
0.13 a
0.27
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
45
0.0043
0.040
17
7.5"
7.0
0.45"
0.32"
0.70s
0.022
0.67
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.3E+03
16
16
16
17
39
15
16
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
19
27
26
35
17
17
16
16
15
16
18
15
22
15
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
22
137
4.7E+03
15
15
6.1E+16
18
17
290
15
15
15
15
1.0E+30
15
LCTV based
on Ingestion
2.6 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
240 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03
0.10
7.5E-03
4.6E-03"
3.2E-03"
2.5E-03
0.031
0.015
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
2.8E-06
0.10
1.9E-04
2.1E-03
2.1E-03
0.13
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
24 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.5
0.034
170 c
0.085 d
0.010
3.5E-03
0.044
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 a
2.72
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-7-2
-------
Table F-7: Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
CAS#
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
1 1 0-49-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
29
16
2.8E+06
45
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
10
10
10
43
10
20
1.0E+30
20
150
10
1.2E+12
10
450
10
10
10
37
5.9E+06
9.2E+06
1.0E+30
4.2E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+09
51
1.1E+03
19
10
9.9E+07
10
11
150
11
10
1.0E+30
10
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
14
7.4E-03
38
0.4 ''"
11 '
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.9
0.020
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
29
17
2.8E+06
45
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
11
11
11
45
11
21
1.0E+30
20
150
11
1.4E+12
11
450
11
11
11
37
6.0E+06
9.4E+06
1.0E+30
4.3E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
51
1.1E+03
19
11
1.0E+08
11
12
150
12
11
1.0E+30
11
LCTV based
on Ingestion
18
1.0E+03b'c
6.6C
0.020 "
1.0E+03"
110
81
990
54
47
49
540
0.022
440 c
32
54
540
0.81
0.4 a'd
25c'd
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
8.2
1.0E+03b'c
0.81
81
56
1.8
17
0.027
0.028
130
10a.c
0.54
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
2.6
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
66
0.15
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
560
240
0.4"
140*
1.0E+03b'c
13C
1.0E+03"
0.0084
0.075
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
33
21
4.7E+06
49
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
15
15
15
64
15
30
1.0E+30
25
220
15
3.4E+12
15
450
15
15
15
41
8.6E+06
1.3E+07
1.0E+30
4.3E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
55
1 . 1 E+03
24
15
1.0E+08
15
16
160
16
15
1.0E+30
15
LCTV based
on Ingestion
2.5E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
2.5E-04
1.0E+03"
0.013
2.2E-03
0.4"
210C
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.38
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
29 c
0.38
1.0E+03b'c
1.6
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.42
1.0E+03b
0.27
0.019
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
23
0.69 c
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.19
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
670 c
0.18
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-7-3
-------
Table F-7: Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
CAS#
1 09-86-4
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
1 08-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
1.47E+00
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
Inhalation
NC
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
10
10
10
26
2.0E+05
10
1.0E+30
10
10
22
10
10
10
10
11
10
17
10
10
10
11
2.1E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.2E+08
390
21
10
10
10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
14
10
910
10
12
11
17
200
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
19
120
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.052
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
0.46
1.7
0.059 c
0.073 '
0.073 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
11
11
11
26
2.1E+05
11
1.0E+30
11
11
23
11
11
11
11
12
11
17
11
11
11
12
2.1E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.3E+08
390
21
11
11
11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
15
11
910
11
13
12
17
200
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
20
130
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.27
160
22
420"
6.2"
2.7
16
1.2
11
9.9
0.13
2. 2 E-03
8.3
0.57
1.0E+03b'c
76 c
29 c
16
160
0.022
1.6
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
27
670 c
0.27
1.0'
2
0.085
83
1.5C
0.049 c
14
190
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
200 a
13
140
1.0E+03"
190
110
0.43
1.7
3.6
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
5.4
5.0 "
61
0.64*
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
15
15
15
36
3.1E+05
15
1.0E+30
15
15
27
15
15
15
15
16
15
21
15
15
15
16
3.4E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.3E+08
390
26
15
15
15
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
19
15
910
15
17
16
21
210
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
26
180
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.20
9.7E-06
2.9E-05
2.9E-04
2.1E-04
0.42
6.6E-05
6.9E-04
1.2E-06
0.21 c
0.14
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
6. 1 E-03
9. 1 E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03C
0.095
0.085
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.43
3.5E-04
6.5E-04
6.0E-03
3.3E-04
0.023
11
0.068
0.13
14
5.9E-05
20 c
100 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.26
1.0E+03b'c
4.4E-03 c
0.048
0.088
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-7-4
-------
Table F-7: Waste Pile No-Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
1 06-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
12
12
1.0E+30
16
13
10
10
10
1.6E+05
12
19
100
610
12
11
12
18
12
11
10
12
10
10
200
10
10
22
20
23
21
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.059
0.019
13
0.50 a
0.94
7.1
0.11 d
0.060
0.057
0.54
0.021
210C
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
12
13
1.0E+30
17
13
11
11
11
1.6E+05
12
20
100
640
12
12
12
18
12
11
11
13
11
11
210
11
11
22
21
23
22
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.70"
9.2
1.0E+03b'c
0.021
2
64
5.9
1.0E+03b'c
25.2
0.96"
0.96"
88
45
1.0'
2.7
1.9
8.1
57
270
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
180
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.70 "
17
1.0E+03b'c
86 c
0.96"
0.96*
0.50a
25
0.44
1.2
13
0.20 "
29
29
30
30
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
17
17
1.0E+30
21
18
15
15
15
1.7E+05
17
24
110
920
17
16
16
23
17
16
15
18
15
15
260
15
15
27
25
28
27
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.031
4.6E-04
6. 1 E-03
7.7E-03
0.50a
0.20
3.5E-03"
3.5E-03"
0.14
0.15
2.5E-04
2.5E-03
2.0E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.35
110
0.54
0.50s
0.32
4.8E-03 '
4.8E-03 d
0.11
2.0a
0.038
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-7-5
-------
Table F-8: Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
1 07-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
1 06-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
1 8540-29-9
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1 .90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
210
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
29
24
25
2.6E+11
24
24
560
2.2E+04
26
24
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
24
1.0E+30
120
32
1.0E+30
29
7.9E+09
28
24
760
27
29
42
9.2E+06
26
24
37
1.6E+03
29
24
26
24
26
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.16
2.0
48
0.13
290 c
21
1.0E+03b'c
2.3
0.19
0.20
0.21
0.030a
3.7
2.3
2.0
160
5.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
210
24
24
25
24
1.0E+30
30
24
26
2.6E+11
24
24
560
2.2E+04
27
24
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
24
1.0E+30
130
33
1.0E+30
30
8.0E+09
28
24
760
28
29
43
9.5E+06
26
24
37
1.6E+03
29
24
26
24
27
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
300 c
60
60
1.0E+03b
0.15
300
0.11 d
1.0E+03b'c
3
1.0E+03b'c
0.34
0.38
50
1.8
180
210"
52
32
1.0E+03b'c
15
880"
60
1.0E+03b'c
0.68
0.67
72
0.50a
0.030a
13
2.4
18
760 c
14
6.0"
3.3
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
5.3
1.0E+03"
76
1.0E+03"
360
0.98
23
0.50"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.7
56
0.50 "
0.030 "
0.58
7.4
730
6.0 "
6.3
0.26
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
210
33
33
34
33
1.0E+30
41
33
36
2.6E+11
33
33
560
2.2E+04
35
33
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
33
1.0E+30
180
42
1.0E+30
40
1.7E+10
37
33
760
36
40
57
9.5E+06
35
33
47
1.6E+03
40
33
35
33
35
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
8.9E-04
6.6E-04 d
1.0E+03b'c
0.56
0.012
1.7C
0.06
1.4E-05
19C
120 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.016
0.058
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
0.043
0.030 "
0.56
0.046
0.25
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.4
210
0.036
1.0E+03b'c
73
390 c
0.056
87
1.0E+03b'c
950 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.20
0.25
1.0E+03b'c
0.032
1.5E-03
0.044
1.0E+03b'c
0.030
0.20
1.0E+03b
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-8-1
-------
Table F-8: Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT, p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
CAS#
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
1 08-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
1 06-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
1 56-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
2.2E+04
26
26
26
29
110
24
26
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
35
64
61
92
29
28
27
25
24
26
34
24
40
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
40
430
5.0E+04
24
24
1.0E+30
35
31
1.0E+03
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
24
87
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
370
7.1E-03
38
4.6
0.11 "
0.075"
1.8
2.4
0.18
1.7
0.20
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2E+04
26
26
26
29
110
24
26
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
36
64
61
93
30
29
28
26
24
27
35
24
41
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
41
430
5.3E+04
24
24
1.0E+30
36
31
1.0E+03
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
24
89
LCTV based
on Ingestion
73
32
32
3.2
36
260 c
0.01
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
140
150
0.45"
0.32*
6.3
12
0.70 a
2.6
6
91
18
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
800
6.0"
60
15
1.0E+03b'c
0.06
1.2
0.13a
0.6
1.0E+03b'c
54 c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
140 c
9.5E-03
0.11
49
7.5 a
17
0.45"
0.32"
0.70s
0.58
1.5
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2E+04
35
35
35
38
120
33
35
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
50
73
70
100
38
40
38
35
33
35
44
33
58
33
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
55
430
7.6E+04
33
33
1.0E+30
46
39
1.0E+03
33
33
33
33
1.0E+30
33
95
LCTV based
on Ingestion
17C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.4E-03
0.28
0.022
0.010*
7.1E-03"
5.7E-03
0.083
0.032
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
8.9E-06
0.23
4.8E-04
4.7E-03
4.7E-03
0.29
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
160 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.9
0.091
500 c
0.19"
0.024
7.8E-03
0.10
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a
6.0
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-8-2
-------
Table F-8: Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
CAS#
1 22-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
1 06-89-8
1 06-88-7
110-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
1 6984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
1 1 0-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
110-49-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
45
1.6E+09
138
5.5E+08
1.0E+30
24
24
24
150
24
58
1.0E+30
57
900
24
1.0E+30
24
1.5E+03
24
24
24
110
6.0E+09
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
160
4.6E+03
53
24
1.7E+14
24
27
490
25
24
1.0E+30
24
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
39.6
0.045
72
0.4 "'"
38'
8.0E-03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
0.039
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
45
1.6E+09
139
5.6E+08
1.0E+30
24
24
24
150
24
60
1.0E+30
57
930
24
1.0E+30
24
1.5E+03
24
24
24
110
6.1E+09
1.4E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
160
4.6E+03
53
24
1.7E+14
24
27
490
26
24
1.0E+30
24
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
20 c
0.020 "
1.0E+03"
240
180
1.0E+03"
120
130
140
1.0E+03"
0.048
1.0E+03b'c
66
120
1.0E+03"
1.8
04 '.i
83c'd
8.0E-03'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
34
1.0E+03b'c
1.8
180
130
6
37
0.058
0.063
300
10"
1.2
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
5.8
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
190 c
0.91
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
530
0.4 "
450 "
1.0E+03b'c
35 c
1.0E+03"
0.019
0.17
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
56
2.4E+09
150
5.6E+08
1.0E+30
33
33
33
214
33
82
1.0E+30
66
1.4E+03
33
1.0E+30
33
1.5E+03
33
33
33
120
8.1E+09
1.9E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
170
4.6E+03
63
33
1.7E+14
33
36
500
36
33
1.0E+30
33
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.007
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.6E-03
1.0E+03"
0.029
6.5E-03
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.2
1.0E+03b'c
3.6
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.1
1.0E+03b
0.72
0.11
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
50
2.1 c
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.55
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-8-3
-------
Table F-8: Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
CAS#
1 09-86-4
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
1 08-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
Inhalation
NC
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
24
24
24
73
2.7E+07
24
1.0E+30
24
25
66
24
24
24
24
28
24
46
24
24
24
26
6.6E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
61
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.3E+11
39
24
3.6E+03
24
31
26
47
670
1.0E+30
8.9E+09
58
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.12
0.061
1.0E+03b'c
0.87
4.7
270 c
0.18"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
24
24
24
75
2.8E+07
24
1.0E+30
24
25
67
24
24
24
24
29
24
47
24
24
24
27
7.0E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
62
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.3E+11
40
24
3.6E+03
24
32
27
47
670
1.0E+30
9.0E+09
59
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.6
200 a
48
930 M
9.2"
6
37
2.8
33 c
22
0.3
4.80E-03
23
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
560 c
97 c
46
360
0.048
3.6
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
73 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.6
1.0'
3.8
0.2
230
4.9 c
220 c
43
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
200"
29
400
1.0E+03"
410
250
1.3
2.0 "
8.0
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
11.9
5.0 "
170
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
33
33
33
110
4.5E+07
33
1.0E+30
33
34
76
33
33
33
33
37
33
57
33
33
33
37
9.4E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
71
33
33
33
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+11
51
33
3.6E+03
33
40
36
57
670
1.0E+30
9.0E+09
72
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.44
2.2E-05
6.3E-05
6.7E-04
4.6E-04
1.1
1.5E-04
1.5E-03
4.7E-06
1.0E+03b'c
0.49
0.057
1.0E+03b'c
0.013
0.022
1.0E+03b'c
5.8 c
0.27
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0
7.7E-04
1.4E-03
0.013
7.4E-04
0.050
30
0.15
0.29
31
2.4E-04C
1.0E+03b'c
100a
1.0E+03b'c
0.57
1.0E+03b'c
20 c
0.14
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-8-4
-------
Table F-8: Waste Pile Single Clay Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
1 37-26-8
1 08-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
1 06-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
1 06-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
510
30
31
1.0E+30
45
33
24
24
24
9.5E+06
29
54
340
5.8E+03
29
28
29
50
30
26
24
32
24
24
1.2E+03
24
24
65
58
67
64
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.18*
0.15
0.035
33
0.50a
2.3
24
0.25"
0.14
0.14
1.0'
0.048
640 c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
520
30
32
1.0E+30
45
34
24
24
24
9.7E+06
29
55
340
6.0E+03
30
29
29
51
31
26
24
32
24
24
1.2E+03
24
24
65
59
68
64
LCTV based
on Ingestion
770
0.70"
23
1.0E+03b'c
0.046
5.5
170
14
1.0E+03b'c
83 c
0.96"
0.96"
210
120
1.0'
6
4.8
18
170
600
0.2 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
430
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.64*
0.70 "
44
1.0E+03b'c
280 c
0.96"
0.96*
0.50 "
61
1.1
2.7
29
0.20 "
84
83
88
89
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
710
39
40
1.0E+30
56
43
33
33
33
9.7E+06
39
64
340
8.7E+03
40
37
38
61
40
35
33
44
33
33
1.4E+03
33
33
74
68
77
73
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.34
0.072
1.0E-03
0.013
0.017
0.50 "
0.47
7.8E-03 '
7.8E-03 d
0.33
0.35
6.1E-04
0.014
4.5E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.32"
0.70 "
250
1.2
0.50a
0.74
0.11 '
0.011 d
0.25
2.0 "
0.084
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-8-5
-------
Table F-9: Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chloro benzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.00E+01
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
6.9E+07
7.4E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.1E+07
5.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.2E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.2E+07
6.0E+08
1.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.5E+08
7.5E+07
2.2E+08
7.2E+07
9.6E+07
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
0.50s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
0.50 '
0.030 "
100s
1.0E+03"'
6.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.1E+07
7.7E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
6.0E+08
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
7.4E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.4E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.3E+07
6.0E+08
2.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+09
7.6E+07
2.2E+08
7.3E+07
9.8E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
740 b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03b
0.50 "
0.030 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
6.0 '
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
740"
1.0E+03"
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
1.0E+03"
100 '
1.0E+03"
6.0s
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
7.9E+07
7.6E+07
8.1E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
6.2E+08
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.7E+07
8.7E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.8E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.2E+08
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.6E+07
6.0E+08
2.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+09
7.8E+07
2.3E+08
7.7E+07
9.9E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
36
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.50a
0.030a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 '
0.030 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-9-1
-------
Table F-9: Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
CAS#
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
1 08-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
1 56-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
1 1 9-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.1E+07
9.1E+07
1.2E+08
1.2E+09
7.7E+07
8.7E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+08
4.3E+08
1.3E+09
1.2E+08
3.4E+14
3.0E+21
7.3E+08
5.8E+08
8.5E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
8.9E+11
9.2E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"
5.0"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5a
0.45*
0.32"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
10a
1.0E+03"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.2E+07
9.1E+07
1.2E+08
1.2E+09
7.8E+07
8.8E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
4.3E+08
1.4E+09
1.2E+08
3.5E+14
3.0E+21
7.4E+08
5.8E+08
8.7E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
8.5E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
9.1E+11
9.4E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
1.0E+03"
200 "
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32*
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70"
1.0E+03"
10a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
200 "
200"
200"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.6E+07
9.6E+07
9.6E+07
1.2E+08
1.3E+09
8.3E+07
8.8E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
4.5E+08
1.4E+09
1.3E+08
4.2E+14
3.0E+21
7.4E+08
5.8E+08
9.3E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
8.8E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
7.7E+07
1.0E+30
9.3E+11
9.4E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45*
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
7.5 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.45"
0.32"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-9-2
-------
Table F-9: Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
CAS#
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
106-89-8
1 06-88-7
1 1 0-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
1 06-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
1 6984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
1 1 0-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
1 43-50-0
7439-92-1
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
C
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
1.00E+01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
8.9E+07
4.4E+08
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.3E+07
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
2.9E+08
7.5E+07
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'e
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.1E+07
4.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.4E+07
8.0E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
2.9E+08
7.6E+07
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50"
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
04"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.5E+07
4.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.6E+07
1.0E+30
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
7.7E+07
8.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.2E+08
1.0E+30
7.9E+07
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
2.9E+08
8.0E+07
1.5E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1 . 1 E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
04a,b,c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.13 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-9-3
-------
Table F-9: Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
CAS#
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
1 26-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
1 1 0-49-6
109-86-4
78-93-3
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
1 0595-95-6
1 00-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
6.2E+08
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.1E+07
7.4E+07
7.1E+07
7.9E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.6E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.7E+08
5.1E+08
8.1E+07
7.4E+07
7.4E+07
7.3E+07
1.2E+08
8.0E+07
3.2E+08
7.4E+07
7.3E+07
7.1E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
7.9E+07
2.9E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.4E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 "
10"
1.0E+03"
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.2E+08
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
7.6E+07
7.2E+07
8.1E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.7E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.7E+08
5.1E+08
8.4E+07
7.6E+07
7.5E+07
7.5E+07
1.2E+08
8.0E+07
3.2E+08
7.5E+07
7.3E+07
7.2E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
8.0E+07
3.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b
0.20 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
10"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
2.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.20"
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
200 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
5.0 "
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.4E+08
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
8.0E+07
7.6E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.0E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.9E+08
5.2E+08
8.7E+07
8.0E+07
7.8E+07
7.8E+07
1.3E+08
8.2E+07
3.3E+08
7.7E+07
7.7E+07
7.6E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
8.4E+07
3.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.9E+07
1.0E+30
8.0E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
50
150
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
340
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 a
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'C
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-9-4
-------
Table F-9: Waste Pile Composite Liner LCTVs
Common Name
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
1 37-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
1 06-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
1 08-05-4
75-01-4
1 08-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.1E+09
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.1E+07
8.3E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.4E+08
3.7E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.3E+09
1.1E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.4E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.2E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
7.6E+07
4.6E+08
4.1E+08
5.0E+08
4.8E+08
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.64*
0.70"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
0.50"
1.0'
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.2E+09
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.3E+07
8.3E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.4E+08
3.8E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.3E+09
1.1E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.4E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.5E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
7.8E+07
4.7E+08
4.1E+08
5.2E+08
4.8E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0'
5.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96"
1.0E+03"
400 "
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64*
0.70 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96"
0.96*
0.50a
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.20 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.2E+09
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.5E+07
8.6E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
3.8E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.5E+09
1.2E+08
1.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.5E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.8E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
8.1E+07
4.8E+08
4.2E+08
5.2E+08
4.9E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50a
1.0E+03b
0.96*
0.96"
0.50a
2.0 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.20 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64"
0.64"
0.70 "
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.50 "
1.0E+03"
0.96*
0.96"
0.50 "
2.0"
0.20"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-9-5
-------
Table F-10: Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner)
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ch loroisopropyljether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-51-6
100-44-7
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
75-15-0
56-23-5
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
8.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.2
1.9
2.0
7.6E+07
1.9
1.9
21
370
2.0
1.9
9.2E+03
9.5E+03
1.9
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
6.9E+07
2.0
1.9
26
2.0
2.1
2.8
3.5E+04
2.0
1.9
2.4
39
2.1
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.013
0.13
3.5
9.9E-03
1.8C
5.0
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.014
0.015
0.014
0.030 "
0.24
0.17
0.16
43
5.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
8.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.2
1.9
2.0
7.7E+07
1.9
1.9
22
370
2.0
1.9
9.3E+03
9.5E+03
1.9
1.0E+30
7.0
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
6.9E+07
2.1
1.9
26
2.0
2.2
2.8
3.6E+04
2.0
1.9
2.4
39
2.2
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
13C
4.7
4.7
1.0E+03b
0.011
23
8.2E-03 d
1.0E+03b'c
0.23
160 c
0.024
0.026
3.6
0.14
14
16"
9.8
2.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.1
69"
4.7
130 c
0.049
0.038
5.3
0.048
0.030 "
0.98
0.19
1.2
19C
1.1
0.49
0.24
260
5.0 "
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.42
1.0E+03b
6.0
1.0E+03b
29
0.076
1.8
0.38
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
0.12
4.1
0.059
0.030"
0.044
0.48
57
0.66
0.50
0.019
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
8.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
7.8E+07
2.2
2.2
22
370
2.3
2.2
9.3E+03
9.5E+03
2.2
1.0E+30
8.2
2.5
1.0E+30
2.5
1.2E+08
2.3
2.2
27
2.3
2.5
3.2
3.6E+04
2.3
2.2
2.7
40
2.5
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.3
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.6E-05
4.2E-05"
440 c
0.037
5.6E-04
0.030C
4.0E-03
9.2E-07
0.12C
0.77 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.2E-04
3.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
3.9E-03
2.4E-03
0.030"
0.014
2.8E-03
0.016
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.090
13
2.3E-03
780 c
4.8
6.7 c
3.7E-03
5.7
50 c
6.0 c
1.0E+03b'c
9.0E-03
0.015
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-03
9.3E-05
2.4E-03
0.030 "
48 c
1.9E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-10-1
-------
Table F-10: Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner)
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylenetrans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
CAS#
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
108-39-4
95-48-7
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
50-29-3
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
156-59-2
156-60-5
75-35-4
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
542-75-6
10061-01-5
10061-02-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
84-74-2
99-65-0
51-28-5
121-14-2
606-20-2
117-84-0
123-91-1
122-39-4
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
370
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
5.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.8E+04
1.0E+30
2.5
3.4
3.3
4.4
2.1
2.1
2.1
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.3
1.9
3.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7
17
1.3E+03
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.3
2.1
36
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
4.3
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
61
4.9E-04
2.0
0.25
8.5E-03 "
6.0E-03 d
0.14
0.19
0.014
0.13
0.015
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
370
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
5.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.9E+04
1.0E+30
2.5
3.4
3.3
4.4
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.3
1.9
3.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7
17
1.3E+03
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.3
2.1
36
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
4.3
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5
2.4
2.4
0.24
2.5
12
8.0E-04
240
1.0E+03b'c
7.4
10
0.32"
0.22*
0.48
0.94
0.44
0.17
0.47
6.6
1.4
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
53
0.47"
4.7
1.1
88 c
4.7E-03
0.094
0.094
0.047
1.0E+03b'c
2.6
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
200 a
200 a
200 a
1.0E+03"
6.5
7.5E-04
7.2E-03
2.6
7.5a
1.2
0.45"
0.32"
0.42
0.042
0.12
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
370
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.4
5.2
2.2
2.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.1E+04
1.0E+30
2.8
3.7
3.6
4.7
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.3
2.6
2.2
3.4
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1
17
1.6E+03
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.4
36
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
4.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.30C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
110C
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-04
0.014
1.0E-03
6.6E-04"
4.7E-04"
3.7E-04
4.8E-03
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
3.5E-07
0.015
2.7E-05
3. 1 E-04
3. 1 E-04
0.019
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.7 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.22
4.6E-03
23 c
0.012"
1.5E-03
5.0E-04
6.4E-03
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 a
0.39
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-10-2
-------
Table F-10: Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner)
Common Name
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and 1 1, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
CAS#
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
72-20-8
1 06-89-8
106-88-7
1 1 0-80-5
111-15-9
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
106-93-4
107-21-1
75-21-8
96-45-7
206-44-0
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
319-84-6
76-44-8
1 024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
55684-94-1
34465-46-8
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
7783-06-4
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
110-49-6
1 09-86-4
78-93-3
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.7
1.3E+07
6.1
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7
1.9
3.4
1.0E+30
3.1
31
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
55
1.9
1.9
1.9
5.2
2.1E+07
4.1E+07
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
6.9
130
3.0
1.9
3.0E+09
1.9
2.0
19
2.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a
2.2
1.5E-03
6.2
0.4 a'd
1.5*
8.0E-03 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.25
3.3E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.7
1.3E+07
6.1
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.8
1.9
3.4
1.0E+30
3.2
32
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
55
1.9
1.9
1.9
5.3
2.1E+07
4.1E+07
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
6.9
130
3.0
1.9
3.1E+09
1.9
2.0
19
2.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
0.90 c
0.020 a
1.0E+03"
19
14
150
9.4
7.6
7.7
94
3.7E-03
54 c
5.2
9.4
94
0.14
0.4 ''"
3.3 c'd
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.95
820 c
0.14
14
9.8
0.23
2.4
4.4E-03
4.9E-03
23
1.0E+01 a'c
0.094
0.047
28
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b
0.46
1.0E+03"
570
10
0.031
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
97
42
04"
18"
1.0E+03b'c
2.0
1.0E+03"
1.3E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"
970
840
63
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.0
1.5E+07
6.4
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
8.0
2.2
4.0
1.0E+30
3.4
38
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
55
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.5
2.3E+07
4.4E+07
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
7.2
130
3.3
2.2
3.1E+09
2.2
2.3
19
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.6E-04
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03"
4.4E-05
1.0E+03"
1.9E-03
2.9E-04
04a,b,c
680 c
8.0E-03a
1.0E+03b'c
0.049
0.030C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.050
1.0E+03b'c
0.23
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
0.060
1.0E+03b
0.038
3.2E-03
1.0E+03b
1.0E+03b
3.3
0.093
0.4 a'b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 "
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
0.018 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
1.0E+03b'c
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-10-3
-------
Table F-10: Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner)
Common Name
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
CAS#
108-10-1
80-62-6
298-00-0
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
79-46-9
55-18-5
62-75-9
924-16-3
621-64-7
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
30402-15-4
36088-22-9
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
1 29-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
51207-31-9
1746-01-6
630-20-6
79-34-5
127-18-4
58-90-2
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2. 41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1 .90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.9
4.0
3.6E+05
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
3.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
3.1E+12
440
110
3.0E+10
48
3.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
2.5
1.9
110
1.9
2.2
2.0
2.8
25
1.0E+30
6.6E+06
3.3
18
2.1
2.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
9.7E-03
3.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.078
0.28
0.20 c
0.013*
0.013*
0.011
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.9
4.1
3.7E+05
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
2.0
3.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
3.1E+12
440
110
3.1E+10
48
3.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
2.5
1.9
110
1.9
2.2
2.0
2.8
26
1.0E+30
6.6E+06
3.3
18
2.1
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.7
73d
1.1"
0.47
2.9
0.22
1.7
1.2
0.023
3.7E-04
1.4
0.098
1.0E+03b'c
8.6 c
3.6 c
2.4
28
3.7E-03
0.28
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
4.6
79 c
0.047
0.21
0.26
0.015
14
0.19
0.16 c
2.5
26
0.52
1.6
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.3
22
1.0E+03*
33
20
0.066
0.29
0.63
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
0.94
2.7
10.0
0.64*
0.70 a
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
4.7
3.8E+05
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
3.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2
3.0
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
3.4E+12
440
110
3.1E+10
48
3.6
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1 . 1 E+08
2.8
2.2
110
2.2
2.4
2.3
3.0
26
1.0E+30
6.7E+06
3.7
21
2.4
2.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.029
1.4E-06
4. 1 E-06
4.2E-05
3.0E-05
0.060
9.6E-06
1.0E-04
1.5E-07
20 c
0.018
2.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
8.8E-04
1.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
4.3E-03C
0.014
1 .OE-02
4.5E-03
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
5.0E-05
9.4E-05
8.8E-04
4.7E-05
3.3E-03
1.6
9.9E-03
0.019
2.0
7.1 E-06
1.0E+03b'c
100 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.037
1.0E+03b'c
0.015 c
7.1E-03
0.010
0.050
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-10-4
-------
Table F-10: Land Application Unit LCTVs (No-Liner)
Common Name
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
1 37-26-8
1 08-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
1 06-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
MCL (mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/ln-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7
2.2
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7E+04
2.1
3.1
13
150
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.9
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.3
1.9
1.9
29
1.9
1.9
3.4
3.2
3.5
3.4
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
3.2E-03
2.2
0.50 a
0.17
0.93
0.019"
0.011
0.010
0.098
3.8E-03
34
Non-Carcinogenic Effect (NC)
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7
2.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7E+04
2.1
3.1
13
150
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.9
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.4
1.9
1.9
29
1.9
1.9
3.4
3.2
3.5
3.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
3.7E-03
0.33
11
1
1.0E+03b'c
3.3
0.61 d
0.21
15
7.2
0.39
0.47
0.35
1.4
34
47
0.14
170 c
160
170
170
45
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
2.9
290 c
11
0.58"
0.58*
0.50a
4.4
0.080
0.21
2.3
0.20 a
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Carcinogenic Effect (C)
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
3.0
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.8E+04
2.4
3.3
14
170
2.5
2.3
2.4
3.2
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
31
2.2
2.2
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.7
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.6E-05
8.8E-04
1 . 1 E-03
0.50a
0.030
5.1E-04"
5.1E-04"
0.021
0.021
3.7E-05
3. 1 E-04
2.9E-04
LCTV based
on
Inhalation
16
0.079
0.50 a
0.046
6.9E-04 '
6.9E-04 d
0.016
0.68
5.5E-03
KEY:
a- TC Rule cap
b- 1,000 mg/L cap
c- Exceeds solubility
d - Capped by daughter LCTV
e - Constituent has no RGC; LCTV from daughter
F-10-5
-------
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Glossary
Adsorption - Adherence of molecules in solution to the surface of solids (ASCE, 1985).
Adsorption isotherm - A graphical representation of the relationship between the
concentration of constituent in solution and the amount adsorbed at constant temperature.
Advection - The process whereby solutes are transported by the bulk mass of flowing
fluid. See also convective transport.
Anisotropy - The condition of having different properties in different directions.
Aquifer - A geologic formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that contains
sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells
and springs.
Aquifer system - A body of permeable material that functions regionally as a
water-yielding unit; it comprises two or more permeable beds separated at least locally
by confining beds that impede ground-water movement but do not greatly affect the
regional hydraulic continuity of the system; includes both saturated and unsaturated parts
of permeable material.
Area of influence of a well - The area surrounding a pumping or recharging well within
which the potentiometric surface has been changed.
Breakthrough curve - A plot of concentration versus time at a fixed location.
Cancer Slope Factor (CFS) - an upper bound, approximating a 95% confidence limit,
on the increased cancer risk from a lifetime exposure to an agent. This estimate, usually
expressed in units of proportion (of a population) affected per mg/kg/day, is generally
reserved for use in the low-dose region of the dose-response relationship, that is, for
exposures corresponding to risks less than 1 in 100.
Cation exchange capacity - The sum total of exchangeable cations that a porous
medium can absorb. Expressed in moles of ion charge per kilogram of soil (or of other
exchanges such as clay).
Chronic Daily Intake (GDI) - exposure expressed as mass of a substance contacted per
unit body weight per unit time, averaged over a long period of time.
Confined - A modifier which describes a condition in which the potentiometric surface is
above the top of the aquifer.
AA
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Confined aquifer - An aquifer bounded above and below by impermeable beds or by
beds of distinctly lower permeability than that of the aquifer itself; an aquifer containing
confined ground water.
Confining bed - See confining unit.
Confining unit - Means a body of impermeable or distinctly less permeable material
stratigraphically adjacent to one or more aquifers.
Darcian velocity - See specific discharge.
Darcy's law - An empirical law which states that the velocity of flow through porous
medium is directly proportional to the hydraulic gradient.
Desorption - A removal of a substance adsorbed to the surface of an adsorbent.
Desorption - The reverse process of sorption. See also sorption.
Diffusion - Spreading of solutes from regions of highest to regions of lower
concentrations caused by the concentration gradient. In slow moving ground water, this
can be a significant mixing process.
Diffusion Coefficient - The rate at which solutes are transported at the microscopic level
due to variations in the solute concentrations within the fluid phases.
Dispersion coefficient - A measure of the spreading of a flowing substance due to the
nature of the porous medium, with its interconnected channels distributed at random in
all directions. Equal to the sum of the coefficients of mechanical dispersion and
molecular diffusion in a porous medium.
Dispersion, longitudinal - Process whereby some of the water molecules and solute
molecules travel more rapidly than the average linear velocity and some travel more
slowly; spreading of the solute in the direction of the bulk flow.
Dispersion, transverse - Spreading of the solute in directions perpendicular to the bulk
flow.
Dispersivity - A geometric property of a porous medium which determines the
dispersion characteristics of the medium by relating the components of pore velocity to
the dispersion coefficient.
A-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Distribution coefficient - The quantity of a constituent sorbed by the solid per unit
weight of solid divided by the quantity dissolved in the water per unit volume of water.
Dose-Response Relationship - The relationship between a quantified exposure (dose),
and the proportion of subjects demonstrating specific, biological changes (response).
Evapotranspiration - The combined loss of water from a given area by evaporation
from the land and transpiration from plants.
Exposure pathway - the course a chemical or physical agent takes from a source to an
exposed organism. An exposure pathway describes a unique mechanism by which an
individual or population is exposed to chemicals or physical agents at or originating from
a site. Each exposure pathway includes a source or release from a source, an exposure
point, and an exposure route. If the exposure point differs from the source, a
transport/exposure medium (e.g., water) or media (in case of intermedia transfer) also is
included.
Exposure point - A location of potential contact between an organism and a chemical or
physical agent.
Exposure point concentration - an estimate of the of the arithmetic average
concentration of a contaminant at a exposure point.
Flow, steady - A characteristic of a flow system where the magnitude and direction of
specific discharge are constant in time at any point See also flow, unsteady.
Flow, uniform - A characteristic of a flow system where specific discharge has the same
magnitude and direction at any point.
Flow, unsteady - A characteristic of a flow system where the magnitude and/or direction
of the specific discharge changes with time.
Flow velocity - See specific discharge.
Flux - See specific discharge.
Geohydrologic system - (See ground water system.) The geohydrologic units within a
geologic setting, including any recharge, discharge, interconnections between units, and
any natural or human-induced processes or events that could affect ground water flow
within or among those units.
A-2
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Geohydrologic unit - (See hydrogeologic unit.) An aquifer, a confining unit, or a
combination of aquifers and confining units comprising a framework for a reasonably
distinct geohydrologic system.
Ground water - Means water below the land surface in a zone of saturation. Ground
water is the water contained within an aquifer.
Ground water, confined - Ground water under pressure significantly greater than
atmospheric and whose upper limit is the bottom of a confining unit. See also confined,
confining unit, and confined aquifer.
Ground water discharge - Flow of water from the zone of saturation.
Ground water flow - The movement of water in the zone of saturation.
Ground water flux - (See specific discharge.) The rate of ground-water flow per unit
area of porous or fractured media measured perpendicular to the direction of flow.
Ground water mound - A raised area in a water table or other potentiometric surface
created by ground water recharge.
Ground water, perched - Unconfmed ground water separated from an underlying body
of ground water by an unsaturated zone. Its water table is a perched water table. Perched
ground water is held up by a perching bed whose permeability is so low that water
percolating downward through it is not able to bring water in the underlying unsaturated
zone above atmospheric pressure.
Ground water recharge - The process of water addition to the saturated zone or the
volume of water added by this process.
Ground water system - A ground-water reservoir and its contained water. Also, the
collective hydrodynamic and geochemical processes at work in the reservoir.
Ground water travel time - The time required for a unit volume of ground water to
travel between two locations. The travel time is the length of the flow path divided by the
velocity, where velocity is the average ground water flux passing through the
cross-sectional area of the geologic medium through which flow occurs, perpendicular to
the flow direction, divided by the effective porosity along the flow path. If discrete
segments of the flow path have different hydrologic properties the total travel time will
be the sum of the travel times for each discrete segment.
A-4
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Ground water, unconfined - Water in an aquifer that has a water table. Synonymous
with phreatic ground water.
Hazard quotient - the ratio of a single contaminant exposure level over a specified time
period to a reference dose for that contaminant derived from a similar period.
Head, static - The height above a standard datum of the surface of a column of water (or
other liquid) that can be supported by the static pressure at a given point. The static head
is the sum of the elevation head and the pressure head.
Health-based number (HBN) - the maximum constituent concentration in ground water
that is expected to not usually cause adverse noncancer health effects in the general
population (including sensitive subgroups), or that will not result in an additional
incidence of cancer in more than approximately one in one million individuals exposed to
the contaminant.
Heterogeneity - A characteristic of a medium in which material properties vary from
point to point.
Homogeneity - A characteristic of a medium in which material properties are identical
everywhere.
Human Health Benchmark - quantitative expression of dose-response relationships.
Hydraulic Conductivity - A coefficient of proportionality describing the rate at which
water can move through an aquifer or other permeable medium.
Hydraulic gradient - Slope of the water table or potentiometric surface.
Hydraulic Head - The height of the free surface of a body of water above a given point
beneath the surface.
Hydrodynamic dispersion - The spreading (at the macroscopic level) of the solute front
during transport resulting from both mechanical dispersion and molecular diffusion.
Hydrogeologic unit - Any soil or rock unit or zone which by virtue of its porosity or
permeability, or lack thereof, has a distinct influence on the storage or movement of
ground water.
Hydrologic properties - Those properties of a rock that govern the entrance of water and
the capacity to hold, transmit, and deliver water, such as porosity, effective porosity,
A-5
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
specific retention, permeability, and the directions of maximum and minimum
permeabilities.
Hydrolysis - The splitting (lysis) of a compound by a reaction with water. Example are
the reaction of salts with water to produce solutions which are not neutral, and the
reaction of an ester with water.
Hydrostratigraphic unit - See hydrogeologic unit
Immiscible - The chemical property of two or more phases that, at mutual equilibrium,
cannot dissolve completely in one another, e.g., oil and water.
Impermeable - A characteristic of some geologic material that limits its ability to
transmit significant quantities of water under the head differences ordinarily found in the
subsurface.
Infiltration - The downward entry of water into the soil or rock, specifically from a
waste management unit.
Infiltration capacity - The maximum rate at which a soil or rock is capable of absorbing
water or limiting infiltration.
Isotropy - The condition in which the property or properties of interest are the same in
all directions.
Leachate - A liquid that has percolated through waste and has extracted dissolved or
suspended materials.
Leaching - Separation or dissolving out of soluble constituents from a waste by
percolation of water.
Matrix - The solid framework of a porous system.
MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level - Legally enforceable standards regulating the
maximum allowed amount of certain chemicals in drinking water.
Mechanical dispersion - The process whereby solutes are mechanically mixed during
advective transport caused by the velocity variations at the microscopic level.
Synonymous with hydraulic dispersion.
Miscible - The chemical property of two or more phases that, when brought together,
have the ability to mix and form one phase.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Model - A conceptual, mathematical, or physical system obeying certain specified
conditions, whose behavior is used to understand the physical system to which it is
analogous in some way.
Moisture content - The ratio, expressed as a percentage, of either (a) the weight of water
to the weight of solid particles expressed as moisture weight percentage or (b) the volume
of water to the volume of solid particles expressed as moisture volume percentage in a
given volume of porous medium. See water content.
Molecular diffusion, coefficient of, - The component of mass transport flux of solutes
(at the microscopic level) due to variations in solute concentrations within the fluid
phases. Synonymous with diffusion coefficient.
Molecular Diffusion - The process in which solutes are transported at the microscopic
level due to variations in the solute concentrations within the fluid phases.
Monte Carlo Simulation - A method that produces a statistical estimate of a quantity by
taking many random samples from an assumed probability distribution, such as a normal
distribution. The method is typically used when experimentation is infeasible or when
the actual input values are difficult or impossible to obtain.
Mounding - Commonly, an outward and upward expansion of the free water table
caused by surface infiltration or recharge method.
Permeability - The property of a porous medium to transmit fluids under an hydraulic
gradient.
Pore velocity - See velocity, average interstitial.
Porosity - The ratio, usually expressed as a percentage, of the total volume of voids of a
given porous medium to the total volume of the porous medium.
Porosity, effective - The ratio, usually expressed as a percentage of the total volume of
voids available for fluid transmission to the total volume of the porous medium.
Receptor - the exposed individual relative to the exposure pathway considered.
Recharge - The process of addition of water to the saturated zone; also the water added.
In IWEM, recharge is the result of natural precipitation around a waste management unit.
Reference concentration (RFC) - an estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an
order of magnitude) of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human population
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
(including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of
deleterious effects during a lifetime. It can be derived from a NOAEL, LOAEL, or
benchmark concentration, with uncertainty factors generally applied to reflect limitations
of the data used. Generally used in EPA's noncancer health assessments.
Reference Dose (RfD) - An estimate (with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of
magnitude) of a daily oral exposure to the human population (including sensitive
subgroups) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a
lifetime.
Release - any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging,
injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping or disposing of any contaminant into the
environment.
Retardation factor - The ratio of the average linear velocity of ground water to the
velocity of the retarded constituent.
Risk - the probability that a contaminant will cause an adverse effect in exposed humans
or to the environment.
Risk assessment - the process used to determine the risk posed by contaminants released
into the environment. Elements include identification of the contaminants present in the
environmental media, assessment of exposure and exposure pathways, assessment of the
toxicity of the contaminants present at the site, characterization of human health risks,
and characterization of the impacts or risks to the environment.
Saturated Zone - The part of the water bearing layer of rock or soil in which all spaces,
large or small, are filled with water
Seepage velocity - See specific discharge.
Soil bulk density - The mass of dry soil per unit bulk soil.
Soil moisture - Subsurface liquid water in the unsaturated zone expressed as a fraction of
the total porous medium volume occupied by water. It is less than or equal to the
porosity.
Solubility - The total amount of solute species that will remain indefinitely in a solution
maintained at constant temperature and pressure in contact with the solid crystals from
which the solutes were derived.
A-8
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Solute transport - The net flux of solute (dissolved constituent) through a hydrogeologic
unit controlled by the flow of subsurface water and transport mechanisms.
Sorption - A general term used to encompass the process of absorption and adsorption.
Source term - The kinds and amounts of constituents that make up the source of a
potential release.
Specific discharge - The rate of discharge of ground water per unit area of a porous
medium measured at right angle to the direction of flow. Synonymous with flow rate or
specific flux.
Toxicity - the degree to which a chemical substance elicits a deleterious or adverse effect
upon the biological system of an organism exposed to the substance over a designated
time period.
Transient - See flow, unsteady.
Transmissivity - The rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width of the
aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. It is equal to an integration of the hydraulic
conductivities across the saturated part of the aquifer perpendicular to the flow paths.
Transport - Conveyance of dissolved constituents and particulates in flow systems. See
also solute transport and particulate transport.
Unconfined - A condition in which the upper surface of the zone of saturation forms a
water table under atmospheric pressure.
Unconfined aquifer - An aquifer which has a water table.
Unsaturated flow - The movement of water in a porous medium in which the pore
spaces are not filled to capacity with water.
Unsaturated zone - The subsurface zone between the water table and the land surface
where some of the spaces between the soil particles are filled with air.
Vadose zone - See unsaturated zone.
Volatiles - Substances with relatively large vapor pressures. Many organic substances
are almost insoluble in water so that they occur primarily in a gas phase in contact with
water, even though their vapor pressure may be very small.
A-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix A
Water content - The amount of water lost from the soil after drying it to constant weight
at 105 °C, expressed either as the weight of water per unit weight of dry soil or as the
volume of water per unit bulk volume of soil. See also moisture content.
Water table - The upper surface of a zone of saturation except where that surface is
formed by a confining unit. The water pressure at the water table equals atmospheric
pressure.
Water table aquifer - See unconfined aquifer.
Well - A bored, drilled or driven shaft, or a dug hole, whose depth is greater than the
largest surface dimension.
A-10
-------
APPENDIX B
LIST OF IWEM WASTE CONSTITUENTS AND DEFAULT
CHEMICAL PROPERTY DATA
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
Chemical Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo {b } fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene, 1,3-
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
154.2
44.1
58.1
41.1
120.2
56.1
71.1
72.1
53.1
364.9
58.1
93.1
178.2
121.8
74.9
137.3
228.3
78.1
184.2
252.3
252.3
108.1
126.6
9.0
143.0
171.1
390.6
163.8
94.9
54.1
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
4.24
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
6.13E+03
2.13E+05
6.40E+05
l.OOE+06
7.40E+04
0.18
l.OOE+06
3.60E+04
0.0434
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
9.40E-03
1.75E+03
500
1.62E-03
1.50E-03
4.00E+04
525
l.OOE+06
1.72E+04
1.31E+03
0.34
6.74E+03
1.52E+04
735
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
3.75
-0.21
-0.59
-0.71
1.26
-0.22
-0.99
-1.84
-0.089
6.18
1.47
0.60
4.21
0
0
0
5.34
1.80
1.26
5.80
5.80
0.78
2.84
0
0.80
2.39
7.13
1.77
0.76
2.06
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
31.5
0
500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
6.68E+08
0.018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
410
0
0.23
0
0
0
9.46
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
45
0
0
0
0
5.20E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.40E+03
5.00E+04
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0426
0.0363
0.0445
0.0385
0.0397
0.0378
0.0388
0.0184
0.0319
0.0186 (i)
0.0325
0.0239
0.0208
0.0174 (i)
0.0278
0.0275
0.0233
0.0132
0.0337
0.0426
0.0325
B 1
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
Chemical Name
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro- 1,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene, 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT, p,p'-
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
74.1
312.4
240.2
112.4
76.1
153.8
409.8
88.5
127.6
112.6
325.2
208.3
64.5
119.4
50.5
128.6
76.5
52.0
52.0
228.3
58.9
63.5
108.1
108.1
108.1
324.4
120.2
100.2
98.1
320.0
318.0
354.5
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
7.40E+04
2.69
52
l.OOE+06
1.19E+03
793
0.056
1.74E+03
5.30E+03
472
11
2.60E+03
5.68E+03
7.92E+03
5.33E+03
2.20E+04
3.37E+03
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
1.60E-03
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
2.27E+04
2.60E+04
2.15E+04
2.34E+04
61
4.30E+04 (e)
5.00E+03
0.090
0.12
0.025
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
0.50
4.23
2.02
0
1.84
2.41
5.89
1.74
1.61
2.58
4.04
1.91
0.51
1.58
0.91
1.82
1.13
0
0
5.34
0
0
1.76
1.76
1.76
2.12
3.40
1.11
1.82
5.89
6.64
6.59
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0.017
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
l.OOE-04
0
0
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.025
0
0.060
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
1.20E+05
0
3.15E+04
0
38
0
0
0
2.80E+06
2.50E+04
0
2.74E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.20E+04
0
3.10E+05
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0410
0.0308
0.0172
0.0315
0.0299
0.0173
0.0334
0.0366
0.0344
0.0429
0.0299
0.0341
0.0213
0.0294
0.0311
0.0291
0.0299
0.0248
0.0295
0.0140
B2
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
Chemical Name
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropanel,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1 ,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1 ,4-
Dichlorobenzidine3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene l,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans- 1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
270.2
278.4
236.3
147.0
147.0
253.1
120.9
99.0
99.0
96.9
96.9
96.9
163.0
221.0
113.0
111.0
111.0
111.0
380.9
222.2
268.4
229.2
0.0
256.3
212.3
122.2
278.3
168.1
184.1
182.1
182.1
390.6
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
40
2.49E-03
1.23E+03
156
74
3.11
280
5.06E+03
8.52E+03
3.50E+03
6.30E+03
2.25E+03
4.50E+03
677
2.80E+03
2.80E+03
2.72E+03
2.72E+03
0.20
1.08E+03
0.10
2.50E+04
60
0.025
1.30E+03
7.87E+03
11.2
861
2.79E+03
270
182
0.020
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
4.17
6.52
1.94
3.08
3.05
3.32
2.16
1.46
1.13
1.70
1.60
1.79
2.49
0.68
1.67
1.43
1.80
1.80
5.08
1.99
4.09
0.13
1.49
6.64
2.55
2.29
4.37
1.31
-0.09
1.68
1.40
7.60
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0.10
0
4.00E-03
0
0
0
0
0.011
9.61E-03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
40
0.063
0
0
1.68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
8.00E+03
0
1.20E+05
0
0
0
0
0.38
55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.10E+05
0
4.48E+06
0
0
0
0
1.80E+06
0
0
0
0
5.20E+05
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0190
0.0281
0.0281
0.0274
0.0173 (i)
0.0341
0.0334
0.0344
0.0347
0.0307
0.0319
0.0322
0.0319
0.0190
0.0172 (i)
0.0249
B3
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
123911
122394
122667
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
Chemical Name
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine, 1,2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethyl ene dibromide ( 1 ,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro- 1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
88.1
169.2
184.2
274.4
406.9
380.9
92.5
72.1
90.1
132.2
88.1
74.1
114.1
124.2
106.2
187.9
62.1
44.1
102.2
202.3
19.0
30.0
46.0
96.1
290.8
290.8
290.8
373.3
389.3
260.8
284.8
272.8
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
l.OOE+06
36
68
16
0.51
0.25
6.59E+04
9.50E+04 (e)
l.OOE+06
2.29E+05 (g)
8.03E+04
5.68E+04
3.67E+03
6.30E+03
169
4.18E+03
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06 (a)
6.20E+04
0.21
5.50E+05
l.OOE+06
1.10E+05
0.24
6.8
2
0.18
0.2
3.23
5.00E-03
1.8
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
-0.81
3.30
2.82
2.94
3.55
4.60
-0.53
0.90
-0.54
0.70
0.35
0.55
1.27
-0.27
3.00
1.42
-1.50
-1.10
0
4.63
-1.30
-2.70
0.80
3.43
3.4
3.43
5.21
4.9
4.46
5.41
4.72
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.50E+04
0
0
0
3.50E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.90E+05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
2.30
0
0.055
31
0
0
0
4.80E-03
0
0
1.25E+03
0
0.63
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.05
0
61
0.063
0
0
25
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
5.40E+04
0
0
0
0
0
3.40E+06
0
1.10E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.73E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0331
0.0229
0.0350
0.0331
0.0308
0.0252
0.0267
0.0331
0.0429
0.0460
0.0319 (i)
0.0549
0.0337
0.0233
0.0230
0.0232
0.0180
0.0176
0.0222
0.0248
0.0228
B4
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
68122
91203
7440020
98953
79469
Chemical Name
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane, n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
Indeno{ l,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Methoxyethanol, 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
N,N-Dimethyl formamide [DMF]
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
374.9
390.9
236.7
406.9
86.2
34.1
276.3
74.1
138.2
490.6
207.2
54.9
200.6
67.1
32.0
345.7
118.1
76.1
72.1
100.2
100.1
263.2
88.1
268.4
173.8
84.9
95.9
73.1
128.2
58.7
123.1
89.1
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
8.25E-06 (f)
4.00E-06 (f)
50
140
12
437
2.20E-05
8.50E+04
1.20E+04
7.6
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
0.056 (h)
2.54E+04
l.OOE+06
0.045
l.OOE+06 (g)
l.OOE+06 (a)
2.23E+05
1.90E+04
1.50E+04
55
5.13E+04 (e)
3.23E-03
1.19E+04
1.30E+04
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06 (e)
31
l.OOE+06
2.09E+03
1.70E+04
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
7.00
6.38
3.61
5.00
2.95
6.26
0.44
1.90
4.15
0
0
0.22
-1.08
4.90
0
0.95
-0.03
0.87
0.74
2.47
1.05
7.00
1.21
0.93
0
-0.99
3.11
0
1.51
0.23
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.69
0
0
0
0
0
2.80
0
0.017
0
l.OOE-03
0
0
0
0
0
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.20E+03
0
1.20E+04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.60
0
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0133 (i)
0.0130 (i)
0.0280
0.0256
0.0164 (i)
0.0237
0.0949
0.0334
0.0520
0.0275
0.0347
0.0322
0.0264
0.0292
0.0272
0.0194
0.0394
0.0353
0.0264
0.0298
0.0322
B5
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
Chemical Name
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine, 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
102.1
74.1
158.2
130.2
198.2
88.1
114.1
100.1
286.3
291.3
250.3
340.4
356.4
295.3
266.3
94.1
336.7
108.1
260.4
148.1
256.1
58.1
202.3
79.1
162.2
79.0
107.9
334.4
104.2
215.9
306.0
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
9.30E+04
l.OOE+06
1.27E+03
9.89E+03
35.1
1.97E+04
7.65E+04
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
6.54
1.33
2.36E-04 (f)
1.18E-04 (f)
0.55
1.95E+03
8.28E+04
2.00E+03
2.55E+06
50
6.20E+03
0.070
33
4.05E+05 (e)
0.14
l.OOE+06
811
l.OOE+06
l.OOE+06
160.00
310
0.60
6.92E-04 (f)
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
-0.03
0.45
2.09
1.03
2.84
1.03
-0.02
-0.57
-0.51
3.15
5.39
4.93
6.3
4.57
3.06
1.23
0
-0.30
2.64
1.56
6.19
2.63
1.40
4.92
0.34
2.34
0
0
1.90
2.84
4.28
6.62
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.90E+03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
59
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
62
4.90E+05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.70E+06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
610
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0288
0.0363
0.0215
0.0245
0.0227
0.0315
0.0290
0.0319
0.0142 (i)
0.0138 (i)
0.0253
0.0325
0.0307
0.0189
0.0382
0.0344
0.0278
0.0153 (i)
B6
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
Chemical Name
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1 , 1 , 1 ,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-l,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
322.0
167.8
167.8
165.8
231.9
322.3
204.4
240.4
92.1
122.2
107.2
107.2
252.7
187.4
181.4
133.4
133.4
131.4
137.4
197.4
197.4
269.5
255.5
147.4
101.2
213.1
697.6
50.9
86.1
62.5
106.2
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
7.91E-06 (f)
1.10E+03
2.97E+03
200
100
25
l.OOE+06
30
526
3.37E+04
1.66E+04
782
0.74
3.10E+03
170
35
1.33E+03
4.42E+03
1.10E+03
1.10E+03
1.20E+03
800
140
268
1.75E+03
5.50E+04 (e)
350
8
l.OOE+06
2.00E+04
2.76E+03
161
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
6.10
2.71
2.07
2.21
2.32
3.51
0
2.83
2.43
0.02
1.24
1.24
4.31
2.05
2.97
3.96
2.16
1.73
2.10
2.11
2.93
2.25
1.74
1.43
1.66
1.79
1.05
3.19
0
0.45
1.04
3.09
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0.014
5.10E-03
0
0
84
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.070
0
0
0
0.64
2.73E-05
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.017
0
0
0.088
0
0
0
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
1.13E+04
1.59E+07
0
0
9.00E+06
0
0
0
0
0
2.80E+04
l.OOE+04
0
0
2.40E+06
4.95E+04
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.60E+03
0
0
3.00E+05
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0148 (i)
0.0287
0.0293
0.0298
0.0291
0.0282 (i)
0.0290
0.0173
0.0328
0.0271
0.0265
0.0303
0.0315
0.0322
0.0319
0.0255
0.0291
0.0247
0.0315
0.0378
0.0267
B7
-------
Constituent Chemical Properties
CAS
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
Chemical Name
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
Molecular Weight
(g/mol) (a)
106.2
106.2
318.5
65.4
Solubility
(mg/L) (b)
178
185
175
l.OOE+06
Log Koc
(Log(ml/g)) (c)
3.02
3.12
3.08
0
Hydrolysis Rate Constants (c)
Acid
Catalyzed (Ka
)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
0
Neutral (Kn)
(1/yr)
0
0
0
0
Base Catalyzed
(Kb)(l/mol/yr)
0
0
0
Diffusion
Coefficient in
Water (Dw)
(m2/yr) (d)
0.0270
0.0266
0.0268
Note: Data sources for chemical property values are indicated in the column headings; exceptions are noted in parentheses for individual chemical values.
Data sources:
a. http://chemfmder.cambridgesoft.com (CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001)
b. USEPA. 1997b. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM). SCDMWIN 1.0 (SCDM Windows User's Version), Version 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington DC: GPO. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/scdm/index.htm. Accessed July 2001
c. Kollig, H. P. (ed.). 1993. Environmental fate consultants for organic chemicals under consideration for EPA's hazardous waste identification projects. Environmental
Research Laboratory, Office of R&D, USEPA, Athens, GA.
d. Calculated based on Water 9. USEPA. 2001. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/index.html.
Accessed July 2001.
e. Sycracuse Research Corporation (SRC). 1999. CHEMFATE Chemical Search, Environmental Science Center, Syracuse, NY. http://esc.syrres.com/efdb/Chemfate.htm.
Accessed July 2001.
f. Calculated based on USEPA. 2000. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3.
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC: GPO.
g. USNLM (U.S. National Library of Medicine). 2001. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen7HSDB. Accessed July 2001.
h. Budavari, S. (ed). 1996. The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs andBiologicals. 12th edition. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co.
i. Calculated based on USEPA. 1987. Process Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and Heavy Metals in Surface Waters. Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office (GPO).
B8
-------
APPENDIX C
TIER 1 INPUT PARAMETERS
-------
Table C.I: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
8
!
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of
Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Katio of Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
m
g/cm3
L/kg
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
40.5
6.36
1 .OOE-05
1.00E-05
9,340
10
486
22.0
0.0135
0.0135
48,200
25
2,430
49.3
0.0686
0.0658
94,500
50
12,100
110
0.122
0.109
199,000
75
52,600
229
0.308
0.274
521 ,000
90
142,000
376
0.438
0.411
1,810,000
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
1.08
1.20E+10
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.880
0.737
1.32
0.794
2.57
0.889
4.09
1.33
6.13
1.45
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00377
0.129
1.03
0.0106
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00358
1.60
0.594
0.596
1.20
0.0489
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0341
1.60
2.04
0.935
1.27
0.0609
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0567
1.65
7.80
1.52
1.37
0.0746
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.1020
1.65
35.0
2.71
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.177
1.67
169
5.90
1.82
0.0937
0.450
42.7
0.959
0.289
1.67
2,450
21.8
2.50
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.69
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.0004
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.0015
0.107
1.30
4.27
174
0.00557
0.164
1.43
7.62
804
0.0191
0.236
1.56
14.3
1,890
0.0409
0.296
1.63
32.4
11,000
0.0762
0.334
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.426
1.80
914
4,290,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.0009
3.15
0.002
16.3
0.0057
55.0
0.0151
321
0.0310
1,320
0.491
11,000
chemical-specific value
0.109
0.0136
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000164
0.928
0.116
0.00580
7.50
5.17
0.000132
2.72
0.340
0.0170
12.5
6.05
0.000234
6.18
0.773
0.0387
12.5
6.81
0.000433
9.76
1.22
0.0610
17.5
7.41
0.000810
14.5
1.81
0.0903
22.5
7.92
0.00139
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.00984
150
0.00
0.00321
0.945
2.52
6.42
16.4
47.0
897
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
USEPA, 2001
Policy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Policy for Tier 1
No data available
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.2: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
8
!
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Saturated Zone (cont'd)
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Sediment Thickness (Thickness of Sludge)
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
9.30
3.05
0.0000100
3.78E-15
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
174
13.2
0.00990
0.270
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
401
20.0
0.0465
0.521
50.0
0.00
0.993
50
1,770
42.1
0.144
1.14
50.0
1.22
1.81
75
6,970
83.5
0.269
2.27
50.0
3.05
2.95
90
28,300
168
0.377
3.51
50.0
4.57
4.24
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
22.3
95.0
33.5
18.2
0.20
0.00
0.00224
0.104
1.03
0.00997
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00285
1.60
90.0
0.318
0.516
1.18
0.0525
0.410
2.74
0.0803
0.0316
1.60
240
1.08
0.801
1.23
0.0674
0.430
4.27
0.114
0.0552
1.65
360
4.94
1.36
1.31
0.0812
0.430
9.14
0.22
0.100
1 .6700
800
43.8
3.19
1.61
0.0905
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.181
1.67
5,000
301
7.88
1.91
0.0976
0.450
35.4
0.799
0.302
1.67
5,000
2,420
22.3
2.43
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.98
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000400
0.0500
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00145
0.108
1.29
4.57
126
0.00546
0.162
1.43
7.62
315
0.0196
0.233
1.56
15.2
2,210
0.0418
0.294
1.63
30.5
9,780
0.0777
0.333
1.70
79.3
24,800
0.211
0.430
1.80
914
7,660,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000508
2.48
0.00200
11.1
0.00670
43.4
0.0141
227
0.0330
814
0.538
10,800
chemical-specific value
0.104
0.0130
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000128
0.802
0.100
0.00501
7.5
5.21
0.000135
2.44
0.305
0.0152
12.5
6.06
0.000235
5.71
0.714
0.0357
17.5
6.81
0.000430
9.01
1.13
0.0563
17.5
7.42
0.000790
15.6
1.95
0.0976
17.5
7.91
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.69
0.0120
150
0.00
0.000126
0.953
2.49
6.04
15.2
39.4
904
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985;
Carsel and others, 1 988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA'STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Dolicy for Tier 1
Dolicy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.3: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, No Liner Scenario
Input
Type
0
£J
$
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
ASH
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Land Surface
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsatu rated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm (soil/water distribution coeff)
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.0003
10
20.2
4.49
0.0508
0.0602
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.128
50
121
11.0
0.145
0.255
75
1,210
34.8
0.282
0.391
90
4,170
64.6
0.417
0.538
100
1,940,000
1,390
1.84
1.82
20.0
0.00
0.00347
0.120
1.02
0.0114
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00421
1.60
0.617
0.624
1.20
0.0487
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0339
1.60
2.10
0.946
1.26
0.0608
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0569
1.65
8.32
1.55
1.38
0.0742
0.450
7.01
0.174
0.100
1.65
36.2
2.71
1.53
0.0854
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.175
1.67
165
5.76
1.82
0.0934
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,400
20.2
2.52
0.114
0.450
610
1.00
3.56
1.67
chem cal-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00153
0.105
1.30
3.60
126
0.00549
0.161
1.43
7.38
317
0.0193
0.235
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0408
0.297
1.63
33.5
11,000
0.0740
0.335
1.69
91.4
31,500
0.212
0.421
1.80
914
6,750,000
1.00
0.000002
0.101
0.0009
2.69
0.00200
10.8
0.00570
46.8
0.0170
272
0.0330
1,260
0.301
10,900
chem cal-specific value
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000128
0.848
0.106
0.00530
7.50
5.20
0.000132
2.50
0.313
0.0156
12.5
6.07
0.000237
5.59
0.699
0.0350
12.5
6.81
0.000437
8.71
1.09
0.0544
17.5
7.41
0.000794
14.7
1.83
0.0916
22.5
7.90
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.00998
150
0.00
0.000308
0.868
2.44
6.27
16.9
47.7
892
chem cal-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
USEPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorterand Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among
the three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.4: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Land Application Unit Scenario
Input
Type
Source
Unsaturated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles
0
20.2
4.49
0.00001
0.00001
10
40.5
6.36
0.0104
0.0130
25
4,050
63.6
0.0686
0.0704
50
40,500
201
0.110
0.110
75
182,000
427
0.212
0.201
90
648,000
805
0.326
0.326
100
80,900,000
8,990
0.745
0.745
40.0
0.00
0.00224
0.0926
1.04
0.0126
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00418
1.60
0.586
0.605
1.20
0.0498
0.410
2.13
0.0669
0.0346
1.60
2.01
0.929
1.26
0.0613
0.430
4.57
0.121
0.0578
1.65
7.80
1.51
1.37
0.0749
0.450
8.53
0.208
0.102
1.65
33.8
2.59
1.51
0.0862
0.450
18.3
0.423
0.175
1.67
147
5.41
1.78
0.0942
0.450
45.7
1.00
0.291
1.67
2,510
20.8
2.55
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.96
1.67
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
0.000402
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00143
0.105
1.29
3.96
94.6
0.00545
0.162
1.43
7.62
315
0.0195
0.235
1.56
19.5
2,190
0.0408
0.295
1.63
53.3
11,000
0.0778
0.334
1.70
144
31,500
0.212
0.427
1.80
914
6,310,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.000556
2.34
0.00200
9.93
0.00800
50.2
0.0223
316
0.0430
1,210
0.430
10,900
chemical-specific va ue
0.108
0.0134
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000149
1.02
0.128
0.00639
7.50
5.20
0.000130
2.99
0.374
0.0187
12.5
6.07
0.000229
6.70
0.838
0.0419
12.5
6.82
0.000421
10.7
1.34
0.0669
17.5
7.42
0.000781
16.1
2.02
0.101
17.5
7.89
0.00133
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.0120
150
0.00
0.0000963
1.03
2.83
7.95
21.7
60.1
882
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
US EPA, 1996
Assumption of LAU Design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada, 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA's STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 6,557 iterations.
-------
Table C.5: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
Source
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of
Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Ratio of Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
m
g/cm3
L/kg
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
40.5
6.36
0.00001
0.00001
81,100
10
567
23.8
0.0135
0.00944
228,000
25
2,480
49.8
0.0686
0.0253
376,000
50
12,100
110
0.130
0.0432
728,000
75
54,600
234
0.312
0.0445
1,370,000
90
149,000
386
0.446
0.0486
2,930,000
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
0.0526
1.63E+10
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.883
0.737
1.32
0.794
2.58
0.889
4.09
1.33
6.14
1.45
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00377
0.129
1.04
0.0106
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00358
1.60
0.598
0.595
1.20
0.0489
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0340
1.60
2.06
0.935
1.27
0.0611
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0568
1.65
7.79
1.52
1.37
0.0746
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.101
1.65
35.0
2.72
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.177
1.67
169
5.92
1.82
0.0937
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.288
1.67
2,450
21.8
2.50
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.69
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000400
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00151
0.107
1.30
4.03
141
0.00558
0.164
1.43
7.62
631
0.0192
0.236
1.56
12.2
1,890
0.0411
0.295
1.63
32.0
11,000
0.0765
0.334
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.426
1.80
914
4,290,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.0009
2.97
0.002
14.5
0.00570
52.2
0.0153
297
0.0310
1,280
0.491
1 1 ,000
chemical-specific value
0.109
0.0136
0.005
7.50
3.21
0.0000164
0.916
0.114
0.00572
7.50
5.18
0.000131
2.71
0.338
0.0169
12.5
6.05
0.000234
6.15
0.769
0.0385
12.5
6.82
0.000434
9.72
1.22
0.0608
17.5
7.41
0.000810
14.4
1.80
0.0899
22.5
7.93
0.00139
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.00984
150
0.00
0.00321
0.944
2.49
6.27
16.1
46.3
897
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
USEPA, 1999
USEPA, 2001
Dolicy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Dolicy for Tier 1
Mo data available
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1 988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Dolicy for Tier 1
Dolicy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.6: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
a
(8
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Operational Life (Duration of Leaching)
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Total Impoundment Operating Depth
Sediment Thickness (Thickness of Sludge)
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DEPTH
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
9.30
3.05
1.00E-05
3.78E-15
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
192
13.8
0.00990
0.042
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
581
24.1
0.0465
0.0629
50.0
0.00
1.06
50
1,860
43.1
0.147
0.108
50.0
1.52
1.83
75
7,810
88.4
0.269
0.163
50.0
3.05
3.09
90
29,800
173
0.377
0.217
50.0
4.57
4.27
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
0.798
95.0
33.5
18.2
4.63
0.20
0.00
0.00224
0.0983
1.02
0.00997
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00254
1.60
90.0
0.347
0.524
1.18
0.0522
0.410
2.44
0.0737
0.0314
1.60
240
1.20
0.815
1.23
0.0669
0.430
3.70
0.101
0.0550
1.65
chem
360
5.56
1.39
1.31
0.0809
0.430
7.62
0.188
0.0994
1.67
850
49.6
3.31
1.63
0.0904
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.180
1.67
1,800
308
7.97
1.92
0.0976
0.450
30.5
0.691
0.299
1.67
5,000
2,420
22.3
2.43
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.98
1.67
cal-specific value
1.00
chem cal-specific value
0.00
0.000400
0.0500
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00145
0.107
1.29
3.66
108
0.00540
0.162
1.43
7.32
315
0.0195
0.232
1.56
13.7
2,210
0.0415
0.294
1.63
30.0
6,940
0.0780
0.334
1.70
76.2
22,100
0.211
0.430
1.80
914
7,660,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000700
2.11
0.00200
9.36
chem
0.107
0.0134
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000128
0.808
0.101
0.00505
7.5
5.20
0.000136
2.49
0.311
0.0156
12.5
6.07
0.000236
0.00700
34.1
0.0150
193
0.0330
723
0.538
10,800
cal-specific va ue
5.78
0.723
0.0361
17.5
6.82
0.000433
9.06
1.13
0.0566
17.5
7.43
0.000794
15.5
1.94
0.0969
17.5
7.91
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.68
0.0103
150
0.00
0.000126
0.884
2.37
5.70
14.0
35.8
794
chem cal-specific va ue
1.00
chem cal-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Derived
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1 988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA's STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Dolicy for Tier 1
Dolicy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.7: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Single Liner Scenario
Input
Type
o
y
$
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
ASH
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsatu rated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.00001
10
20.2
4.49
0.0508
0.0264
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.0950
50
121
11.0
0.145
0.127
75
1,210
34.8
0.282
0.133
90
4,170
64.6
0.417
0.135
100
1,940,000
1,390
1.84
0.136
20.0
0.00
0.00347
0.120
1.02
0.0114
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00421
1.60
0.617
0.620
1.20
0.0487
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0339
1.60
2.09
0.942
1.26
0.0608
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0566
1.65
8.26
1.54
1.38
0.0743
0.450
7.01
0.174
0.100
1.65
35.8
2.70
1.53
0.0855
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.175
1.67
163
5.76
1.82
0.0935
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,400
20.2
2.52
0.114
0.450
610
1.00
3.56
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00153
0.105
1.30
3.60
126
0.00547
0.161
1.43
7.32
315
0.0192
0.235
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0408
0.298
1.63
33.2
11,000
0.0738
0.336
1.69
91.4
31,500
0.212
0.421
1.80
914
6,750,000
1.00
0.000002
0.101
0.0009
2.64
0.002
10.5
0.00570
45.7
0.0170
263
0.0330
1,240
0.301
10,900
chemical-specific value
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000128
0.845
0.106
0.00528
7.50
5.19
0.000132
2.50
0.312
0.0156
12.5
6.06
0.000237
5.60
0.700
0.0350
12.5
6.80
0.000437
8.73
1.09
0.0546
17.5
7.41
0.000793
14.8
1.85
0.0925
22.5
7.90
0.00137
40.0
5.00
0.250
22.5
9.69
0.00998
150
0.00
0.000308
0.868
2.43
6.24
16.9
47.4
892
chem cal-specific value
1.00
chem cal-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
USEPA, 1999
USEPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorterand Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied amor
the three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.8: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Landfill, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
Source
Unsaturated Zone
1 Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS11
SS12
SS13
FS1
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Fraction of Landfill Occupied by Waste of
Concern
Depth of Waste Disposal Facility
Density of Hazardous Waste
Ratio of Waste Concentration to Leachate
Concentration
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsaturated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Constant
Lognormal
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
unitless
m
g/cm3
L/kg
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard un
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles
0
40.5
6.36
0.00001
0.00
0.00
10
445
21.1
0.0226
0.00
0.00
25
2,480
49.8
0.0780
0.00
0.00
50
12,100
110
0.143
0.00
0.00
75
54,600
234
0.326
0.0000730
301,000,000
90
134,000
365
0.450
0.000169
1.09E+10
100
3,120,000
1,770
1.15
0.000401
8.33E+12
1.00
0.510
0.700
0.879
0.738
1.31
0.794
2.51
0.888
4.09
1.33
6.41
1.46
10.1
2.10
10000
0.00
0.00463
0.130
1.01
0.0118
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00347
1.60
0.608
0.614
1.20
0.0490
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0337
1.60
2.06
0.930
1.27
0.0613
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0566
1.65
8.35
1.54
1.38
0.0747
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.102
1.65
36.7
2.73
1.54
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.179
1.67
180
6.15
1.83
0.0937
0.450
36.6
0.825
0.294
1.67
2,390
20.3
2.47
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
1.60
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000401
0.0502
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00151
0.105
1.30
3.96
94.6
0.00538
0.163
1.43
7.62
315
0.0188
0.236
1.55
12.2
1,890
0.0413
0.296
1.63
30.5
11,000
0.0762
0.335
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.424
1.80
914
8,480,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.001
2.51
0.002
10.5
0.00570
45.6
0.0180
250
0.0330
1,200
0.483
10,800
chemical-specific value
0.111
0.0139
0.00500
7.50
3.20
0.00000858
0.958
0.120
0.00599
7.50
5.20
0.000135
2.91
0.364
0.0182
12.5
6.06
0.000238
6.38
0.797
0.0399
12.5
6.79
0.000443
9.87
1.23
0.0617
17.5
7.39
0.000814
14.7
1.84
0.0921
22.5
7.89
0.00140
40.0
4.99
0.250
22.5
9.70
0.0159
150
0.00
0.000936
0.974
2.48
6.07
15.6
44.4
867
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
TetraTech, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Policy for Tier 1
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Schanz and Salhotra, 1992
Policy for Tier 1
No data available
Carseland Parrish, 1988
Carseland Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carseland Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied
among the three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.9: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Surface Impoundment, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
Source
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
SS7
SS16
SS22
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Waste Water Ponding Depth
Total Impoundment Operating Depth
Sediment Thickness
Distance to Nearest Surface Water Body
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsatu rated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
DBGS
HZERO
DEPTH
DSLUDGE
DISSW
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m
m
m
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
9.30
3.05
1.00E-05
0.00
4.00
0.00
0.0100
10
206
14.4
0.00990
0.00
15.0
0.00
0.460
25
609
24.7
0.0465
0.00
50.0
0.00
1.07
50
2,020
45.0
0.168
0.0000488
50.0
1.52
1.83
75
8,760
93.6
0.271
0.000202
50.0
3.38
3.15
90
35,200
188
0.450
0.000498
50.0
4.57
4.27
100
4,860,000
2,200
1.84
0.00369
95.0
33.5
18.2
4.63
0.20
0.00
0.00437
0.109
1.02
0.00851
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00366
1.60
105
0.375
0.534
1.18
0.0521
0.410
1.83
0.0603
0.0319
1.60
240
1.28
0.817
1.23
0.0668
0.410
3.35
0.0937
0.0552
1.60
360
6.19
1.42
1.31
0.0809
0.430
6.10
0.154
0.0993
1.67
chemical-specific va
1,000
52.3
3.31
1.64
0.0902
0.430
15.2
0.354
0.180
1.67
2,000
305
8.06
1.93
0.0973
0.450
30.5
0.691
0.304
1.67
5,000
2,520
19.8
2.49
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
2.75
1.67
ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
0.000401
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00143
0.100
1.29
3.53
63.1
0.00538
0.160
1.43
6.10
284
0.0195
0.235
1.56
12.2
1,890
0.0407
0.296
1.63
24.4
5,990
0.0768
0.334
1.70
61.0
21,300
0.212
0.429
1.80
914
7,740,000
1.00
5.00E-07
0.100
0.000700
1.53
0.00200
7.44
0.00700
28.2
chemical-specific va
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.5
3.20
0.0000103
0.873
0.109
0.00546
7.5
5.22
0.000136
2.54
0.317
0.0159
12.5
6.08
0.000237
5.84
0.731
0.0365
17.5
6.80
0.000429
0.0151
183
0.0330
680
0.650
11,000
ue
9.11
1.14
0.0569
17.5
7.40
0.000796
13.7
1.72
0.0859
22.5
7.89
0.00135
40.0
5.00
0.250
27.5
9.69
0.00823
150
0.00
0.000118
0.803
2.18
5.38
13.1
31.9
908
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 2001
Derived
ABB 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Derived
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
USEPA, 2001
Derived
Assumption
USEPA, 2001
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1 988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET database
USEPA STORET database
Dolicy for Tier 1
Dolicy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Dolicy for Tier 1
The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among th<
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
Table C.10: IWEM Tier 1 Input Parameters for Waste Pile, Composite Liner Scenario
Input
Type
8
1
Unsatu rated Zone
Saturated Zone
Input
No.
SS1
SS2/3
SS5
SS6
SS10
SS15
US1
US2
US3
US4
US5
use
US7
US8
US9
US10
US11
US12
US13
AS1
AS2
ASS
AS4
ASS
AS6
AS7
ASS
AS9
AS10
AS11
AS12
AS13
AS14
AS15
AS16
AS17
AS20
AS21
AS22
AS23
AS24
Parameter
Area
Length/Width
Recharge Rate
Infiltration Rate
Duration of Leaching
Base Depth Below Grade
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Moisture Retention Parameter (alpha)
Moisture Retention Parameter (beta)
Residual Water Content
Saturated Water Content
Thickness of Unsatu rated Zone
Dispersivity
Percent Organic Matter
Bulk Density
Soil/Water Distribution Coefficient
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Chemical Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Average Particle Diameter
Aquifer Effective Porosity
Aquifer Bulk Density
Aquifer Saturated Thickness
Longitudinal Hydraulic Conductivity
Anisotropy Ratio
Hydraulic Gradient
Seepage Velocity
Retardation Factor
Longitudinal Dispersivity
Transverse Dispersivity
Vertical Dispersivity
Temperature of Ambient Aquifer Water
Ambient Groundwater pH
Fraction of Organic Carbon
Radial Distance of Observation Well from
Downgradient Edge of Waste Unit
Angle Off-Center of Observation Well
Depth of Well Below Water Table
Leading Coefficient of Freundlich Adsorption
Isotherm
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Exponent
Hydrolysis Degradation Rate Coefficient
Biodegradation Rate Coefficient
Input
Distribution Type
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Lognormal 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Johnson SB 1
Constant
Derived
Constant
Derived
Constant
Empirical
Derived
Derived
Regional Site-Based
Regional Site-Based
Constant
Regional Site-Based
Derived
Derived
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Gelhar Empirical
Regional Site-Based
Empirical
Johnson SB
Constant
Constant
Uniform
Derived
Constant
Derived
Derived
Units
(output)
m
m
m/yr
m/yr
yr
m
m/yr
1/m
unitless
unitless
unitless
m
m
unitless
g/cm3
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
cm
unitless
g/cm3
m
m/yr
unitless
unitless
m/yr
unitless
m
m
m
degrees C
standard units
unitless
m
degrees
m
cm3/g
unitless
1/yr
1/yr
Percentiles 2
0
5.06
2.25
0.00001
0.00
10
20.2
4.49
0.0495
0.00
25
20.2
4.49
0.0787
0.00
50
121
11.0
0.147
0.00
75
1,210
34.8
0.286
0.0000730
90
4,170
64.6
0.419
0.000167
100
2,020,000
1,420
1.68
0.000401
20.0
0.00
0.00684
0.100
1.02
0.0156
0.410
0.305
0.0267
0.00250
1.60
0.611
0.616
1.20
0.0492
0.410
1.68
0.0570
0.0336
1.60
2.04
0.939
1.26
0.0610
0.430
3.96
0.107
0.0570
1.65
8.26
1.53
1.37
0.0745
0.450
6.10
0.154
0.101
1.65
35.5
2.74
1.53
0.0857
0.450
15.2
0.354
0.176
1.67
159
6.00
1.82
0.0937
0.450
34.1
0.770
0.291
1.67
2,520
20.2
2.45
0.115
0.450
610
1.00
2.11
1.67
chemical-specific value
1.00
chemical-specific value
0.00
0.000402
0.0501
1.16
0.305
3.15
0.00149
0.106
1.29
3.73
94.6
0.00563
0.168
1.43
7.32
315
0.0200
0.238
1.56
15.2
1,890
0.0422
0.298
1.64
32.0
11,000
0.0781
0.335
1.70
91.4
31,500
0.211
0.423
1.80
914
4,440,000
1.00
0.000002
0.100
0.000903
2.08
0.00200
8.68
0.00570
42.2
0.0180
245
0.0330
1,210
0.390
10,900
chemical-specific va ue
0.101
0.0126
0.00500
7.50
3.21
0.0000116
0.864
0.108
0.00540
7.50
5.23
0.000133
2.58
0.322
0.0161
12.5
6.08
0.000236
5.60
0.701
0.0350
12.5
6.82
0.000435
8.72
1.09
0.0545
17.5
7.42
0.000809
15.2
1.90
0.0948
22.5
7.93
0.00142
40.0
5.00
.250
22.5
9.68
0.0116
150
0.00
0.00270
0.947
2.45
6.08
16.2
46.0
914
chemical-specific va ue
1.00
chemical-specific va ue
0.00
References
USEPA, 1986 and 1997b
Derived
ABB, 1995 and USEPA, 1997b
Tetra Tech, 2001
USEPA, 1996
Assumption of waste pile design
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
Carsel and Parrish, 1988
API, 1989
Gelhar, 1986; EPRI, 1985; USEPA, 1997a
Carsel and others, 1988
Carsel and others, 1 988
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
Shae, 1974
Davis, 1969; McWorter and Sunada 1977
Freeze and Cherry, 1979
API, 1989
API, 1989
Assumption
API, 1989
Derived
Derived
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
EPRI, 1985; Gelhar, 1986; Gelhar, 1992
Collins, 1925
USEPA STORET
USEPA STORET
Policy for Tier 1
Policy for Tier 1
API, 1989
Derived
Assumption
Derived
Policy for Tier 1
1 The actual distribution type depends upon the soil type; the distribution types given here corespond to the silty loam soil (the most common type). In the Tier 1 modeling runs, soil type is automatically varied among the
three soil types; each soil type has it's own values/distributions of values for the soil parameters. The values presented in this table include all three soil types.
2 Values were generated using a Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations.
-------
APPENDIX D
INFILTRATION RATE DATA
-------
Table D-l. LF HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
KY
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
No Liner
SLT
0.0000
1.6833
1.0762
0.3416
0.2116
0.1471
0.0564
0.0239
0.0008
0.2332
0.1953
0.0549
0.1359
0.1082
0.0000
0.3363
0.2609
0.0005
0.0798
0.1554
0.0780
0.1529
0.0765
0.1585
0.0599
0.0008
0.1143
0.0135
0.1090
0.1435
0.3122
0.0076
0.0000
0.0104
0.0239
0.0307
0.0099
0.0442
0.0000
0.0036
0.3256
0.1709
SNL
0.0000
1.8354
1.1494
0.3993
0.2700
0.2045
0.0721
0.0300
0.0094
0.2383
0.2464
0.1049
0.1781
0.1491
0.0008
0.4171
0.3287
0.0013
0.1138
0.2210
0.1212
0.1989
0.1158
0.2057
0.1067
0.0008
0.1641
0.0345
0.1452
0.1676
0.3914
0.0130
0.0000
0.0234
0.0630
0.0368
0.0074
0.0627
0.0000
0.0069
0.3896
0.2228
SCL
0.0003
1.4610
0.9647
0.2822
0.1674
0.1227
0.0554
0.0196
0.0038
0.1542
0.1615
0.0384
0.1166
0.0886
0.0000
0.2738
0.2123
0.0086
0.0620
0.1539
0.0823
0.1224
0.0663
0.1372
0.0531
0.0036
0.1156
0.0226
0.1102
0.0704
0.2492
0.0081
0.0003
0.0117
0.0226
0.0381
0.0099
0.0323
0.0003
0.0074
0.2705
0.1405
Clay Liner
0.0000
0.0338
0.0526
0.0477
0.0445
0.0432
0.0295
0.0188
0.0046
0.0445
0.0444
0.0241
0.0432
0.0432
0.0013
0.0486
0.0477
0.0188
0.0432
0.0444
0.0409
0.0409
0.0409
0.0432
0.0241
0.0188
0.0409
0.0094
0.0374
0.0409
0.0486
0.0000
0.0013
0.0094
0.0241
0.0046
0.0188
0.0196
0.0188
0.0432
0.0362
0.0445
D.l-1
-------
Table D-l. LF HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
101
73
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
24
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
33
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
City
Honolulu
Indianapolis
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
Medford
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
State
HI
IN
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
OR
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
No Liner
SLT
0.0523
0.1300
0.1684
0.1511
0.4107
0.3647
0.0033
0.0000
0.3294
0.3531
0.0787
0.3081
0.0912
0.2073
0.1450
0.0180
0.1062
0.2268
0.4674
0.3520
0.5893
0.2436
0.3122
0.0671
0.0612
0.1016
0.2007
0.0000
0.0894
0.1900
0.0000
0.4171
0.2294
0.2131
0.0069
0.0508
0.0005
0.1212
0.1024
0.0130
0.1095
0.0221
SNL
0.0945
0.1862
0.2136
0.2106
0.4460
0.4641
0.0053
0.0000
0.3970
0.4336
0.0950
0.3612
0.1400
0.2309
0.2201
0.0254
0.1483
0.2812
0.5395
0.4628
0.7445
0.2944
0.0000
0.0795
0.0942
0.1697
0.2609
0.0003
0.1313
0.2540
0.0000
0.4387
0.2840
0.2863
0.0132
0.1003
0.0071
0.1598
0.0876
0.0269
0.1646
0.0340
SCL
0.0366
0.1064
0.1392
0.1102
0.3543
0.2817
0.0094
0.0018
0.2700
0.2824
0.0699
0.2570
0.0686
0.2096
0.1019
0.0135
0.0879
0.1943
0.3769
0.2855
0.4503
0.1969
0.2685
0.0536
0.0389
0.0805
0.1641
0.0003
0.0792
0.1521
0.0000
0.3927
0.1872
0.1753
0.0084
0.0495
0.0033
0.1008
0.0945
0.0185
0.0820
0.0241
Clay Liner
0.0048
0.0444
0.0445
0.0362
0.0486
0.0492
0.0188
0.0000
0.0486
0.0477
0.0013
0.0444
0.0409
0.0432
0.0492
0.0094
0.0432
0.0445
0.0486
0.0526
0.0477
0.0444
0.0362
0.0291
0.0246
0.0362
0.0444
0.0000
0.0432
0.0526
0.0188
0.0432
0.0445
0.0445
0.0188
0.0409
0.0013
0.0432
0.0013
0.0432
0.0253
0.0013
D.l-2
-------
Table D-l. LF HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
102
15
48
68
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
Notes:
SLT =
SNL =
SCL =
City
San Juan
Santa maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
Silt Loam cover
State
PR
CA
MI
NY
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
Sandy Loam cover
Silty Clay Loam cover
No Liner
SLT
0.1267
0.0947
0.1651
0.1473
0.1814
0.4384
0.2296
0.0602
0.2545
0.5913
0.0658
0.1049
0.0000
0.0686
0.2611
0.2891
0.2022
0.0000
SNL
0.1923
0.1151
0.2101
0.1928
0.2428
0.4582
0.2939
0.0831
0.3251
0.7308
0.1031
0.1483
0.0003
0.1006
0.3490
0.3556
0.2591
0.0023
SCL
0.0945
0.0841
0.1435
0.1224
0.1427
0.4077
0.1842
0.0554
0.2118
0.4564
0.0475
0.0762
0.0005
0.0465
0.1783
0.2332
0.1697
0.0003
Clay Liner
0.0193
0.0013
0.0432
0.0445
0.0444
0.0432
0.0362
0.0342
0.0445
0.0477
0.0253
0.0350
0.0000
0.0241
0.0477
0.0362
0.0445
0.0188
D.l-3
-------
Table D-2. WP HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
KY
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
No Liner/ Waste Type
Low
0.0003
1.5373
1.2100
0.5160
0.3140
0.2570
0.0502
0.0259
0.0003
0.3220
0.3690
0.2270
0.2130
0.1880
0.0003
0.5230
0.4830
0.0043
0.1680
0.3100
0.1820
0.3100
0.1720
0.2350
0.2580
0.0008
0.2510
0.1010
0.1360
0.2630
0.4900
0.0231
0.0003
0.0077
0.0404
0.0422
0.0366
0.0963
0.0003
0.0259
0.4840
0.2790
Medium
0.0003
1.8146
1.2100
0.5160
0.3140
0.2570
0.0725
0.0259
0.0003
0.3220
0.3690
0.2270
0.2130
0.1880
0.0003
0.5230
0.4830
0.0043
0.1680
0.3100
0.1820
0.3100
0.1720
0.2350
0.2580
0.0008
0.2510
0.1010
0.1360
0.2630
0.4900
0.0231
0.0003
0.0167
0.0404
0.0422
0.0366
0.0963
0.0003
0.0259
0.4840
0.2790
High
0.0003
1.8789
1.2100
0.5160
0.3140
0.2570
0.1225
0.0259
0.0003
0.3220
0.3690
0.2270
0.2130
0.1880
0.0003
0.5230
0.4830
0.0043
0.1680
0.3100
0.1820
0.3100
0.1720
0.2350
0.2580
0.0008
0.2510
0.1010
0.1360
0.2630
0.4900
0.0231
0.0003
0.0777
0.0404
0.0422
0.0366
0.0963
0.0003
0.0259
0.4840
0.2790
Clay Liner/Waste Type
Low
0.0016
0.1352
0.1316
0.1184
0.1193
0.1125
0.0352
0.0124
0.0136
0.1193
0.1062
0.0050
0.1125
0.1125
0.0000
0.1255
0.1184
0.0124
0.1125
0.1062
0.0688
0.0688
0.0688
0.1125
0.0050
0.0124
0.0688
0.0033
0.0481
0.0688
0.1255
0.0968
0.0000
0.0098
0.0105
0.0136
0.0124
0.0422
0.0124
0.1262
0.0804
0.1193
Medium
0.0151
0.1357
0.1355
0.1351
0.1286
0.1273
0.0364
0.0689
0.0434
0.1286
0.1336
0.1329
0.1273
0.1273
0.0556
0.1352
0.1351
0.0689
0.1273
0.1336
0.1325
0.1325
0.1325
0.1273
0.1329
0.0689
0.1325
0.1063
0.1153
0.1325
0.1352
0.1350
0.0556
0.0118
0.1228
0.0434
0.0689
0.1347
0.0689
0.1328
0.1273
0.1286
High
0.0074
0.1354
0.1350
0.1347
0.1279
0.1266
0.0660
0.0950
0.0606
0.1279
0.1332
0.1318
0.1266
0.1266
0.0718
0.1349
0.1347
0.0950
0.1266
0.1332
0.1321
0.1321
0.1321
0.1266
0.1318
0.0950
0.1321
0.1193
0.1114
0.1321
0.1349
0.1344
0.0718
0.0407
0.1234
0.0606
0.0950
0.1342
0.0950
0.1313
0.1266
0.1279
D.2-1
-------
Table D-2. WP HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
101
73
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
24
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
33
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
City
Honolulu
Indianapolis
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
Medford
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
State
HI
IN
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
OR
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
No Liner/ Waste Type
Low
0.0501
0.2690
0.2610
0.4090
0.5420
0.6070
0.0020
0.0003
0.4520
0.5380
0.1330
0.2690
0.2020
0.2500
0.4230
0.0757
0.1760
0.3340
0.6140
0.5420
0.8490
0.3990
0.4540
0.1620
0.2420
0.3840
0.3530
0.0003
0.1720
0.3030
0.0003
0.5060
0.3250
0.3480
0.0003
0.1480
0.0135
0.2130
0.1230
0.0193
0.2950
0.0658
Medium
0.1083
0.2690
0.2610
0.4090
0.5420
0.6070
0.0020
0.0003
0.4520
0.5380
0.1330
0.2690
0.2020
0.2500
0.4230
0.0757
0.1760
0.3340
0.6140
0.5420
0.8490
0.3990
0.4540
0.1620
0.2420
0.3840
0.3530
0.0003
0.1720
0.3030
0.0003
0.5060
0.3250
0.3480
0.0003
0.1480
0.0135
0.2130
0.1230
0.0193
0.2950
0.0658
High
0.1983
0.2690
0.2610
0.4090
0.5420
0.6070
0.0020
0.0003
0.4520
0.5380
0.1330
0.2690
0.2020
0.2500
0.4230
0.0757
0.1760
0.3340
0.6140
0.5420
0.8490
0.3990
0.4540
0.1620
0.2420
0.3840
0.3530
0.0003
0.1720
0.3030
0.0003
0.5060
0.3250
0.3480
0.0003
0.1480
0.0135
0.2130
0.1230
0.0193
0.2950
0.0658
Clay Liner/Waste Type
Low
0.0323
0.1062
0.1193
0.0804
0.1255
0.0038
0.0124
0.0968
0.1255
0.1184
0.0000
0.1062
0.0688
0.1262
0.0038
0.0033
0.1125
0.1193
0.1255
0.1316
0.1184
0.1062
0.0804
0.0202
0.0075
0.0804
0.1062
0.0968
0.1125
0.1316
0.0124
0.1125
0.1193
0.1193
0.0124
0.0688
0.0000
0.1125
0.0000
0.1262
0.0200
0.0000
Medium
0.0494
0.1336
0.1286
0.1273
0.1352
0.0236
0.0689
0.1350
0.1352
0.1351
0.0556
0.1336
0.1325
0.1328
0.0236
0.1063
0.1273
0.1286
0.1352
0.1355
0.1351
0.1336
0.1273
0.1264
0.1310
0.1273
0.1336
0.1350
0.1273
0.1355
0.0689
0.1273
0.1286
0.1286
0.0689
0.1325
0.0556
0.1273
0.0556
0.1328
0.1339
0.0556
High
0.0871
0.1332
0.1279
0.1266
0.1349
0.0297
0.0950
0.1344
0.1349
0.1347
0.0718
0.1332
0.1321
0.1313
0.0297
0.1193
0.1266
0.1279
0.1349
0.1350
0.1347
0.1332
0.1266
0.1265
0.1298
0.1266
0.1332
0.1344
0.1266
0.1350
0.0950
0.1266
0.1279
0.1279
0.0950
0.1321
0.0718
0.1266
0.0718
0.1313
0.1333
0.0718
D.2-2
-------
Table D-2. WP HELP-derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
102
15
48
68
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
Notes:
City
San Juan
Santa maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
State
PR
CA
MI
NY
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
No Liner/ Waste Type
Low
0.1498
0.1510
0.2370
0.2750
0.3410
0.5310
0.4460
0.1520
0.4100
0.8220
0.2720
0.2470
0.0003
0.2490
0.5640
0.4670
0.3310
0.0003
Medium
0.2883
0.1510
0.2370
0.2750
0.3410
0.5310
0.4460
0.1520
0.4100
0.8220
0.2720
0.2470
0.0003
0.2490
0.5640
0.4670
0.3310
0.0003
High
0.4442
0.1510
0.2370
0.2750
0.3410
0.5310
0.4460
0.1520
0.4100
0.8220
0.2720
0.2470
0.0003
0.2490
0.5640
0.4670
0.3310
0.0003
Clay Liner/Waste Type
Low
0.0637
0.0000
0.1125
0.1193
0.1062
0.1125
0.0804
0.0264
0.1193
0.1184
0.0200
0.0174
0.0968
0.0050
0.1184
0.0804
0.1193
0.0124
Medium
0.0793
0.0556
0.1273
0.1286
0.1336
0.1273
0.1273
0.1262
0.1286
0.1351
0.1339
0.1305
0.1350
0.1329
0.1351
0.1273
0.1286
0.0689
Low, Medium, and High denote representative waste types with different hydraulic conductivities:
Low = Fine-grained waste (e.g., fly ash), Hydraulic conductivity is 5xlO~5 cm/sec
Medium = Medium-grained waste (e.g., bottom ash), Hydraulic conductivity is 0.0041 cm/sec
High = Coarse-grained waste (e.g., slag), Hydraulic conductivity is 0.041 cm/sec
High
0.1114
0.0718
0.1266
0.1279
0.1332
0.1266
0.1266
0.1255
0.1279
0.1347
0.1333
0.1302
0.1344
0.1318
0.1347
0.1266
0.1279
0.0950
D.2-3
-------
Table D-3. LAU HELP-Derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
19
98
82
95
62
44
99
7
2
67
75
35
43
41
18
86
93
10
42
74
52
55
51
38
36
3
53
29
32
54
88
23
16
100
28
1
6
27
4
25
77
59
101
73
City
Albuquerque
Annette
Astoria
Atlanta
Augusta
Bangor
Bethel
Bismarck
Boise
Boston
Bridgeport
Brownsville
Burlington
Caribou
Cedar City
Central Park
Charleston
Cheyenne
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbia
Columbus
Concord
Dallas
Denver
Des Moines
Dodge City
E. Lansing
E. St. Louis
Edison
El Paso
Ely
Fairbanks
Flagstaff
Fresno
Glasgow
Grand Island
Grand Junction
Great Falls
Greensboro
Hartford
Honolulu
Indianapolis
State
NM
AK
OR
GA
ME
ME
AK
ND
ID
MA
CT
TX
VT
ME
UT
NY
SC
WY
IL
OH
OH
MO
OH
NH
TX
CO
IA
KS
MI
IL
NJ
TX
NV
AK
AZ
CA
KY
NE
CO
MT
NC
CT
HI
IN
No Liner
SLT
0.0000
1.8049
1.0762
0.3416
0.2116
0.1471
0.1849
0.0239
0.0008
0.2332
0.1953
0.0549
0.1359
0.1082
0.0000
0.3363
0.2609
0.0005
0.0798
0.1554
0.0780
0.1529
0.0765
0.1585
0.0599
0.0008
0.1143
0.0135
0.1090
0.1435
0.3122
0.0076
0.0000
0.1463
0.0239
0.0307
0.0099
0.0442
0.0000
0.0036
0.3256
0.1709
0.0541
0.1300
SNL
0.0000
1.9771
1.1494
0.3993
0.2700
0.2045
0.1981
0.0300
0.0094
0.2383
0.2464
0.1049
0.1781
0.1491
0.0008
0.4171
0.3287
0.0013
0.1138
0.2210
0.1212
0.1989
0.1158
0.2057
0.1067
0.0008
0.1641
0.0345
0.1452
0.1676
0.3914
0.0130
0.0000
0.1483
0.0630
0.0368
0.0074
0.0627
0.0000
0.0069
0.3896
0.2228
0.0983
0.1862
SCL
0.0003
1.5159
0.9647
0.2822
0.1674
0.1227
0.1781
0.0196
0.0038
0.1542
0.1615
0.0384
0.1166
0.0886
0.0000
0.2738
0.2123
0.0086
0.0620
0.1539
0.0823
0.1224
0.0663
0.1372
0.0531
0.0036
0.1156
0.0226
0.1102
0.0704
0.2492
0.0081
0.0003
0.1445
0.0226
0.0381
0.0099
0.0323
0.0003
0.0074
0.2705
0.1405
0.0363
0.1064
D.3-1
-------
Table D-3. LAU HELP-Derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
66
78
85
96
11
20
87
90
12
69
50
24
97
30
47
65
89
83
92
70
80
33
37
76
71
21
39
84
5
40
64
63
8
49
17
45
13
26
58
14
102
15
48
68
City
Ithaca
Jacksonville
Knoxville
Lake Charles
Lander
Las Vegas
Lexington
Little Rock
Los Angeles
Lynchburg
Madison
Medford
Miami
Midland
Montpelier
Nashua
Nashville
New Haven
New Orleans
New York City
Norfolk
North Omaha
Oklahoma City
Orlando
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Pittsburg
Plainfield
Pocatello
Portland
Portland
Providence
Pullman
Put-in-Bay
Rapid City
Rutland
Sacramento
Salt Lake City
San Antonio
San Diego
San Juan
Santa maria
Sault St. Marie
Schenectady
State
NY
FL
TN
LA
WY
NV
KY
AK
CA
VA
WI
OR
FL
TX
VT
NH
TN
CT
LA
NY
VA
NE
OK
FL
PA
AZ
PA
MA
ID
OR
ME
RI
WA
OH
SD
VT
CA
UT
TX
CA
PR
CA
MI
NY
No Liner
SLT
0.1684
0.1511
0.4107
0.3647
0.0033
0.0000
0.3294
0.3531
0.0787
0.3081
0.0912
0.2073
0.1450
0.0180
0.1062
0.2268
0.4674
0.3520
0.5893
0.2436
0.3122
0.0671
0.0612
0.1016
0.2007
0.0000
0.0894
0.1900
0.0000
0.4171
0.2294
0.2131
0.0069
0.0508
0.0005
0.1212
0.1024
0.0130
0.1095
0.0221
0.1491
0.0947
0.1651
0.1473
SNL
0.2136
0.2106
0.4460
0.4641
0.0053
0.0000
0.3970
0.4336
0.0950
0.3612
0.1400
0.2309
0.2201
0.0254
0.1483
0.2812
0.5395
0.4628
0.7445
0.2944
0.0000
0.0795
0.0942
0.1697
0.2609
0.0003
0.1313
0.2540
0.0000
0.4387
0.2840
0.2863
0.0132
0.1003
0.0071
0.1598
0.0876
0.0269
0.1646
0.0340
0.2164
0.1151
0.2101
0.1928
SCL
0.1392
0.1102
0.3543
0.2817
0.0094
0.0018
0.2700
0.2824
0.0699
0.2570
0.0686
0.2096
0.1019
0.0135
0.0879
0.1943
0.3769
0.2855
0.4503
0.1969
0.2685
0.0536
0.0389
0.0805
0.1641
0.0003
0.0792
0.1521
0.0000
0.3927
0.1872
0.1753
0.0084
0.0495
0.0033
0.1008
0.0945
0.0185
0.0820
0.0241
0.1049
0.0841
0.1435
0.1224
D.3-2
-------
Table D-3. LAU HELP-Derived Infiltration Rates (m/yr)
ID
72
46
81
31
60
91
57
56
22
34
94
79
61
9
Notes:
SLT =
SNL =
SCL =
City
Seabrook
Seattle
Shreveport
St. Cloud
Syracuse
Tallahassee
Tampa
Topeka
Tucson
Tulsa
W. Palm Beach
Watkinsville
Worchester
Yakima
Silt Loam soil
Sandy Loam soil
State
NJ
WA
LA
MN
NY
FL
FL
KS
AZ
OK
FL
GA
MA
WA
Silty Clay Loam soil
No Liner
SLT
0.1814
0.4384
0.2296
0.0602
0.2545
0.5913
0.0658
0.1049
0.0000
0.0686
0.2611
0.2891
0.2022
0.0000
SNL
0.2428
0.4582
0.2939
0.0831
0.3251
0.7308
0.1031
0.1483
0.0003
0.1006
0.3490
0.3556
0.2591
0.0023
SCL
0.1427
0.4077
0.1842
0.0554
0.2118
0.4564
0.0475
0.0762
0.0005
0.0465
0.1783
0.2332
0.1697
0.0003
D.3-3
-------
Table D.4: Flow rate data used to develop landfill and waste pile composite liner infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001)
Landfill
Cell ID1
G228
G232
G233
G234
G235
G236
G237
G238
G239
G240
G241
G242
G243
G244
G245
G246
G247
G248
G249
G250
G251
G252
G232
G233
G234
G235
G236
Cell Type
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
closed
closed
closed
closed
closed
Average M
(L/ha/d)
5.85
11
0
2
4
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
>nthly LDS Flow
Rate
(m/y)
2.14E-04
4.02E-04
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
1.46E-04
3.65E-05
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
2.19E-04
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
7.30E-05
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
3.65E-05
O.OOE+00
Liner Type
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
GM/GCL
Type of
Waste3
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
MSW
Site Parameters
Location
Mid-Atlantic
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
Average
Annual
Rainfall
(mm)
NA
990
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
1040
760
1090
1090
1090
990
1040
1040
1040
1040
Subsurface Soil
Type
NA
Silty Clay
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand
NA
NA
NA
Silty Clay
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Sand & Gravel
Landfill Cell Construction/Operation Information
Cell Area
(ha)
51
4.7
2
2
1.7
1.7
2.8
3.9
2.6
3.8
3.3
3.9
3
4
3
2.8
2.8
4.5
3.8
4
2.4
2.8
4.7
2
2
1.7
1.7
GM Liner
Material4
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
GM Liner
Thickness
(mm)
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
1
1
1
1
GCL or CCL
Thickness
(mm)
NA
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
250
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Maximum
Height of
Waste
(m)
NA
NA
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
41
28
30
30
NA
24
24
24
24
End
Construction
Date
1988
May-92
Jun-88
Jun-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Sep-88
Dec-88
Jan-89
Jul-89
Dec-89
Feb-90
Feb-90
Oct-90
Jan-91
Apr-92
May-92
Jan-93
Sep-92
Dec-90
Jan-93
Jan-93
May-92
Jun-88
Jun-88
Aug-88
Aug-88
Waste
Placement
Start Date
1989
May-92
Jul-88
Jul-88
Sep-88
Sep-88
Oct-88
Dec-88
Feb-89
Jul-89
Dec-89
Jul-90
Feb-90
Oct-90
Jan-91
Apr-92
May-92
Jan-93
Dec-92
Feb-91
Jan-93
Jan-93
May-92
Jul-88
Jul-88
Sep-88
Sep-88
Final
Closure
Date
NA
Jul-94
Feb-91
Feb-91
Apr-93
Apr-93
Jul-94
Feb-91
Feb-91
Apr-93
Apr-93
Source of Data
Eith 8, Koerner (1997)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
EPA (1998)
Notes:
1. Cell ID as reported by Tetra Tech (2001)
2. GM = geomembrane; GCL = geosynthetic clay liner
3. MSW = municipal solid waste
4. HOPE = high density polyethylene
NA = not available
- = not applicable
Data Sources:
Eith, A. W., and G.R. Koerner, 1997. Assessment of HOPE geomembrane performance in municipal waste landfill double liner system after eight years of service. Geotextiles and geomembranes, Vol. 15, pp. 277 -
EPA, 1998. Assessment and Recommendations for Optimal Performance of Waste Containment Systems. Office of Research and Development, Cincinatti, Ohio.
-------
Table D.5: Leak Density Data Used to Develop Surface Impound composite liner infiltration rates (from TetraTech, 2001)
Site ID1
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
L9
L10
L86
L103
L1 10
L1 14
L136
L144
L152
L159
L160
L176
L177
L178
L179
L180
L181
L182
Date
1995
1996
1994
1995
1997
1998
1995
1995
1997
1998
Apr-96
Oct-96
Jan-97
Jan-97
Oct-97
May-98
Aug-98
NA
NA
May-98
Sep-96
Apr-97
Sep-98
Sep-98
NA
NA
Area (m2|
18500
14926
13480
11652
8200
9284
67100
66150
11460
18135
9416
4980
11720
7000
13526
5608
3742
15000
10000
13500
15000
7500
5000
13200
48600
8000
Location
France
France
France
France
France
France
Canada
Canada
Canada
France
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
NA
NA
Waste Type
domestic
domestic
HW
HW
HW
HW
waste water
treatment
waste water
treatment
black liqueur
domestic
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
waste water
containment
HW
WMU type
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
landfill
pond
pond
pond
landfill
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
pond
landfill
Type of GM
Liner2
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
PBGM
PBGM
PP
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HOPE
HDPE/CCL
Thickness ot
GM (mm)
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
1.14
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.5
2
Quality of
Material
Beneath GM
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
high
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Holes
0
4
1
1
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
Knife
Cuts/Tears
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
1
2
3
0
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
NA
NA
Seam or
Weld
Defects
5
2
1
2
0
0
2
7
2
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
Total Leaks
5
6
3
5
0
1
5
9
6
6
0
0
3
4
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
21
10
Range of
Hole Size
(mm)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30x50
NA
NA
NA
Leak Density
(leaks/ha)
2.7
4.02
2.23
4.29
0
1.08
0.75
1.36
5.24
3.31
0
0
2.6
5.7
0.7
0
0
0
0
0.7
0
1.3
0
0
4.3
12.5
Source
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
Rollinetal. (1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
McQuade and
Needham(1999)
Laine(1991)
Laine(1991)
Notes:
1. Cell ID as reported by Tetra Tech (2001)
2. HOPE = high density polyethylene; PBGM = pre-fabricated bituminous geomembrane; PP = polypropylene; CCL = compacted clay liner
NA = not available; - = not applicable
Data Sources:
Rollin, A.L., M. Marcotte, T. Jacqulein, and L. Chaput. 1999. Leak location in exposed geomembrane liners using an electrical leak detection technique. Geosynthetics '99, Vol. 2, pp. 615-626
McQuade, S.J., and A.D. Needham, 1999. Geomembrane liner defects - causes, frequency and avoidance. Geotechnical Engineering, Vol., 137. No. 4, pp. 203-213
Laine, D.L., 1991. Analysis of pinhole seam leaks located in geomembrane liners using the electrical leak location method. Proceedings, Geosynthetics '91, pp.239-253
-------
Table D.6: Comparison of composite liner infiltration rates
Calculated using Bonaparte Equation and Infiltration
Rates for composite-lined landfill cells
Percentile
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Calculated
Infiltration (m/yr)
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
1.05E-05
1.37E-05
2.03E-05
3.96E-05
6.01 E-05
7.13E-05
1.87E-04
Observed Infiltration
(m/yr)
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
O.OOE+00
2.19E-05
7.30E-05
7.30E-05
1.73E-04
4.02E-04
Infiltration Rate Comparison (Head =0.3m. Hole Area = 6mm2)
S
=
S
-Calculated Infiltration
-Actual Infiltration value
40 50 60
Percentile
-------
APPENDIX E
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF REFERENCE GROUNDWATER
CONCENTRATION VALUES
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-l Shower Model
E-l.l Shower Model
The shower model calculates the incremental change in the concentration of a
constituent in air that results from the transfer of constituent mass from the water phase
(the shower water) to the vapor phase (the air in the shower stall) over time. The model
then estimates the concentration of the constituent in a bathroom that results from air
exchange within the bathroom and between the bathroom and the rest of the house over
time. After the model calculates the predicted air-phase constituent concentration in the
shower stall and bathroom, we use those concentrations to estimate the average air-phase
constituent concentration to which an individual is exposed over the course of an entire
day. We use this average daily concentration to calculate inhalation HBNs.
The shower model is based on differential equations presented in McKone (1987)
and Little (1992a). We solved the differential equations using a mathematical technique
called "finite difference numerical integration," to produce the equations that we use in
our analysis, Equations E-l to E-l 1 in this Appendix. In reviewing the equations and
reading the following sections, it will help to keep in mind the following two concepts:
We calculate air-phase constituent concentrations for different "compartments."
The shower model is based on the understanding that there are two compartments
in the bathroom: 1) the shower stall and 2) the rest of the bathroom (outside of
the shower stall). We assume that an adult spends time: in the shower stall when
the shower is running; in the shower stall after the shower is turned off; and in the
rest of the bathroom after the shower is turned off (see Equations E-l and E-2).
We calculate air-phase constituent concentrations for different time steps. We
implement the shower model in time steps. That is, we estimate the air-phase
constituent concentration in each of the two compartments in 0.2-minute
increments or time steps. The air-phase constituent concentration at the
beginning of the 0.2-minute time step differs from the concentration at the end of
the 0.2-minute time step because of volatilization of constituent mass from the
shower water (which adds constituent mass) and the exchange of air between the
compartments in the bathroom and the rest of the house (which disperses the
mass). At the beginning of a time step, the air-phase concentration in each
bathroom compartment is equal to the air-phase concentration that was estimated
for the compartment at the end of the previous time step.
E-l
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The following is our basic procedure for implementing the shower model:
Calculate a mass transfer coefficient for each constituent;
Estimate the air-phase constituent concentration in the shower stall for
sequential 0.2-minute time steps;
Estimate the air-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom (other
than in the shower stall) for sequential 0.2-minute time steps;
Use the air-phase constituent concentrations calculated for the shower
stall, and the air-phase constituent concentrations calculated for the
bathroom, to calculate the average constituent concentration to which an
adult is exposed during the course of a day.
This procedure is explained in greater detail below. Appendix E-3 provides the
values for the constituent-specific properties used in the model. Table E.I provides the
values we used for the parameters in the model.
Calculating a Mass Transfer Coefficient
The first step in estimating the concentration of a constituent in air is to quantify
the constituent's "resistance" to movement between the water phase and the air phase.
We quantify this resistance using the mass transfer coefficient presented in Equation E-4,
which incorporates variables calculated in Equations E-3 and E-5. The mass transfer
coefficient depends on properties specific to each constituent evaluated, as well as
physical properties of the water droplet. Specifically, the mass transfer coefficient
depends on:
The constituent's diffusivity in water (the molecular diffusion coefficient
for the constituent in water), which determines how readily the constituent
mass in the center of the water droplet will diffuse to the surface of the
water droplet. If a constituent's diffusivity in water is low, then as the
constituent is emitted from the surface of the water droplet, the rate at
which the surface of the droplet is "supplied" with constituent from the
center of the water droplet will be slow, resulting in less constituent being
emitted from the droplet. Diffusivity influences the concentration gradient
across the droplet.
The Henry's law constant for the constituent, which establishes how the
constituent will partition between the water phase and the air phase to
achieve equilibrium. Henry's law states that, at equilibrium, the amount
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
of a constituent dissolved in water is proportional to the amount of the
constituent in the air phase that is in contact with the water. This
proportion is constituent-specific (each constituent has a different Henry's
law constant). The Henry's law constant influences the magnitude of the
air-phase constituent concentrations more than any other constituent-
specific parameter.
The constituent's diffusivity in air (the molecular diffusion coefficient for
the constituent in air), which determines how readily the constituent will
migrate away from the droplet once it is released into the air surrounding
the droplet. Constituents with lower diffusivities in air will have
comparatively higher concentrations around the water droplet than in the
surrounding air. Therefore, because of Henry's law, less constituent
would need to come out of solution into the air phase in order to achieve
equilibrium.
The amount of time that the droplet is in contact with the air, which we
assume is equivalent to the time it takes for the droplet to fall to the floor
of the shower. We determine the time it takes the droplet to fall by
dividing distance that the droplet has to fall (which we assume is equal to
the height of the shower nozzle) by the velocity at which the water droplet
falls (which we assume is the terminal velocity of the droplet). For this
analysis, we set the nozzle height and the terminal velocity of the droplet
at fixed values, as presented in Table E.I.
The ratio of the water droplet's surface area to its volume. Because we
assume that the droplet is a sphere, its surface area to volume ratio is equal
to a value of 6 divided by the diameter of the droplet. For this analysis,
the diameter of the droplet, therefore its surface area to volume ratio, is a
fixed value (see Table E.I).
Appendix E-2 presents the constituent-specific diffusivities and Henry's law
constants that we used in our analysis.
E-3
-------
Table
Shower Model Input Parameters
Input Parameter
Description
Value
Units
Reference
Comment
Bathroom Properties
Vb
Volume of the bathroom
10
m3
McKone, 1987
Exchange Rate
Qbh
Qsb
Volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom
and the house
Volumetric exchange rate between the shower
and the bathroom
300
100
L/min
L/min
derived value
derived value
Estimated from the volume and flow rate
in McKone (1987) such that the exchange
rate equals the volume divided by the
residence time (e.g., 10,OOOL/30 min).
Estimated from the volume and flow rate
in McKone (1987) such that the exchange
rate equals the volume divided by the
residence time (e.g., 2000L/20 min).
Exposure Time
ShowerStallTime
r_bathroom
ShowerTime
Time in shower stall after showering
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower
Shower time, 50th percentile
5
5
15
min
min
min
USEPA, 1997c
USEPA, 1997c
USEPA, 1997c
Table 15-23. 50th percentile overall
Table 15-32. 50th percentile overall
Table 15-21. 50th percentile overall
Shower Properties
Vs
NozHeight
ShowerRate
3ropVel
3ropDiam
Volume of shower
Height of shower head
Rate of water flow from shower head
Terminal velocity of water drop
Diameter of shower water drop
2
1.8
10
400
0.098
m3
m
L/min
cm/s
cm
McKone, 1987
Little, 1992a
derived value
derived value
derived value
Selected based on the maximum height
reported in Table 1 of Little (1992a), a
summary of five studies.
Value obtained by averaging the flow rates
reported in five studies in Table 1 of
Little (1992a) (QL) = 10.08 L/min.
Selected value by correlating to existing
data.
Estimated as a function of terminal
velocity<=600cm/sec (Coburn, 1996).
Groundwater
Cin
Constituent concentration in incoming water
0.001
mg/L
NA
Unit concentration selected.
TO
I
8
<*»-
I
o
s
s.
b
o
TO
TO
I
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Calculating the Air-Phase Constituent Concentration in the Shower
Calculating the air-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the end of
each time step involves:
1. Calculating the fraction of constituent that can be emitted into the air from each
water droplet (Equation E-7);
2. Translating the fraction of constituent that can be emitted from each water droplet
(from step 1) into the mass of constituent that is emitted from the entire volume of
water that is coming into the shower during each time step (Equation E-6); and
3. Determining the constituent concentration at the end of the time step by:
calculating the concentration added to the shower air during the time step
(dividing the constituent mass emitted from the water in step 2 by the volume of
the shower), adding this concentration to the concentration of the constituent that
was already in the shower air at the beginning of the time step, and subtracting the
concentration lost from the shower air due to the exchange of air with the rest of
the bathroom (Equation E-9).
An important element of this analysis is the difference between the time in the
shower stall that is spent showering (15 minutes, Table E.I) and the time in the shower
stall that occurs after showering (5 minutes, Table E.I). The difference in these two time
periods involves how we handle the value for mass of constituent emitted from the
shower water (step 2, above). When we switch the model over from the time period
where the shower nozzle is turned on (the time spent showering), to the time period
where the shower nozzle is turned off (the time spent in the shower stall after showering),
we set the mass emitted from the water to zero. This means that during the 5-minute
period when the individual is in the shower after the shower is turned off, the air-phase
concentration of the constituent is only a function of the concentration of the constituent
in the air at the beginning of the time step and the air exchange between the shower stall
and the rest of the bathroom. The following paragraphs describe steps 1 and 2 in more
detail.
The fraction of the constituent mass that potentially can be emitted from a droplet
at any given time during the droplet's fall through the air (Equation E-7) is a function of
the mass transfer coefficient (the constituent's resistance to movement from the water
phase to the air phase, described previously) and the "fraction of gas phase saturation" in
the shower (calculated using Equation E-8). Inherent in this calculation is an assumption
that the concentration of the constituent in the air is constant over the time it takes the
droplet to fall. The fraction of gas phase saturation is an expression of how close the air-
phase constituent concentration is to the maximum possible (equilibrium) air-phase
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
concentration. Stated another way, Henry's law dictates that for a certain constituent
concentration in water, we can predict the maximum concentration of constituent in the
air that is in contact with the water (assuming the air and water are in equilibrium).
Consequently, if there is already constituent in the air, then, to maintain equilibrium,
there is a limit to how much additional constituent can be emitted from the water to the
air (the less constituent already present in the air, the more constituent that theoretically
may be emitted). The fraction of gas phase saturation is an expression of how close the
air concentration is to that limit at the beginning of each time step. However, as
suggested at the beginning of this paragraph, even though Henry's law influences the
maximum fraction of mass that could be emitted from the droplet, the mass transfer
coefficient also influences how much of the constituent will "free itself from the water.
Factors such as the constituent's dispersivity (in water and air) and the surface area of the
droplet also influence the fraction of constituent mass that can be emitted from the
droplet.
In most cases, for each 0.2-minute time step we evaluate, the mass of a
constituent emitted from the shower water to the air is the product of: the concentration
of the constituent in the shower water, the volume of water emitted from the shower
during the time step, and the fraction of the constituent mass in the water that potentially
could be emitted from the water (discussed above). However, in certain cases (typically
rare), the mass transfer coefficient is of a magnitude that the concentration calculated in
this way exceeds the mass that possibly could be emitted when the water and the air
phases are at equilibrium. In this case, we "cap" the constituent mass that can be emitted
from the shower water during the time step. The cap is the maximum constituent mass
that could be emitted from the water at equilibrium (based on Henry's law) minus the
constituent mass already in the shower stall at the beginning of the time step
Calculating the Air-Phase Constituent Concentration in the Bathroom (other than in
the Shower Stall)
The air-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom (Equation E-10) is a
function of the air-phase constituent concentration calculated for the shower, and the
exchange of air 1) between the shower and the bathroom and 2) between the bathroom
and the rest of the house. Specifically, for each time step, the air-phase constituent
concentration in the bathroom is equal to: the air-phase constituent concentration in the
bathroom at the beginning of the time step, plus the constituent concentration added as a
result of the exchange of air with the shower, minus the constituent concentration lost as
a result of the exchange of air with the rest of the house. Table E. 1 presents the values
we used for the volumetric exchange rate between the shower and the bathroom; the
volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom and the house; and the volume of the
bathroom.
E-6
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Calculating the Average Daily Constituent Concentration to Which an Individual is
Exposed
To calculate the average concentration of a constituent to which an individual is
exposed on a daily basis (24 hours per day) (Equation E-ll), we:
1. Calculate the average constituent concentration in the shower air across all time
steps and multiply this concentration by the amount of time an individual spends
in the shower stall (Equation E-2);
2. Calculate the average constituent concentration in the bathroom air (not including
the shower air) across all time steps and multiply this concentration by the
amount of time an individual spends in the bathroom (not including the time spent
in the shower stall);
3. Sum the values calculated in steps 1 and 2, and divide the sum by the length of a
day. This calculation carries with it an assumption that an individual only is
exposed to the constituent in the shower, and in the bathroom after showering
(that is, that the concentration of the constituent in the rest of the house is zero).
E-1.2 Shower Model Uncertainties and Limitations
The primary limitations and uncertainties of the shower model are as follows:
The model is constructed such that air-phase concentration of a constituent
in household air results solely from showering activity. Individuals are
exposed to emissions via inhalation for time spent in the shower while
showering, in the shower stall after showering, and in the bathroom after
showering. Other models calculate indoor air concentrations resulting
from emissions from household use of tap water and/or calculate
inhalation exposures for time spent in the remainder of the house.
However, McKone (1987) found that the risk from inhalation exposures in
the remainder of the house was considerably lower than the risk from
inhalation exposures in the bathroom and during showering. In addition,
there are few data available to estimate the input parameters needed to
calculate exposure concentrations from other household activities,
including variables such as house volume, air exchange rate between the
house and outside air, and exposure time in the house. Given expected the
lower risk due to exposure in the remainder of the house, and the lack of
available data to estimate house constituent concentrations, we focused on
showering as the greatest source of inhalation exposure and risk due to use
of contaminated water.
EX7
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The model currently only considers exposures to adults who shower, and
does not consider exposures to children who bathe in bathtubs. This
limitation of the model may be significant. A recent report by EPA's
National Center for Environmental Assessment states that: "Because of
the longer exposure times, chemical emissions during the use of bathtubs
may be as, or more, significant than during showers, in terms of human
inhalation. This is particularly important given that small children are
typically washed in bathtubs rather than showers and are generally more
sensitive to chemical exposure than are healthy adults" (USEPA, 2000).
Our analysis does not consider either an individual's dermal exposure to
water, or an individual's incidental ingestion of water, while showering.
The model only considers emissions that result from falling droplets of
water in the shower. The model does not include algorithms that account
for emissions from water films on shower walls or puddles on the floor of
the shower. Use of the model also assumes that a droplet falls directly
from the shower nozzle to the shower stall floor, and is not intercepted by
the body of the individual who is showering.
The input parameter values are a source of uncertainty for the shower
model. To select values for the shower properties (shower and bathroom
volume, nozzle height, and flow rate), we generally used central tendency
values that were reported in the literature. Although fixing shower model
input parameters as constant does not capture variability in the results, the
results still compare favorably to experimental data for numerous organic
compounds of varying volatility (Coburn, 1996). The values for droplet
properties (diameter and velocity) are also constants, and are based on
correlation to existing data. The largest uncertainty is likely in the
volumetric exchange rates used between the shower and bathroom and the
bathroom and the rest of house. We derived these values, 300 L/min for
the exchange rate between the bathroom and house, and 100 L/min for the
exchange rate between the shower and bathroom, from McKone (1987).
However, values reported in a five-study summary by Little (1992a)
ranged from 35 to 460 L/min for the exchange between the shower and
bathroom, and 38 to 480 L/min for the exchange between the bathroom
and the rest of the house. Such a large range of volumetric exchange rates
imparts uncertainty to the shower model's estimation of constituent
concentrations.
A constituent's solubility in water depends on a number of factors
including the temperature of the water and the other chemicals (for
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
example, other solvents) that are in the water. When the concentration of
a constituent in water exceeds the constituent's solubility in that water, we
expect that at least some of the constituent will exist in the water as a non-
aqueous (free) phase. Henry's law, a basic principle of the shower model,
only applies to constituents dissolved in water, it does not apply to non-
aqueous phase constituents (USEPA, 1996). As a result, it would not be
appropriate to use the HBNs we developed for the inhalation pathway if
the shower water (which we assume is from a groundwater well)
contained non-aqueous phase constituent. More importantly, however,
EPACMTP, the groundwater fate and transport model that we use to
estimate constituent concentrations in the modeled groundwater, cannot be
used to model non-aqueous phase liquids. Consequently, the IWEM tool
should not be used in cases where non-aqueous phase constituents are
present in leachate. In these situations, another tool must be used that is
capable of evaluating non-aqueous phase liquids.
E-9
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-l. Total time spent in shower and bathroom
BSResTime = ShowerTime + ShowerStall Time + T bathroom
Name
BSResTime
ShowerTime
ShowerStallTime
T_bathroom
Description
Total time spent in shower and bathroom (min)
Duration of shower (min)
Time in shower stall after showering (min)
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower (min)
Value
Calculated above
Provided in Equation E-l 2
Provided in Equation E-l 2
Provided in Equation E-l 2
This equation calculates the total time that a receptor is exposed to vapors.
Equation E-2. Total time spent in shower stall
Shower Res Time = ShowerStallTime + ShowerTime
Name
ShowerResTime
ShowerStallTime
ShowerTime
Description
Total time spent in shower stall (min)
Time in shower stall after showering (min)
Duration of shower (min)
Value
Calculated above
Provided in Equation E-l 2
Provided in Equation E-l 2
This equation calculates the total time that a receptor is exposed to vapors in the shower stall.
E-10
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-3. Dimensionless Henry's law constant
Name
Hprime
HLCcoef
HLC
R
Temp
Hprime = HLCcoef x HLC
TTT f~* ^-i ?/~
llL^Loej -
R x lemp
Description
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Coefficient to Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Henry's law constant (atm-mVmol)
Ideal Gas constant (atm-m3/K-Mol)
Temperature (K)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Chemical-specific
0.00008206
298
This equation calculates the dimensionless form of Henry's law constant.
Equation E-4. Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient
Name
N
AVRatio
Kol
DropResTime
DropDiam
NozHeight
DropVel
100
N = Kol x AVRatio x DropResTime
6
A >- latino
DropDiam
^ T. NozHeight x 100
DropVel
Description
Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient (dimensionless)
Area-to-volume ratio for a sphere (cm2/cm3)
Overall mass transfer coefficient (cm/s)
Residence time for falling drops (s)
Drop diameter (cm)
Nozzle height (m)
Drop terminal velocity (cm/s)
Conversion factor (cm/m)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-5
Calculated above
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
Conversion factor
This equation calculates the dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient. The above equation is based
on Little (1992a; Equation 5), which provides the equation as N = Kol x A/Q1 where A is the total surface
area for mass transfer and Ql is water flow in volume per time.
E-ll
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-5. Overall mass transfer coefficient
Name
Kol
beta
Dw
Da
Hprime
( 2.5 i r1
J^,-\ 7 /? i
*°I-PA(D.+ D,* Hprime)
Description
Overall mass transfer coefficient (cm/s)
Proportionality constant (cm-sA-l/3)
Diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
Diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Value
Calculated above
216
Chemical-specific
Chemical-specific
Calculated in Equation E-3
This equation calculates the overall mass transfer coefficient. The above equation corresponds to Equation
17 in McKone (1987) and was modified to use the dimensionless Henry's law constant. McKone (1987)
noted that the proportionality constant, beta, was a dimensionless value. Little (1992b) indicated that beta
is not dimensionless. The correct units are noted above. The value for beta was derived using data for
benzene and verified for chemicals of varying volatility (Coburn, 1996).
E-12
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-6. Constituent mass emitted in the shower for a given time step
For Et > Emax,
Es = Emax
For Et < Emax,
Es= Et
Where,
Et = Cin x ShowerRate x ts x fern
Emax = (yeq - ys,t) x Vs x 1000
Name
Es
Emax
Et
yeq
ys,t
Vs
Cin
ShowerRate
ts
fern
Hprime
1000
Description
Constituent mass emitted in the shower for a given time step
(mg)
Maximum possible mass of constituent emitted from shower
during time step (mg)
Potential mass of constituent emitted from shower during
time step (mg)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in equilibrium between
water and air (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Volume of shower (m3)
Liquid-phase constituent concentration in the incoming water
(mg/L)
Rate of flow from showerhead (L/min)
Time step (min)
Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
(dimensionless)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated above
Hprime x Cin
Calculated from last time step
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
0.2
Calculated in Equation E-7
Calculated in Equation E-3
Conversion factor
The above equations are used to determine the mass of constituent emitted for a given time step. The
equilibrium concentration in air (y_eq) is calculated from Equation 1 in Little (1992a). If the mass emitted
based on the mass transfer coefficient (Et) is greater than the amount emitted to reach equilibrium (Emax),
the mass is set to the amount that results in the air concentration at equilibrium.
E-13
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-7. Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
fern = (l- Fsat] x (;- e~N\
Name
fern
Fsat
N
Description
Fraction of constituent emitted from a droplet
(dimensionless)
Fraction of gas-phase saturation (dimensionless)
Dimensionless overall mass transfer coefficient
(dimensionless)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation A-8
Calculated in Equation A-4
This equation is used to calculate the fraction of a given chemical emitted from a droplet of water in the
shower. The equation is based on Equation 5 in Little (1992a). The above equation is obtained by
rearranging the equation in Little given that ys_max/m = Cin and f_sat = ys/ys_max = ys/(m x Cin).
Equation E-8. Fraction of gas-phase saturation in shower
Name
Fsat
yeq
ys,t
Hprime
Cin
Vs,t
77V -K/
1'Sdt
yeq
Description
Fraction of gas-phase saturation in shower (dimensionless)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in equilibrium between
water and air (mg/L)
Current gas-phase constituent concentration in air (mg/L)
Dimensionless Henry's law constant (dimensionless)
Constituent concentration in incoming water (mg/L)
Value
Calculated above
Hprime x Cin
Calculated in Equation E-9 (a;
ys, t+ts for previous time step)
Calculated in Equation E-3
Provided in Equation E-12
This equation is used to calculate the fraction of gas phase saturation in shower for each time step. The
equilibrium concentration in air (y_eq) is calculated from Equation 1 in Little (1992a).
E-14
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-9. Gas-phase constituent concentration
Name
ys, t+ts
ys,t
yb, t
Es
Qsb
Vs
ts
1000
[& - (Qsb
in the shower at end of time step
x (ys,t - yb, t\ x ts\\
Vs x 1000
Description
Gas-phase constituent concentration in
time step (mg/L)
the shower at end of
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Mass emitted in the shower for a given
Volumetric exchange rate between the
bathroom (L/min)
time step (mg)
shower and the
Volume of shower (m3)
Time step (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated from last time step
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation E-6
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
0.2
Conversion factor
This equation is used to calculate the gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at end of time step.
The equation is derived from Equation 9 in Little (1992a). Es is set to 0 when the shower is turned off (i.e.,
at the end of showering) to estimate the reduction in shower stall air concentrations after emissions cease.
E-15
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-10. Gas-phase constituent concentration in
yb, ti
Name
yb, t+ts
yb, t
ys, t+ts
yh, t
Qsb
Qbh
Vb
ts
1000
\\Qsb X (ys, t + ts- yb, t\ -
, 1 17 / 1 L
the bathroom at end of time step
Qbh x (yb, t - yh, tj\
Vb x 1000
Description
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
bathroom at end
bathroom at the
shower at the end
house at the
Volumetric exchange rate between the shower and the
bathroom (L/min)
Volumetric exchange rate between the bathroom and the
house (L/min)
Volume of bathroom (m3)
Time step (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation E-9
Assumed deminimus, zero
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
Provided in Equation E-12
0.2
Conversion factor
This equation is used to calculate the gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at end of time
step. The equation is derived from Equation 10 in Little (1992a).
E-16
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Equation E-ll. Average daily concentration in indoor air
C^air _ indot
Name
Cair_indoor
Cair_shower
Cair_bathroom
ShowerResTime
T_bathroom
ys,t
ys, t+ts
yb, t
yb, t+ts
ns
nb
1440
1000
\Cair_ shower x ShowerResTime} + \Catr_ bathroom x T bathroom]
1440
J] [(ys, t+ts + ys.t)/2\ x 1000
C^air shower
ns
y \(yb, t+ts + yb,t}/2\ x 1000
f~< , . ** L^ ' J
L^air bainroom
nb
Description
Average daily concentration in indoor air (mg/m3)
Average concentration in shower (mg/m3)
Average concentration in bathroom (mg/m3)
Total time spent in shower stall (min)
Time spent in bathroom, not in shower (min)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the shower at the end
of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
beginning of time step (mg/L)
Gas-phase constituent concentration in the bathroom at the
end of time step (mg/L)
Number of time steps corresponding to time spent in the
shower (dimensionless)
Number of time steps corresponding to time spent in the
bathroom (dimensionless)
Minutes per day (min)
Conversion factor (L/m3)
Value
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated above
Calculated in Equation E-2
Provided in Equation E-12
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation E-9
Calculated from last time step
Calculated in Equation E-10
Summed in model code
Summed in model code
Conversion factor
The above equations are used to calculate the time-weighted average daily indoor air concentration to
which a receptor is exposed. The equation assumes that receptors are only exposed to constituents in the
shower and bathroom.
E-17
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-2 Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties for
the Shower Model
To calculate inhalation HBNs, the shower model requires input of several
chemical-specific properties, including Henry's law constant (HLC), solubility (Sol), and
diffusion coefficients in air (DJ and water (DJ. This attachment describes the data
sources and methodologies used to collect and develop these properties. Table E.I2 (at
the end of this appendix lists by constituent the chemical-specific properties used to
calculate inhalation HBNs, along with the data source for each value.
E-2.1 Data Collection Procedure
To select data values available from multiple sources, we created a hierarchy of
references based on the reliability and availability of data in such sources. Our first
choice for data collection and calculations was EPA reports and software. When we
could not find data or equations from EPA publications, we consulted highly recognized
sources, including chemical information databases on the Internet. These on-line sources
are compilations of data that provide the primary references for data values. The specific
hierarchy varied among properties as described in subsequent sections.
For dioxins, the preferred data source in all cases was the Exposure and Human
Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related
Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3 (Dioxin Reassessment) (USEPA, 2000). We used the
Mercury Study Report to Congress (USEPA, 1997a) as the preferred source for mercury
properties. If values were unavailable from these sources, we followed the same
reference hierarchy that was used for other constituents.
All data entry for chemical and physical properties was checked by comparing
each entry against the original online or hardcopy reference. All property calculation
programs were checked using hand calculations to ensure that they were functioning
correctly.
E-2.2 Solubility (Sol)
For solubility (Sol) values, we looked for data by searching the following sources
in the following order:
1. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM) (USEPA, 1997b);
2. CHEMFATE Chemical Search (SRC, 1999);
E-18
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document _ Appendix E
3. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB) (USNLM, 2001);
4. ChemFinder (CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001).
For mercury, we obtained a solubility for elemental mercury from The Merck Index: An
Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals (Budavari, 1996).
E-2.3 Henry's Law Constant (HLC)
Collection of Henry's law constant (HLC) data proceeded by searching sources in
the following order:
1. SCDM;
2. CHEMFATE;
3. HSDB.
When we could not find data from these sources, we calculated HLC using equation 1 5-8
from Lyman, Reehl, and Rosenblatt (1990):
Sol
where
HLC = Henry's law constant (atm-mVmolej
Pvp = vapor pressure (atm)
Sol = solubility (mol/m3).
E-2.4 Diffusion Coefficient in Water (Dw)
For all chemicals, we calculated the diffusion coefficient in water (Dw) by hand
because few empirical data are available. The preferred calculation was equation 17-6
from the WATER9 model (USEPA, 2001):
298.16 P )
where
Dw = diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
T = temperature (degrees C)
MW = molecular weight (g/g-mol)
p = density (g/cc).
E-19
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
When we did not know chemical density, we used equation 3.16 from Process
Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and Heavy Metals in Surface
(Process Coefficients) (USEPA, 1987), which only requires molecular weight:
Dw = 0.00022 x
-2/3
where
MW =
diffusion coefficient in water (cm2/s)
molecular weight (g/mol).
E-2.5 Diffusion Coefficient in Air (DJ
All diffusion coefficients in air (Da) were calculated values because few empirical
data are available. Similar to Dw, we first consulted WATER9 and then used USEPA
(1987). Equation 17-5 in WATER9 calculates diffusivity in air as follows:
0.0029(7+273.16)
1.5
A. =
0.034 + (1-0.000015MT2)
+ 1.8
where
T
MW
P
diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
temperature (degrees C)
molecular weight (g/g-mol)
density (g/cc).
When density was not available, we used equation 3.17 from Process Coefficients
(U.S. EPA, 1987):
Dfl=L9x
-2/3
where
E-20
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Da = diffusion coefficient in air (cm2/s)
MW = molecular weight (g/mol).
For dioxins and furans, we used an equation from the Dioxin Reassessment (USEPA,
2000) to estimate diffusion coefficients from diphenyl's diffusivity:
D^_ _ (MWb\ °'5
1\= \MWa)
where
Da = diffusion coefficient of constituent in air (cm2/s)
Db = diffusion coefficient of diphenyl at 25 degrees C (0.068
cm2/s)
MWa = molecular weight of constituent (g/mole)
MWb = molecular weight of diphenyl (154 g/mole).
E-21
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E.12. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties
Constituent
Acetaldehyde (ethanal)
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid (propenoic acid)
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Aniline (benzeneamine)
3enz(a)anthracene
benzene
Senzidine
3enzo(a)pyrene
3enzo (b)fluoranthene
benzyl chloride
3is (2 -ethylhexyl) phthalate
3is(2-chloroethyl)ether
3is (2 -chloroisopropyl) ether
Sromodichloromethane
Sromomethane (methyl bromide)
butadiene, 1,3-
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene, 2- (Chloroprene)
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Chloroform
Chloromethane (methyl chloride)
Chlorophenol, 2-
Chloropropene, 3- (allyl chloride)
CASRN
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
62-53-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-44-7
117-81-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
56-23-5
75-15-0
57-74-9
126-99-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
Da (cm2/s)
1.28E-01 e
1.06E-01 e
1.34E-01 e
1.12E-01 e
1.07E-01 e
1.03E-01 e
1.14E-01 e
2.28E-02 e
8.30E-02 e
5.09E-02 b
8.95E-02 e
3.55E-02 e
2.55E-02 e
4.76E-02 b
6.34E-02 e
1.73E-02 e
5.67E-02 e
4.01E-02 e
5.63E-02 e
l.OOE-01 e
l.OOE-01 e
5.71E-02 e
1.06E-01 e
2.15E-02 e
8.41E-02 e
7.21E-02 e
2.18E-02 e
3.66E-02 e
1.04E-01 e
7.70E-02 e
1.24E-01 e
6.61E-02 e
9.36E-02 e
Dw (cm2/s)
1.35E-05 e
1.15E-05 e
1.41E-05 e
1.22E-05 e
1.26E-05 e
1.20E-05 e
1.23E-05 e
5.84E-06 e
1.01E-05 e
5.89E-06 b
1.03E-05 e
7.59E-06 e
6.58E-06 e
5.51E-06 b
8.81E-06 e
4.18E-06 e
8.71E-06 e
7.40E-06 e
1.07E-05 e
1.35E-05 e
1.03E-05 e
9.78E-06 e
1.30E-05 e
0 e
l.OOE-05 e
9.48E-06 e
5.48E-06 e
1.06E-05 e
1.16E-05 e
1.09E-05 e
1.36E-05 e
9.48E-06 e
1.08E-05 e
HLC
(atm-m3/mol)
7.89e-05 a
3.88e-05 a
3.46e-05 a
1.22e-04 a
l.OOe-09 a
1.17e-07 a
1.03e-04 a
1.70e-04 a
1.90e-06 a
3.35e-06 a
5.55e-03 a
3.88e-ll a
1.13e-06 a
l.lle-04 a
4.15e-04 a
1.02e-07 a
1.80e-05 a
1.34e-04 d
1.60e-03 a
6.24e-03 a
7.36e-02 a
3.04e-02 a
3.03e-02 a
4.86e-05 a
1.19e-02 f
3.70e-03 a
7.24e-08 f
7.83e-04 a
8.82e-03 a
3.67e-03 a
8.82e-03 a
3.91e-04 a
1.10e-02 a
Sol (mg/L)
l.OOe+06 a
l.OOe+06 a
l.OOe+06 a
2.13e+05 a
6.40e+05 a
l.OOe+06 a
7.40e+04 a
1.80e-01 a
3.60e+04 a
9.40e-03 a
1.75e+03 a
5.00e+02 a
1.62e-03 a
1.50e-03 a
5.25e+02 a
3.40e-01 a
1.72e+04 a
1.31e+03 a
6.74e+03 a
1.52e+04 a
7.35e+02 a
7.93e+02 a
1.19e+03 a
5.60e-02 a
1.74e+03 a
4.72e+02 a
l.lle+01 a
2.60e+03 a
5.68e+03 a
7.92e+03 a
5.33e+03 a
2.20e+04 a
3.37e+03 a
E-22
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E.12. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
Chrysene
Cresol, o-
Cresol,
Cresol, p-
Cresols (total)
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
DDT, p,p'-
3ibenz(a,h)anthracene
3ibromo-3-chloropropane, 1,2-
3ichlorobenzene, 1,2-
3ichlorobenzene, 1,4-
3ichlorobenzidine, 3,3'-
3ichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
3ichloroethane, 1,1-
3ichloroethane, 1,2-
3ichloroethylene, 1,1-
3ichloropropane, 1,2-
3ichloropropene, trans-1,3-
3ichloropropene, 1,3- (isomer mixture)
3ichloropropene, cis-1,3-
3ieldrin
dimethyl formamide, N,N- (DMF)
3imethylbenz(a)anthracene, 7,12-
3initrotoluene, 2,4-
3ioxane, 1,4-
3iphenylhydrazine, 1,2-
ipichlorohydrin
ipoxybutane, 1,2-
ithoxyethanol acetate, 2-
ithoxyethanol , 2-
ithylbenzene
ithylene dibromide
1,2-dibromoethane)
CASRN
218-01-9
95-48-7
108-39-4
106-44-5
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
50-29-3
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
75-34-3
107-06-2
75-35-4
78-87-5
10061-02-6
542-75-6
10061-01-5
60-57-1
68-12-2
57-97-6
121-14-2
123-91-1
122-66-7
106-89-8
106-88-7
111-15-9
110-80-5
100-41-4
106-93-4
Da (cm2/s)
2.61E-02 e
7.59E-02 e
0.0729 e
7.24E-02 e
7.37E-02 e
6.02E-02 e
7.59E-02 e
1.83E-02 e
2.36E-02 e
3.21E-02 e
5.62E-02 e
5.50E-02 e
4.75E-02 b
7.60E-02 e
8.36E-02 e
8.54E-02 e
8.63E-02 e
7.33E-02 e
7.63E-02 e
7.63E-02 e
7.65E-02 e
2.33E-02 e
9.72E-02 e
4.71E-02 b
3.75E-02 e
8.74E-02 e
0.0343 e
0.0888 e
9.32E-02 e
5.70E-02 e
8.19E-02 e
6.86E-02 e
4.31E-02 e
Dw (cm2/s)
6.75E-06 e
9.86E-06 e
0 e
9.24E-06 e
9.48E-06 e
7.85E-06 e
9.35E-06 e
4.44E-06 e
6.02E-06 e
8.90E-06 e
8.92E-06 e
8.68E-06 e
5.50E-06 b
1.08E-05 e
1.06E-05 e
1.09E-05 e
1.10E-05 e
9.73E-06 e
1.01E-05 e
1.01E-05 e
1.02E-05 e
6.01E-06 e
1.12E-05 e
5.45E-06 b
7.90E-06 e
1.05E-05 e
7.25E-06 e
1.11E-05 e
1.05E-05 e
7.98E-06 e
9.76E-06 e
8.48E-06 e
1.05E-05 e
HLC
(atm-m3/mol)
9.46e-05 a
1.20e-06 a
8.65e-07 a
7.92e-07 a
9.52e-07 a
1.16e+00 a
1.02e-04 f
8.10e-06 a
1.47e-08 a
1.47e-04 a
1.90e-03 a
2.40e-03 a
4.00e-09 a
3.43e-01 a
5.62e-03 a
9.79e-04 a
2.61e-02 a
2.80e-03 a
1.80e-03 i
1.77e-02 a
2.40e-03 i
1.51e-05 a
7.39e-08 i
3.11e-08 a
9.26e-08 a
4.80e-06 a
1.53e-06 a
3.04e-05 a
1.80e-04 f
1.80e-06 i
1.23e-07 a
7.88e-03 a
7.43e-04 a
Sol (mg/L)
1.60e-03 a
2.60e+04 a
2.27e+04 a
2.15e+04 a
2.34e+04 a
6.13e+01 a
4.30e+04 f
2.50e-02 a
2.49e-03 a
1.23e+03 a
1.56e+02 a
7.38e+01 a
3.11e+00 a
2.80e+02 a
5.06e+03 a
8.52e+03 a
2.25e+03 a
2.80e+03 a
2.72e+03 a
2.80e+03 a
2.72e+03 a
1.95e-01 a
l.OOe+06 f
2.50e-02 a
2.70e+02 a
l.OOe+06 a
6.80e+01 a
6.59e+04 a
9.50e+04 f
2.29e+05 i
l.OOe+06 a
1.69e+02 a
4.18e+03 a
E-23
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E.12. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
ithylene glycol
ithylene thiourea
ithylene oxide
rormaldehyde
wfural
1CH, gamma- (Lindane)
HCH, beta-
HCH, alpha-
leptachlor epoxide
leptachlor
lexachloro-l,3-butadiene
lexachlorobenzene
lexachlorocyclopentadiene
lexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(HxCDDs)
lexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs)
lexachloroethane
lexane, -
ndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
sophorone
Mercury
Vlethacrylonitrile
Vlethanol
Vlethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Vlethoxyethanol, 2-
Vlethyl methacrylate
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Vlethyl ethyl ketone
Vlethylcholanthrene, 3-
Vlethylene chloride (dichloromethane)
V-Nitrosomethylethylamine
V-Nitrosodimethylamine
V-Nitrosopiperidine
CASRN
107-21-1
96-45-7
75-21-8
50-00-0
98-01-1
58-89-9
319-85-7
319-84-6
1024-57-3
76-44-8
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
34465-46-8
55684-94-1
67-72-1
110-54-3
193-39-5
78-59-1
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
110-49-6
109-86-4
80-62-6
1634-04-4
108-10-1
78-93-3
56-49-5
75-09-2
10595-95-6
62-75-9
100-75-4
Da (cm2/s)
1.17E-01 e
8.69E-02 b
1.34E-01 e
1.67E-01 e
8.53E-02 e
2.74E-02 e
0.0277 e
2.75E-02 e
2.19E-02 e
2.23E-02 e
2.67E-02 e
2.90E-02 e
2.72E-02 e
4.27E-02 j
4.36E-02 j
3.21E-02 e
7.28E-02 e
4.48E-02 b
5.25E-02 e
7.15E-02 e
9.64E-02 e
1.58E-01 e
6.59E-02 e
0.0952 e
7.53E-02 e
7.55E-02 e
6.98E-02 e
9.17E-02 e
2.41E-02 e
9.99E-02 e
8.41E-02 e
9.88E-02 e
6.99E-02 e
Dw (cm2/s)
1.36E-05 e
1.01E-05 b
1.46E-05 e
1.74E-05 e
1.07E-05 e
7.30E-06 e
7.40E-06 e
7.35E-06 e
5.58E-06 e
5.70E-06 e
7.03E-06 e
7.85E-06 e
7.22E-06 e
4.12E-06 b
4.23E-06 b
8.89E-06 e
8.12E-06 e
5.19E-06 b
7.53E-06 e
3.01E-05 e
1.06E-05 e
1.65E-05 e
8.71E-06 e
1.10E-05 e
9.25E-06 e
8.63E-06 e
8.36E-06 e
1.02E-05 e
6.14E-06 e
1.25E-05 e
9.99E-06 e
1.15E-05 e
9.18E-06 e
HLC
(atm-m3/mol)
6.00e-08 a
3.08e-10 a
1.48e-04 f
3.36e-07 a
4.00e-06 a
1.40e-05 a
7.43e-07 a
1.06e-05 a
9.50e-06 a
1.10e-03 a
8.15e-03 a
1.32e-03 a
2.70e-02 a
1.10e-05 c
1.10e-05 c
3.89e-03 a
1.43e-02 a
1.60e-06 a
6.64e-06 a
7.10e-03 k
2.47e-04 a
4.55e-06 a
3.11e-07 d
8.10e-08 f
3.37e-04 a
5.87e-04 f
1.38e-04 a
5.59e-05 a
9.40e-07 a
2.19e-03 a
1.40e-06 i
1.20e-06 a
2.80e-07 a
Sol (mg/L)
l.OOe+06 a
6.20e+04 a
l.OOe+06 g
5.50e+05 a
1.10e+05 a
6.80e+00 a
2.40e-01 a
2.00e+00 a
2.00e-01 a
1.80e-01 a
3.23e+00 a
5.00e-03 a
1.80e+00 a
4.40e-06 c
1.30e-05 c
5.00e+01 a
1.24e+01 a
2.20e-05 a
1.20e+04 a
5.62e-02 h
2.54e+04 a
l.OOe+06 a
l.OOe+06 i
l.OOe+06 g
1.50e+04 a
5.13e+04 f
1.90e+04 a
2.23e+05 a
3.23e-03 a
1.30e+04 a
1.97e+04 a
l.OOe+06 a
7.65e+04 a
E-24
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E.12. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
V-Nitrosodiphenylamine
V-Nitrosodiethylamine
V-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
V-Nitrosopyrrolidine
V-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
Vitropropane, 2-
3entachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(PeCDDs)
'entachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs)
'entachlorophenol
'henol
'hthalic anhydride
'olychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
'ropylene oxide (1,2-epoxypropane)
'yridine
Styrene
retrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
(2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans (TCDFs) *
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
roluidine, o-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
rribromomethane (bromoform)
rrichloro-l,2,2-trifluoro-ethane, 1,1,2-
[Yichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-
[richloroethane, 1,1,2-
[richloroethane, 1,1,1-
[richloroethylene (TCE)
CASRN
86-30-6
55-18-5
924-16-3
930-55-2
621-64-7
91-20-3
98-95-3
79-46-9
36088-22-9
30402-15-4
87-86-5
108-95-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
75-56-9
110-86-1
100-42-5
1746-01-6
55722-27-5
79-34-5
630-20-6
127-18-4
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
8001-35-2
75-25-2
76-13-1
120-82-1
79-00-5
71-55-6
79-01-6
Da (cm2/s)
2.84E-02 e
7.38E-02 e
4.22E-02 e
8.00E-02 e
5.64E-02 e
6.05E-02 e
6.81E-02 e
8.47E-02 e
0.0447 j
4.57E-02 j
2.95E-02 e
8.34E-02 e
5.95E-02 e
2.33E-02 e
1.10E-01 e
9.31E-02 e
7.13E-02 e
4.70E-02 j
4.82E-02 j
4.89E-02 e
4.82E-02 e
5.05E-02 e
7.80E-02 e
7.72E-02 b
7.24E-02 e
2.16E-02 e
3.58E-02 e
3.76E-02 e
3.96E-02 e
6.69E-02 e
6.48E-02 e
6.87E-02 e
Dw (cm2/s)
7.19E-06 e
9.13E-06 e
6.83E-06 e
1.01E-05 e
7.76E-06 e
8.38E-06 e
9.45E-06 e
1.02E-05 e
4.38E-06 b
4.51E-06 b
8.01E-06 e
1.03E-05 e
9.75E-06 e
5.98E-06 e
1.21E-05 e
1.09E-05 e
8.81E-06 e
4.68E-06 b
4.84E-06 b
9.29E-06 e
9.10E-06 e
9.45E-06 e
9.23E-06 e
8.94E-06 b
9.18E-06 e
5.48E-06 e
1.04E-05 e
8.59E-06 e
8.40E-06 e
l.OOE-05 e
9.60E-06 e
1.02E-05 e
HLC
(atm-m3/mol)
5.00e-06 a
3.63e-06 a
3.16e-04 a
1.20e-08 a
2.25e-06 a
4.83e-04 a
2.40e-05 a
1.23e-04 a
2.60e-06 c
5.00e-06 c
2.44e-08 a
3.97e-07 a
1.63e-08 a
2.60e-03 a
1.23e-04 f
8.88e-06 a
2.75e-03 a
3.29e-05 c
1.40e-05 c
3.45e-04 a
2.42e-03 a
1.84e-02 a
6.64e-03 a
7.92e-10 a
2.72e-06 a
6.00e-06 a
5.35e-04 a
4.81e-01 a
1.42e-03 a
9.13e-04 a
1.72e-02 a
1.03e-02 a
Sol (mg/L)
3.51e+01 a
9.30e+04 a
1.27e+03 a
l.OOe+06 a
9.89e+03 a
3.10e+01 a
2.09e+03 a
1.70e+04 a
1.18e-04 c
2.40e-04 c
1.95e+03 a
8.28e+04 a
6.20e+03 a
7.00e-02 a
4.05e+05 f
l.OOe+06 a
3.10e+02 a
1.93e-05 c
4.20e-04 c
2.97e+03 a
1.10e+03 a
2.00e+02 a
5.26e+02 a
3.37e+04 a
1.66e+04 a
7.40e-01 a
3.10e+03 a
1.70e+02 a
3.46e+01 a
4.42e+03 a
1.33e+03 a
1.10e+03 a
E-25
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E.12. Constituent-specific Chemical and Physical Properties (continued)
Constituent
rrichlorofluoromethane (Freon 1 1)
Irichlorophenol, 2,4,6-
rrichloropropane, 1,2,3-
rriethylamine
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene, p-
Xylene, o-
Xylene, m-
Xylenes (total)
CASRN
75-69-4
88-06-2
96-18-4
121-44-8
108-05-4
75-01-4
106-42-3
95-47-6
108-38-3
1330-20-7
Da (cm2/s)
6.55E-02 e
3.14E-02 e
5.75E-02 e
6.63E-02 e
8.51E-02 e
1.07E-01 e
6.84E-02 e
6.91E-02 e
6.85E-02 e
6.87E-02 e
Dw (cm2/s)
1.01E-05 e
8.09E-06 e
9.24E-06 e
7.84E-06 e
l.OOE-05 e
1.20E-05 e
8.45E-06 e
8.56E-06 e
8.47E-06 e
8.49E-06 e
HLC
(atm-m3/mol)
9.70e-02 a
7.79e-06 a
4.09e-04 a
1.38e-04 f
5.11e-04 a
2.70e-02 a
7.66e-03 a
5.19e-03 a
7.34e-03 a
6.73e-03 a
Sol (mg/L)
1.10e+03 a
8.00e+02 a
1.75e+03 a
5.50e+04 f
2.00e+04 a
2.76e+03 a
1.85e+02 a
1.78e+02 a
1.61e+02 a
1.75e+02 a
Da = air diffusivity; Dw = water diffusivity; HLC = Henry's law constant; Sol = aqueous solubility
CASRN = Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number
* Values used for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (CAS #51207-31-9).
Data Sources:
a SCDM (USEPA, 1997b).
b Calculated based on USEPA, 1987.
c USEPA, 2000.
d Calculated based on Lyman, Reehl, and Rosenblatt, 1990.
e Calculated based on WATER9 (USEPA, 2001).
f CHEMFATE (SRC, 1999).
g ChemFinder.com (CambridgeSoft Corporation, 2001).
h The Merck Index (Budavari, 1996).
i HSDB (NLM, 2001).
j Calculated based on USEPA, 2000.
k USEPA, 1997a.
E-26
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-2.6 References for Appendix E-2
Budavari, S. (ed). 1996. The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and
Biologicals. 12th edition. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co.
CambridgeSoft Corporation. 2001. ChemFinder.com database and internet searching.
http://chemfmder.cambridgesoft.com. Accessed July 2001.
Lyman, W.J., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt. 1990. Handbook of Chemical Property
Estimation Methods: Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC). 1999. CHEMFATE Chemical Search,
Environmental Science Center, Syracuse, NY.
http://esc.syrres.com/efdb/Chemfate.htm. Accessed July 2001.
USEPA. 1987. Process Coefficients and Models for Simulating Toxic Organics and
Heavy Metals in Surface Waters. Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO).
USEPA. 1997a. Mercury Study Report to Congress. Volume IV: An Assessment of
Exposure to Mercury in the United States. EPA-452/R-97-006. Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC: GPO.
USEPA. 1997b. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM). SCDMWIN 1.0 (SCDM
Windows User's Version), Version 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington DC: GPO.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/scdm/index.htm. Accessed July 2001.
USEPA. 2000. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds, Part 1, Vol. 3.
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC: GPO.
USEPA. 2001. WATER9. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/index.html.
Accessed July 2001.
USNLM (U.S. National Library of Medicine). 2001. Hazardous Substances Data Bank
(HSDB). http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen7HSDB. Accessed
July 2001.
E-27
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3 Human Health Benchmarks used in the IWEM Tool
Human health benchmarks for chronic oral and inhalation exposures are an
important component of the IWEM 1 tool. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) uses reference doses (RfDs) and reference concentrations (RfCs) to evaluate
noncancer risk from oral and inhalation exposures, respectively. Oral cancer slope
factors (CSFs), inhalation unit risk factors (URFs), and inhalation CSFs are used to
evaluate risk for carcinogens.
This memorandum provides the toxicity benchmarks we used to develop the
HBNs that we will use in developing Reference Groundwater Concentrations used in the
IWEM tool. Section E-3.1 describes the data sources and general hierarchy used to
collect these benchmarks. Section E-3.2 provides the benchmarks along with discussions
of individual human health benchmarks extracted from a variety of sources.
E-3.1 Methodology and Data Sources
Several sources of health benchmarks are available. Human health benchmarks
were obtained from these sources in the following order of preference:
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
Superfund Technical Support Center Provisional Benchmarks
Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST)
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) minimal risk
levels (MRLs)
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) chronic inhalation
reference exposure levels (RELs) and cancer potency factors.
EPA health assessment documents
Various other EPA health benchmark sources.
For dioxins and dibenzofurans, World Health Organization (WHO) toxicity equivalency
factors (TEFs) from Van den Berg et al. (1998) were applied to the HEAST CSF for
2,3,7,8-TCDD to obtain CSFs for all other dioxins and furans (see Section E-3.2.4).
E-3.1.1 Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
Benchmarks in IRIS are prepared and maintained by EPA, and values from IRIS
were used to develop HBNs for the IWEM tool whenever IRIS benchmarks were
available. IRIS is EPA's electronic database containing information on human health
effects (USEPA, 200la). Each chemical file contains descriptive and quantitative
information on potential health effects. Health benchmarks for chronic noncarcinogenic
health effects include RfDs and RfCs. Cancer classification, oral CSFs, and inhalation
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
URFs are included for carcinogenic effects. IRIS is the official repository of Agency-
wide consensus of human health risk information.
Inhalation CSFs are not available from IRIS, so they were calculated from
inhalation URFs (which are available from IRIS) using the following equation:
inh CSF = inh URF x 70 kg - 20 m3/d x 1000 ng/mg
In this equation, 70 kg represents average body weight; 20 m3/d represents average
inhalation rate; and 1000 i-ig/mg is a units conversion factor (USEPA, 1997). These
standard estimates of body weight and inhalation rate are used by EPA in the calculation
of the URF, and, therefore, the values were used to calculate inhalation CSFs.
E-3.1.2 Superfund Provisional Benchmarks
The Superfund Technical Support Center (EPA's National Center for
Environmental Assessment [NCEA]) derives provisional RfCs, RfDs, and CSFs for
certain chemicals. These provisional health benchmarks can be found in Risk
Assessment Issue Papers. Some of the provisional values have been externally peer
reviewed, and some (e.g., trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene) come from previously
published EPA Health Assessment Documents. These provisional values have not
undergone EPA's formal review process for finalizing benchmarks and do not represent
Agency-wide consensus information. Specific provisional values used in the IWEM tool
are described in Section E-3.2.5.
E-3.1.3 Health Effects Summary Tables (HEAST)
HEAST is a listing of provisional noncarcinogenic and carcinogenic health
toxicity values (RfDs, RfCs, URFs, and CSFs) derived by EPA (USEPA, 1997).
Although the health toxicity values in HEAST have undergone review and have the
concurrence of individual EPA program offices, either they have not been reviewed as
extensively as those in IRIS or their data set is not complete enough to be listed in IRIS.
HEAST benchmarks have not been updated in several years and do not represent
Agency-wide consensus information.
E-3.1.4 ATSDR Minimal Risk Levels
The ATSDR MRLs are substance-specific health guidance levels for
noncarcinogenic endpoints (ATSDR, 2001). An MRL is an estimate of the daily human
exposure to a hazardous substance that is likely to be without appreciable risk of adverse
noncancer health effects over a specified duration of exposure. MRLs are based on
noncancer health effects only and are not based on a consideration of cancer effects.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
MRLs are derived for acute, intermediate, and chronic exposure durations for oral and
inhalation routes of exposure. Inhalation and oral MRLs are derived in a manner similar
to EPA's RfCs and RfDs, respectively (i.e., ATSDR uses the no-observed-adverse-effect-
level/uncertainty factor (NOAEL/UF) approach); however, MRLs are intended to serve
as screening levels and are exposure duration-specific. Also, ATSDR uses EPA's 1994
inhalation dosimetry methodology in the derivation of inhalation MRLs. A chronic
inhalation MRL for mixed xylenes was used as a surrogate for each of the xylene
isomers.
E-3.1.5 CalEPA Cancer Potency Factors and Reference Exposure Levels
CalEPA has developed cancer potency factors for chemicals regulated under
California's Hot Spots Air Toxics Program (CalEPA, 1999a). The cancer potency factors
are analogous to EPA's oral and inhalation CSFs. CalEPA has also developed chronic
inhalation RELs, analogous to EPA's RfC, for 120 substances (CalEPA, 1999b, 2000).
CalEPA used EPA's 1994 inhalation dosimetry methodology in the derivation of
inhalation RELs. The cancer potency factors and inhalation RELs have undergone
internal peer review by various California agencies and have been the subject of public
comment. A chronic inhalation REL for mixed cresols was used as a surrogate for each
of the cresol isomers.
E-3.1.6 Other EPA Health Benchmarks
EPA has also derived health benchmark values in other risk assessment
documents, such as Health Assessment Documents (HADs), Health Effect Assessments
(HEAs), Health and Environmental Effects Profiles (HEEPs), Health and Environmental
Effects Documents (HEEDs), Drinking Water Criteria Documents, and Ambient Water
Quality Criteria Documents. Evaluations of potential carcinogenicity of chemicals in
support of reportable quantity adjustments were published by EPA's Carcinogen
Assessment Group (CAG) and may include cancer potency factor estimates. Health
toxicity values identified in these EPA documents are usually dated and are not
recognized as Agency-wide consensus information or verified benchmarks, however, and
as a result they are used in the hierarchy only when values are not available from IRIS,
HEAST, Superfund provisional values, ATSDR, or CalEPA. Section E-3.2.6 describes
the specific values from these alternative EPA sources that were used in the IWEM tool.
E-3.2 Human Health Benchmark Values
The chronic human health benchmarks used to calculate the health-based numbers
(HBNs) in the IWEM tool are summarized in Table E-3.1, which provides the Chemical
Abstract Service Registry Number (CASRN), constituent name, RfD (mg/kg-d), RfC
(mg/m3), oral CSF (mg/kg-d *), inhalation URF [(u-g/m3)"1], inhalation CSF (mg/kg-d *),
EX50
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
and reference for each benchmark. A key to the references cited and abbreviations used
is provided at the end of the table.
For a majority of the IWEM constituents, human health benchmarks were
available from IRIS (USEPA, 2001a), Superfund Provisional Benchmarks, or HEAST
(USEPA, 1997). Benchmarks also were obtained from ATSDR (2001) or CalEPA
(1999a, 1999b, 2000). This section describes benchmarks obtained from other sources,
along with the Superfund Provisional values and special uses (e.g., benzene, vinyl
chloride) of IRIS benchmarks.
E-31
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values
Oj
Constituent Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde (ethanal)
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid (propenoic acid)
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo {b } fluoranthene
Benzyl chloride
CASRN
83-32-9
75-07-0
67-64-1
75-05-8
98-86-2
107-02-8
79-06-1
79-10-7
107-13-1
309-00-2
107-18-6
62-53-3
120-12-7
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
56-55-3
71-43-2
92-87-5
50-32-8
205-99-2
100-44-7
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
6.0E-02
l.OE-01
l.OE-01
2.0E-02
2.0E-04
5.0E-01
l.OE-03
3.0E-05
5.0E-03
3.0E-01
4.0E-04
3.0E-04
7.0E-02
3.0E-03
RfDRef
\
\
I
H
I
\
H
I
\
\
\
I
\
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
4.5E+0
5.4E-1
1.7E+01
5.7E-3
1.5E+00
1.2E+00
5.5E-02
2.3E+02
7.3E+00
1.2E+00
1.7E-01
CSFo
Ref
I
\
I
I
I
C99a
I
\
I
C99a
\
RfC
(mg/m3)
9.0E-03
3.1E+01
6.0E-02
2.0E-05
l.OE-03
2.0E-03
l.OE-03
6.0E-02
RfC Ref
I
A
I
\
\
\
I
COO
URF
(per
ug/m3)
2.2E-06
1.3E-03
6.8E-05
4.9E-03
1.6E-06
1.1E-04
7.8E-06
6.7E-02
1.1E-03
1.1E-04
4.9E-05
URF Ref
I
I
\
I
C99a
C99a
I
\
C99a
C99a
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
7.7E-03
4.6E+00
2.4E-01
1.7E+01
5.6E-03
3.9E-01
2.7E-02
2.3E+02
3.9E+00
3.9E-01
1.7E-01
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
\
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Benzyl alcohol
Beryllium
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2 -chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2 -ethylhexyl) phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane (methyl
bromide)
Butadiene, 1,3-
Butanol
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-
(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
Chloro-l,3-butadiene, 2-
(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline, p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
CASRN
100-51-6
7440-41-7
111-44-4
39638-32-9
117-81-7
75-27-4
74-83-9
106-99-0
71-36-3
85-68-7
88-85-7
7440-43-9
56-23-5
75-15-0
57-74-9
126-99-8
106-47-8
108-90-7
510-15-6
124-48-1
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
3.0E-01
2.0E-03
4.0E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
1.4E-03
l.OE-01
2.0E-01
l.OE-03
5.0E-04
7.0E-04
l.OE-01
5.0E-04
2.0E-02
4.0E-03
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
RfDRef
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.1E+00
7.0E-02
1.4E-02
6.2E-02
1.3E-01
3.5E-01
2.7E-01
8.4E-02
CSFo
Ref
I
H
I
I
I
I
H
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE-02
5.0E-03
2.0E-02
7.0E-03
7.0E-01
7.0E-04
7.0E-03
6.0E-02
RfC Ref
C99b
I
COO
SF
I
I
H
SF
URF
(per
ug/m3)
3.3E-04
l.OE-05
2.4E-06
1.8E-05
2.8E-04
1.5E-05
l.OE-04
7.8E-05
2.4E-05
URF Ref
I
H
C99a
AC
I
I
I
H
AC
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
1.2E+00
3.5E-02
8.4E-03
6.2E-02
9.8E-01
5.3E-02
3.5E-01
2.7E-01
8.4E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
AC
calc
calc
calc
calc
AC
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
Oj
Oj
-------
Oj
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride)
Chloroform
Chloromethane (methyl
chloride)
Chlorophenol, 2-
Chloropropene, 3- (allyl
chloride)
Chromium (UT)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol, p-
Cresol, o-
Cresol, m-
Cresols (total)
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
DDD
DDE
CASRN
75-00-3
67-66-3
74-87-3
95-57-8
107-05-1
16065-83-1
18540-29-9
218-01-9
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
106-44-5
95-48-7
108-39-4
1319-77-3
98-82-8
108-93-0
108-94-1
72-54-8
72-55-9
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
l.OE-02
5.0E-03
1.5E+00
3.0E-03
2.0E-02
RfDRef
I
I
\
\
SF
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.3E-02
1.2E-01
CSFo
Ref
H
C99a
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE+01
l.OE-01
9.0E-02
1.4E-03
l.OE-03
RfC Ref
I
A
I
AC
I
URF
(per
ug/m3)
1.8E-06
6.0E-06
1.1E-05
URF Ref
H
C99a
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
6.3E-03
2.1E-02
3.9E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
(only a drinking water action level is available for this metal)
5.0E-03
5.0E-02
5.0E-02
5.0E-02
l.OE-01
1.7E-05
5.0E+00
H
I
\
surr (I)
I
solv
I
2.4E-01
3.4E-01
I
I
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
6.0E-01
4.0E-01
2.0E-05
surr
(COO)
surr
(COO)
surr
(COO)
COO
I
solv
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
DDT, p,p'-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane,
1,2-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene, 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine, 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane
(Freon 12)
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
Dichloroethane, 1,1-
Dichloroethylene, 1,1-
Dichloroethylene, trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene, cis-1,2-
Dichlorophenol, 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid,
2,4- (2,4-D)
Dichloropropane, 1,2-
Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene, cis-1,3-
CASRN
50-29-3
84-74-2
117-84-0
2303-16-4
53-70-3
96-12-8
95-50-1
106-46-7
91-94-1
75-71-8
107-06-2
75-34-3
75-35-4
156-60-5
156-59-2
120-83-2
94-75-7
78-87-5
10061-02-6
10061-01-5
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
5.0E-04
l.OE-01
2.0E-02
9.0E-02
2.0E-01
l.OE-01
9.0E-03
2.0E-02
l.OE-02
3.0E-03
l.OE-02
9.0E-02
3.0E-02
3.0E-02
RfDRef
I
I
H
I
I
H
I
I
H
I
I
A
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
3.4E-01
6.1E-02
7.3E+00
1.4E+0
2.4E-2
4.5E-01
9.1E-2
6.0E-1
6.8E-2
l.OE-1
l.OE-1
CSFo
Ref
I
H
TEF
H
H
I
I
I
H
I
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
2.0E-04
2.0E-01
8.0E-01
2.0E-01
2.4E+00
5.0E-01
7.0E-02
4.0E-03
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
RfC Ref
I
H
I
H
A
H
COO
I
SUIT (I)
surr (I)
URF
(per
ug/m3)
9.7E-05
1.2E-03
6.9E-07
1.1E-05
3.4E-04
2.6E-05
1.6E-06
5.0E-05
4.0E-06
4.0E-06
URF Ref
I
C99a
H
C99a
C99a
I
C99a
I
surr (I)
surr (I)
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
3.4E-01
4.2E+00
2.4E-03
3.9E-02
1.2E+00
9.1E-02
5.6E-03
1.8E-01
1.4E-02
1.4E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
Oj
-------
Oj
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Dichloropropene, 1,3- (mixture
of isomers)
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine, 3,3'-
Dimethyl phthalate
Dimethyl formamide, N,N-
(DMF)
Dimethylbenz{a } anthracene ,
7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine, 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol, 2,4-
Dimethylphenol, 3,4-
Dinitrobenzene, 1,3-
Dinitrophenol, 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,6-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,4-
Dioxane, 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine, 1,2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and
II,mixture)
CASRN
542-75-6
60-57-1
84-66-2
56-53-1
60-51-5
119-90-4
131-11-3
68-12-2
57-97-6
119-93-7
105-67-9
95-65-8
99-65-0
51-28-5
606-20-2
121-14-2
123-91-1
122-39-4
122-66-7
298-04-4
115-29-7
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
3.0E-02
5.0E-05
8.0E-01
2.0E-04
l.OE-01
2.0E-02
l.OE-03
l.OE-04
2.0E-03
l.OE-03
2.0E-03
2.5E-02
4.0E-05
6.0E-03
RfDRef
I
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
l.OE-01
1.6E+01
4.7E+03
1.4E-02
9.2E+00
6.8E-01
6.8E-01
1.1E-2
8.0E-1
CSFo
Ref
I
I
H
H
H
surr (I)
surr (I)
I
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
2.0E-02
3.0E-02
3.0E+00
RfC Ref
I
I
COO
URF
(per
ug/m3)
4.0E-06
4.6E-03
7.1E-02
8.9E-05
7.7E-06
2.2E-04
URF Ref
I
I
C99a
C99a
C99a
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
1.4E-02
1.6E+01
2.5E+02
3.1E-01
2.7E-02
7.7E-01
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
Oj
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Oj
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1,2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Ethoxyethanol, 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-
dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furan
Furfural
HCH, beta-
HCH, gamma- (Lindane)
CASRN
72-20-8
106-89-8
106-88-7
111-15-9
110-80-5
141-78-6
60-29-7
97-63-2
62-50-0
100-41-4
75-21-8
106-93-4
107-21-1
96-45-7
206-44-0
86-73-7
16984-48-8
50-00-0
64-18-6
110-00-9
98-01-1
319-85-7
58-89-9
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
3.0E-04
2.0E-03
3.0E-01
4.0E-01
9.0E-01
2.0E-01
9.0E-02
l.OE-01
2.0E+00
8.0E-05
4.0E-02
4.0E-02
6.0E-02
2.0E-01
2.0E+00
l.OE-03
3.0E-03
3.0E-04
RfDRef
\
H
H
H
\
I
H
I
\
I
\
I
surr (I)
\
H
\
\
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
9.9E-3
2.9E+02
l.OE+0
8.5E+1
1.1E-01
1.8E+00
1.3E+00
CSFo
Ref
I
RQ
H
I
H
I
H
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE-03
2.0E-02
3.0E-01
2.0E-01
l.OE+00
3.0E-02
2.0E-04
4.0E-01
9.8E-03
5.0E-02
RfC Ref
I
\
COO
I
I
coo
H
COO
A
H
URF
(per
ug/m3)
1.2E-06
1.1E-06
l.OE-04
2.2E-04
1.3E-05
1.3E-05
5.3E-04
3.1E-04
URF Ref
I
SF
H
I
C99a
\
I
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
4.2E-03
3.9E-03
3.5E-01
7.7E-01
4.6E-02
4.6E-02
1.9E+00
1.1E+00
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
HCH, alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-l,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(HxCDDs)
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
(HxCDFs)
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane, n-
Indeno{l,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol, 2-
CASRN
319-84-6
76-44-8
1024-57-3
87-68-3
118-74-1
77-47-4
34465-46-8
55684-94-1
67-72-1
70-30-4
110-54-3
193-39-5
78-83-1
78-59-1
143-50-0
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
126-98-7
67-56-1
72-43-5
109-86-4
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
8.0E-03
5.0E-04
1.3E-05
3.0E-04
8.0E-04
6.0E-03
l.OE-03
3.0E-04
1.1E+01
3.0E-01
2.0E-01
5.0E-04
RfDRef
A
I
I
SF
I
I
I
I
SF
I
I
A
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
6.3E+00
4.5E+00
9.1E+00
7.8E-2
1.6E+0
1.5E+04
1.5E+04
1.4E-02
1.2E+00
9.5E-04
CSFo
Ref
I
I
I
I
I
WH098
WH098
I
C99a
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
2.0E-04
2.0E-01
2.0E+00
RfC Ref
I
I
C99b
URF
(per
ug/m3)
1.8E-03
1.3E-03
2.6E-03
2.2E-05
4.6E-04
3.3E+00
3.3E+00
4.0E-06
1.1E-04
URF Ref
I
I
I
I
I
WH098
WH098
I
C99a
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
6.3E+00
4.6E+00
9.1E+00
7.7E-02
1.6E+00
1.5E+04
1.5E+04
1.4E-02
3.9E-01
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
WH098
WH098
calc
calc
(only a drinking water action level is available for this metal)
4.7E-02
l.OE-04
l.OE-04
5.0E-01
5.0E-03
l.OE-03
I
surr (I)
I
I
I
H
3.0E-04
7.0E-04
4.0E+00
2.0E-02
I
H
COO
I
Oj
Oo
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Oj
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Methoxyethanol acetate, 2-
Methyl parathion
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl tert-butyl ether
(MTBE)
Methylcholanthrene, 3-
Methylene bromide
(dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride
(dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine
N-Nitrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
CASRN
110-49-6
298-00-0
80-62-6
108-10-1
78-93-3
1634-04-4
56-49-5
74-95-3
75-09-2
7439-98-7
924-16-3
621-64-7
55-18-5
62-75-9
86-30-6
10595-95-6
100-75-4
930-55-2
91-20-3
7440-02-0
98-95-3
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E-03
2.5E-04
1.4E+00
8.0E-02
6.0E-01
l.OE-02
6.0E-02
5.0E-03
8.00E-06
2.00E-02
2.0E-02
2.0E-02
5.0E-04
RfDRef
H
I
\
H
I
H
\
I
SF
SF
\
I
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
7.5E-03
5.4E+00
7.0E+00
1.5E+02
5.1E+01
4.9E-03
2.2E+01
2.1E+00
CSFo
Ref
\
\
I
\
\
I
\
\
RfC
(mg/m3)
9.0E-02
7.0E-01
8.0E-02
l.OE+00
3.0E+00
3.0E+00
3.0E-03
2.0E-03
RfC Ref
COO
\
H
I
\
H
\
H
URF
(per
ug/m3)
6.3E-03
4.7E-07
1.6E-03
2.0E-03
4.3E-02
1.4E-02
2.6E-06
6.3E-03
2.7E-03
6.1E-04
URF Ref
C99a
\
\
C99a
\
\
C99a
C99a
C99a
\
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
2.2E+01
1.6E-03
5.6E+00
7.0E+00
1.5E+02
4.9E+01
9.1E-03
3.7E+00
9.5E+00
2.1E+00
CSFi Ref
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
calc
C99a
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Nitropropane, 2-
Octamethyl
pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(PeCDDs)
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
(PeCDFs)
Pentachloronitrobenzene
(PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine, 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls
(Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide (1,2-
epoxypropane)
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
CASRN
79-46-9
152-16-9
56-38-2
608-93-5
36088-22-9
30402-15-4
82-68-8
87-86-5
108-95-2
62-38-4
108-45-2
298-02-2
85-44-9
1336-36-3
23950-58-5
75-56-9
129-00-0
110-86-1
94-59-7
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E-03
6.0E-03
8.0E-04
3.0E-03
3.0E-02
6.0E-01
8.0E-05
6.0E-03
2.0E-04
2.0E+00
2.0E-05
7.5E-02
3.0E-02
l.OE-03
RfDRef
H
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
I
surr (I)
I
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.5E+05
7.5E+04
2.6E-01
1.2E-01
4.0E-01
2.4E-01
1.8E-01
CSFo
Ref
WH098
WH098
H
I
I
I
RQ
RfC
(mg/m3)
2.0E-02
2.0E-01
1.2E-01
3.0E-02
7.0E-03
RfC Ref
I
COO
H
I
EPA86
URF
(per
ug/m3)
2.7E-03
3.3E+01
1.7E+01
5.1E-06
l.OE-04
3.7E-06
URF Ref
H
WH098
WH098
C99a
I
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
9.5E+00
1.5E+05
7.5E+04
1.8E-02
4.0E-01
1.3E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
WH098
WH098
calc
I
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene, 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,
2,3,7,8-(2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran,
2,3,7,8- (2,3,7,8-TCDF)
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol, 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate
(Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram (Thiuram)
Toluene
Toluenediamine, 2,4-
Toluidine, o-
Toluidine, p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated
camphenes)
Tribromomethane
(bromoform)
CASRN
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
57-24-9
100-42-5
95-94-3
1746-01-6
51207-31-9
79-34-5
630-20-6
127-18-4
58-90-2
3689-24-5
7440-28-0
137-26-8
108-88-3
95-80-7
95-53-4
106-49-0
8001-35-2
75-25-2
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
5.0E-03
5.0E-03
3.0E-04
2.0E-01
3.0E-04
l.OE-09
6.0E-02
3.0E-02
l.OE-02
3.0E-02
5.0E-04
8.0E-05
5.0E-03
2.0E-01
2.0E-02
RfDRef
\
I
\
I
I
A
SF
\
I
I
\
surr (\)
\
I
\
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
1.5E+05
1.5E+04
2.0E-01
2.6E-02
5.2E-02
3.2E+00
2.4E-01
1.9E-01
1.1E+00
7.9E-03
CSFo
Ref
H
WH098
I
\
HAD
H
H
H
\
\
RfC
(mg/m3)
l.OE+00
3.0E-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
I
A
I
URF
(per
ug/m3)
3.3E+01
3.3E+00
5.8E-05
7.4E-06
5.8E-07
1.1E-03
6.9E-05
3.2E-04
1.1E-06
URF Ref
H
WH098
I
\
HAD
C99a
AC
\
\
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
1.5E+05
1.5E+04
2.0E-01
2.6E-02
2.0E-03
3.9E+00
2.4E-01
1.1E+00
3.9E-03
CSFi Ref
H
WH098
calc
calc
HAD
calc
AC
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane, 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-
trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon
11)
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol, 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy) propionic
acid, 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid,
2,4,5-
Trichloropropane, 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene, sym-
(1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene)
Tris(2,3-
dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene, p-
CASRN
76-13-1
120-82-1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
75-69-4
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
93-76-5
96-18-4
121-44-8
99-35-4
126-72-7
7440-62-2
108-05-4
75-01-4
106-42-3
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
3.0E+01
l.OE-02
2.8E-01
4.0E-03
3.0E-01
l.OE-01
8.0E-03
l.OE-02
6.0E-03
3.0E-02
7.0E-03
l.OE+00
3.0E-03
2.0E+00
RfDRef
I
I
SF
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
H
I
surr (H)
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
5.7E-02
1.1E-02
1.1E-02
7.0E+00
9.8E+00
7.2E-01
CSFo
Ref
I
HAD
I
H
RQ
I
RfC
(mg/m3)
3.0E+01
2.0E-01
2.2E+00
6.0E-01
7.0E-01
5.0E-03
7.0E-03
2.0E-01
l.OE-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
H
H
SF
COO
H
SF
I
I
I
surr (A)
URF
(per
ug/m3)
1.6E-05
1.7E-06
3.1E-06
4.4E-06
URF Ref
I
HAD
I
I
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
5.6E-02
6.0E-03
1.1E-02
1.5E-02
CSFi Ref
calc
HAD
calc
calc
r
"M.
8
I
I
I
-------
Table E-3.1. Human Health Benchmark Values (continued)
Constituent Name
Xylene, m-
Xylene, o-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CASRN
108-38-3
95-47-6
1330-20-7
7440-66-6
RfD
(mg/kg-d)
2.0E+00
2.0E+00
2.0E+00
3.0E-01
RfDRef
H
H
I
I
CSFo
(per
mg/kg-d)
CSFo
Ref
RfC
(mg/m3)
4.0E-01
4.0E-01
4.0E-01
RfC Ref
SUIT (A)
SUIT (A)
A
URF
(per
ug/m3)
URF Ref
CSFi (per
mg/kg-d)
CSFi Ref
Key:
CASRN
RfD
RfC
Chemical Abstract Service registry number.
reference dose.
reference concentration.
CSFo = oral cancer slope factor.
CSFi = inhalation cancer slope factor.
URF = unit risk factor.
Sources:
A = ATSDR MRLs (ATSDR, 2001) I
AC = developed for the Air Characteristic Study (USEPA, 1999g) RQ
calc = calculated SF
C99a = CalEPA cancer potency factor (CalEPA, 1999a)
C99b = CalEP A chronic REL (CalEP A, 1999b) solv
COO = CalEPA chronic REL (CalEPA, 2000) surr
HAD = Health Assessment Document (USEPA, 1986a, 1987) TEF
H = HEAST (USEPA, 1997) WH098
IRIS (USEPA, 2001a)
reportable quantity adjustments (USEPA, 1998d,e,f)
Superfund Risk Issue Paper (USEPA, 1998a,b;
1999a,b,c,d,e,f;
2000, 2001b,c,d)
63 FR 64371-0402 (USEPA, 1998c)
surrogate (source in parentheses; see section C.2.8)
toxicity equivalency factor (USEPA, 1993)
World Health Organization (WHO) 1998 toxicity
equivalency factor scheme (Van den Berg et al., 1998)
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
E-3.2.1 Benzene
The cancer risk estimates for benzene are provided as ranges in IRIS. The oral
CSF for benzene is 1.5E-02 to 5.5E-02 (mg/kg/d)'1 and the inhalation URF is 2.2E-06 to
7.8E-06 (pg/m3)' (USEPA, 2001a). For the Tier 1 tool, the upper range estimates were
used (i.e., 5.5E-02 (mg/kg/d)4 and 7.8E-06 (pg/m3)' for the oral CSF and inhalation
URF, respectively).
E-3.2.2 Vinyl Chloride
Based on use of the linearized multistage model, IRIS recommends an oral CSF
of 7.2E-1 per mg/kg-d for vinyl chloride to account for continuous lifetime exposure
during adulthood; this value was used for the Tier 1 Tool.1 Based on use of the linearized
multistage model, an inhalation URF of 4.4E-6 per |ig/m3 to account for continuous,
lifetime exposure during adulthood was recommended for vinyl chloride and was used
for the IWEM 1 tool; an inhalation CSF of 1.5E-2 per mg/kg-d was calculated from the
URF.2
E-3.2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls
There are two inhalation CSFs available from IRIS for polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs): 0.4 per mg/kg-d for evaporated congeners and 2.0 per mg/kg-d for dust or
aerosol (high risk and persistence). The inhalation CSF for evaporated congeners was
used for the IWEM 1 tool.
E-3.2.4 Dioxin-like Compounds
Certain polychlorinated dibenzodioxin, polychlorinated dibenzofuran, and
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners are said to have "dioxin-like" toxicity,
meaning that they are understood to have toxicity similar to that of 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo(p)dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD). Although EPA has not developed health
benchmarks for each specific compound with dioxin-like toxicity, these compounds have
been assigned individual "toxicity equivalency factors" (TEFs; Van den Berg et al.,
*A twofold increase of the oral CSF to 1.4 per mg/kg-d to account for continuous
lifetime exposure from birth was also recommended but was not used for the IWEM 1
Tool.
2A twofold increase to 8.8E-6 per |ig/m3 for the inhalation URF, to account for
continuous lifetime exposure from birth, was also recommended but was not used for the
IWEM 1 tool.
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
1998). TEFs are estimates of the toxicity of dioxin-like compounds relative to the
toxicity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD, which is assigned a TEF of 1.0. TEF estimates are based on a
knowledge of a constituent's mechanism of action, available experimental data, and other
structure-activity information. We used the TEFs to calculate cancer slope factors for the
dioxin and furan congeners (and congener groups) in the IWEM tool.
The dioxin-like congeners (and groups of congeners) included in the TIWEM 1
tool are as follows:
2,3,7,8-TCDD,
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran(2,3,7,8-TCDF)
Pentachlorodibenzodioxins (PeCDDs)
Pentachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs)
Hexachlorodibenzodioxins (HxCDDs)
Hexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs).
2,3,7,8-TCDF has a TEF of 0.1. The dioxin-like PeCDD congener is 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD,
which has a TEF of 1.0. The dioxin-like PeCDF congeners include 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF and
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF which have TEFs of 0.05 and 0.5, respectively. The dioxin-like
HxCDD congeners include 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD, 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD, and 1,2,3,6,7,8-
HxCDD, which have TEFs of 0.1. The dioxin-like HxCDF congeners include
1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF, 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF, 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF, and 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF,
which also have TEFs of 0.1. Table C-2 shows the TEFs that we used to calculate CSFs
for the dioxin and furan congeners (and congener groups) for the purpose of developing
HBNs for the Tier 1 tool.
Table E-3.2. TEFs Used for Dioxin and Furan Congeners
Constituent Name
TEF
CSFo
(mkd)1
CSFo
Source
URF
(Hg/m3)1
URF
Source
CSFi
(mkd)1
CSFi Source
Dioxins
Pentachlorodibenzodioxins
2,3,7,8-TCDD
Hexachlorodibenzodioxins
1
1
0.1
1.5E+05
1.5E+5
1.5E+4
WHO 1998
EPA, 1997
WHO 1998
3.3E+01
3.3E+01
3.3E+00
WHO 1998
EPA, 1997
WHO 1998
1.5E+05
1.5E+5
1.5E+4
WHO 1998
EPA, 1997
WHO 1998
Furans
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
2,3,7,8-TCDF
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.5E+4
7.5E+4
1.5E+4
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
3.3E+00
1.7E+01
3.3E+00
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
1.5E+4
7.5E+4
1.5E+4
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 1998
WHO 98 = TEFs presented in Van den Berg et al. (1998)
EPA, 1997 = HEAST (USEPA, 1997).
E-45
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
The human health benchmarks calculated using the TEFs for 1,2,3,4,7,8-
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran were surrogates for
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins (HxCDDs) and hexachlorodibenzofurans (HxCDFs),
respectively. The human health benchmarks for 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
and 2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran were used to represent pentachlorodibenzodioxins
(PeCDDs) and pentachlorodibenzofurans (PeCDFs), respectively. The human health
benchmarks for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) and
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran were used to represent tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
(TCDDs) and tetrachlorodibenzofurans (TCDFs), respectively. When TEFs varied
within a class of dioxin-like compounds (i.e., pentachlorodibenzofurans), the TEF most
protective of human health was used.
E-3.2.5 Superfund Technical Support Center Provisional Benchmarks
Table E-3.3 lists the provisional human health benchmarks from the Superfund
Technical Support Center that were used for some of the IWEM constituents. A
provisional subchronic RfC of 2.0E-2 mg/m3 was developed by the Superfund Technical
Support Center (USEPA, 1999a) for carbon tetrachloride; a provisional chronic RfC of
7.0E-3 mg/m3 was derived from this value by applying an uncertainty factor of 3 to
account for the use of a subchronic study.
E-46
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-3.3. Provisional Human Health Benchmarks Developed by the Superfund
Technical Support Center
CASRN
108-90-7
7440-48-4
100-41-4
87-68-3
110-54-3
62-75-9
86-30-6
79-34-5
71-55-6
71-55-6
96-18-4
Chemical Name
Chlorobenzene
Cobalt (and compounds)
Ethylbenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexane, -
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
(N-methyl-N-nitroso-
methanamine)
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, 1,1,1-
Trichloropropane, 1,2,3-
Benchmark
Type
RfC
RfD
URF
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfD
RfC
RfC
Benchmark
Value
6.0E-02
2.0E-02
1.1E-06
3.0E-04
1.1E+01
8.0E-06
2.0E-02
6.0E-02
2.8E-01
2.2E+00
5.0E-03
Units
mg/m3
mg/kg-d
(ng/mS)1
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/kg-d
mg/m3
mg/m3
Reference
USEPA, 1998a
USEPA, 2001b
USEPA, 1999b
USEPA, 1998b
USEPA, 1999c
USEPA, 2001c
USEPA, 2001d
USEPA, 2000
USEPA, 1999d
USEPA, 1999e
USEPA, 1999f
E-3.2.6 Benchmarks From Other EPA Sources
For some IWEM constituents, human health benchmarks were not available from
IRIS, the Superfund Technical Support Center, HEAST, ATSDR, or CalEPA, but were
available from other EPA sources:
The provisional oral CSF of 5.2E-2 per mg/kg-d, provisional inhalation
URF of 5.8E-7 per |ig/m3, and the provisional inhalation CSF of 2.0E-3
per mg/kg-d developed for tetrachloroethylene by EPA in a Health
Assessment Document (HAD) (USEPA, 1986a) were used.
For trichloroethylene, provisional cancer benchmarks developed by EPA
in a HAD (USEPA, 1987) were used and include the oral CSF of 1.1 E-2
per mg/kg-d, inhalation URF of 1.7E-6 per |ig/m3, and inhalation CSF of
6.0E-3 per mg/kg-d.
A provisional RfD of 1.7E-5 mg/kg-d and a provisional RfC of 2.0E-5
mg/m3 were derived for cyclohexanol in the final listing rule for solvents
(63 FR 64371) and were used (USEPA, 1998c).
E-47
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
An acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 2.0E-03 mg/kg-d from inhalation
(7.0E-3 mg/m3) was identified for pyridine (USEPA, 1986b).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 293 per mg/kg-d for ethyl
methanesulfonate in a reportable quantity adjustment evaluation (USEPA,
1998d).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 0.18 per mg/kg-d for
safrole in a reportable quantity adjustment evaluation (USEPA, 1998e).
EPA calculated an oral cancer potency factor of 9.8 per mg/kg-d for
tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate in a reportable quantity adjustment
evaluation (USEPA, 1998f).
The cancer slope factor for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene was calculated using a
TEF approach developed for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (USEPA,
1993). The TEF approach assigns dibenzo(a.h)anthracene a TEF of 1
relative to the toxicity of benzo(a)pyrene. The oral CSF for
dibenzo(a.h)anthracene is therefore the same as the IRIS (USEPA, 200la)
value for benzo(a)pyrene: 7.3.E+00 (mg/kg-d)"1.
E-3.2.7 Air Characteristic Study Provisional Benchmarks
Provisional inhalation health benchmarks were developed in the Air
Characteristic Study (USEPA, 1999g) for several constituents lacking IRIS, HEAST,
alternative EPA, or ATSDR values. For 2-chlorophenol, a provisional RfC was
developed using route-to-route extrapolation of the oral RfD. Using route-to-route
extrapolations based on oral CSFs from IRIS and HEAST, the Air Characteristic Study
developed provisional inhalation URFs and inhalation CSFs for
bromodichloromethane, chlorodibromomethane, and o-Toluidine.
These provisional inhalation benchmark values are summarized in Table C-4
below. Additional details on the derivation of these inhalation benchmarks can be found
in the Revised Risk Assessment for the Air Characteristic Study (USEPA, 1999g).
E-48
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document
Appendix E
Table E-3.4. Provisional Inhalation Benchmarks Developed in the Air
Characteristic Study
CASRN
75-27-4
124-48-1
95-57-8
95-53-4
Chemical Name
Bromodichloromethane
(dichlorobromomethane)
Chlorodibromomethane
(dibromochloromethane)
2-Chlorophenol (o-)
o-Toluidine (2-methylaniline)
RfC
(mg/m3)
1.4E-03
RfC Target
Effect
Reproductive
development
al
URF (ng/m3) '
1.8E-05
2.4E-05
6.9E-05
CSFi
(mg/kg-d)1
6.2E-02
8.4E-02
2.4E-01
E-3.2.8 Surrogate Health Benchmarks
For several IWEM constituents, IRIS benchmarks for similar chemicals were used
as surrogate data. The rationale for these recommendations is as follows:
cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene and trans-1,3-dichloropropylene were based on
1,3-dichloropropene. The studies cited in the IRIS file for 1,3-
dichloropropene used a technical-grade chemical that contained about a
50/50 mixture of the cis- and trans-isomers. The RfD is 3E-02 mg/kg-d
and the RfC is 2E-02 mg/m3. The oral CSF for 1,3-dichloropropene is 0.1
(mg/kg-d)' and the inhalation URF is 4E-06 (jig/m3)'1.
The IRIS oral CSF for the 2,4-/2,6-dinitrotoluene mixture (6.8E-01 per
mg/kg-d) was used as the oral CSFs for 2,4-dinitrotoluene and 2,6-
dinitrotoluene.
The RfDs for o- and m-cresol (both 5E-02 mg/kg/d) are cited on IRIS. The
provisional RfD for p-cresol (5E-03 mg/kg/d) is from HEAST. Cresol
mixtures contain all three cresol isomers. Based on the hierarchy
described above (i.e., IRIS is preferred over HEAST because IRIS is
EPA's official repository of Agency-wide consensus human health risk
information), the RfD for m-cresol (5E-02 mg/kg-d) was used as a
surrogate for cresol mixtures.
E-49
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
Fluoride was based on fluorine. The IRIS RfD for fluorine (6E-02 mg/kg-
d) is based on soluble fluoride.
The RfD for methyl mercury (1E-04 mg/kg-d) was used as a surrogate for
elemental mercury.
The RfD for Arochlor 1254 (2E-05 mg/kg-d) was used as a surrogate for
PCBs.
Thallium was based on thallium chloride. There are several thallium salts
that have RfDs in IRIS. The lowest value among the thallium salts (8E-05
mg/kg-d) is routinely used to represent thallium in risk assessments.
p-Xylene was based on total xylenes. An RfD of 2 mg/kg-d is listed for
total xylenes, m-xylene, and o-xylene in IRIS. Total xylenes contain a
mixture of all three isomers; therefore, the RfD likely is appropriate for p-
xylene.
E-3.2.9 Chloroform
EPA has classified chloroform as a Group B2, Probable Human Carcinogen,
based on an increased incidence of several tumor types in rats and mice (USEPA, 2001a).
However, based on an evaluation initiated by EPA's Office of Water (OW), the Office of
Solid Waste (OSW) now believes the weight of evidence for the carcinogenic mode of
action for chloroform does not support a mutagenic mode of action; therefore, a nonlinear
low-dose extrapolation is more appropriate for assessing risk from exposure to
chloroform. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB), the World Health Organization
(WHO), the Society of Toxicology, and EPA all strongly endorse the nonlinear approach
for assessing risks from chloroform.
Although OW conducted its evaluation of chloroform carcinogenicity for oral
exposure, a nonlinear approach for low-dose extrapolation would apply to inhalation
exposure to chloroform as well, because chloroform's mode of action is understood to be
the same for both ingestion and inhalation exposures. Specifically, tumorigenesis for
both ingestion and inhalation exposures is induced through cytotoxicity (cell death)
produced by the oxidative generation of highly reactive metabolites (phosgene and
hydrochloric acid), followed by regenerative cell proliferation (USEPA, 1998g).
Chloroform-induced liver tumors in mice have only been seen after bolus corn oil dosing
and have not been observed following administration by other routes (i.e., drinking water
and inhalation). As explained in EPA OW's March 31, 1998, and December 16, 1998,
Federal Register notices pertaining to chloroform (USEPA, 1998g and 1998h,
respectively), EPA now believes that "based on the current evidence for the mode of
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
action by which chloroform may cause tumorigenesis, ...a nonlinear approach is more
appropriate for extrapolating low-dose cancer risk rather than the low-dose linear
approach..."(USEPA, 1998g). OW determined that, given chloroform's mode of
carcinogenic action, liver toxicity (a noncancer health effect) actually "is a more sensitive
effect of chloroform than the induction of tumors" and that protecting against liver
toxicity "should be protective against carcinogenicity given that the putative mode of
action understanding for chloroform involves cytotoxicity as a key event preceding tumor
development" (USEPA, 1998g).
The recent evaluations conducted by OW concluded that protecting against
chloroform's noncancer health effects protects against excess cancer risk. EPA now
believes that the noncancer health effects resulting from inhalation of chloroform would
precede the development of cancer and would occur at lower doses than would tumor
development. Although EPA has not finalized a noncancer health benchmark for
inhalation exposure (i.e., an RfC), ATSDR has developed an inhalation MRL for
chloroform. Therefore, ATSDR's chronic inhalation MRL for chloroform (0.1 mg/m3)
was used in Tier 1.
E-3.3 References
ATSDR. 2001. Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) for Hazardous Substances.
http://atsdrl.atsdr.cdc.gov:8080/mrls.html
CalEPA. 1999a. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part II.
Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Factors.
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Berkeley, CA. Available
online at http://www.oehha.org/scientific/hsca2.htm.
CalEPA. 1999b. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part III.
Technical Support Document for the Determination of Noncancer Chronic
Reference Exposure Levels. SRP Draft. Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, Berkeley, CA. Available online at
http://www.oehha.org/hotspots/RAGSII.html.
E-51
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
CalEPA. 2000. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines: Part III.
Technical Support Document for the Determination ofNoncancer Chronic
Reference Exposure Levels. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment,
Berkeley, CA. Available online (in 3 sections) at
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/22RELS2k.html,
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/42kChREL.html,
http://www.oehha.org/air/chronic_rels/Jan2001 ChREL.html.
USEPA. 1986a. Addendum to the Health Assessment Document for Tetrachloroethylene
(Perchloroethylene). Updated Carcinogenicity Assessment for
Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene, PERC, PCE). External Review Draft.
EPA/600/8-82-005FA. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Office
of Research and Development, Washington DC.
USEPA. 1986b. Health and Environmental Effects Profile for Pyridine. EPA/GOO/x-86-
168. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1987. Addendum to the Health Assessment Document for Trichloroethylene.
Updated Carcinogenicity Assessment for Trichloroethylene. External Review
Draft. EPA/600/8-82-006FA. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development, Washington DC.
USEPA. 1993. Provisional Guidance for Quantitative Risk Assessment of Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/R-93-
089.
USEPA. 1994. Methods for Derivation of Inhalation Reference Concentrations and
Application of Inhalation Dosimetry. EPA/600/8-90-066F. Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC.
USEPA. 1997. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). EPA-540-R-97-
036. FY 1997 Update. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington, DC.
USEPA. 1998a. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional Chronic
RfCfor Chlorobenzene (CASRN108-90-7). 98-020/09-18-98. National Center
for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
E-52
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
USEPA. 1998b. Risk Assessment Paper for: Evaluation of'the Systemic Toxicity of
Hexachlorobutadiene (CASRN 87-68-3) Resulting from Oral Exposure. 98-
009/07-17-98. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund
Technical Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1998c. Hazardous waste management system; identification and listing of
hazardous waste; solvents; final rule. Federal Register 63 FR 64371-402.
USEPA. 1998d. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Ethyl Methanesulfonate
(62-50-0) in Support of Reportable Quantity Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA
Section 102. Prepared by Carcinogen Assessment Group, Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 1998e. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Safrole (94-59-7) in
Support of Reportable Quantity Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA Section 102.
Prepared by Carcinogen Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 1998f. Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Tris(2,3-
dibromopropyl)phosphate (126-72-7) in Support of Reportable Quantity
Adjustments Pursuant to CERLCA Section 102. Prepared by Carcinogen
Assessment Group, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
Washington, D.C.
USEPA. 1998g. National primary drinking water regulations: disinfectants and
disinfection byproducts notice of data availability; Proposed Rule. Federal
Register W (61): 15673-15692. March 31.
USEPA. 1998h. National primary drinking water regulations: disinfectants and
disinfection byproducts; final rule. Federal Register 63 (241): 69390-69476.
December 16.
USEPA. 1999a. Risk Assessment Paper for: The Derivation of a Provisional
Subchronic RfCfor Carbon Tetrachloride (CASRN 56-23-5). 98-026/6-14-99.
National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support
Center, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1999b. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Evaluating the Carcinogenicity of
Ethylbenzene (CASRN 100-41-4). 99-011/10-12-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
E-53
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
USEPA. 1999c. Risk Assessment Paper for: An Updated Systemic Toxicity Evaluation
of'n-Hexane (CASRN110-54-3). 98-019/10-1-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
USEPA. 1999d. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of Provisional Oral
Chronic RfD and Subchronic RfDsfor 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (CASRN 71-55-6).
98-025/8-4-99. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund
Technical Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1999e. Risk Assessment Issue Paper for: Derivation of Provisional Chronic
and Subchronic RfCsfor 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (CASRN 71-55-6). 98-025/8-4-
99. National Center for Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical
Support Center, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1999f. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of the Systemic Toxicity of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (CASRN 96-18-4). 98-014/8-13-99. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
USEPA. 1999g. Revised Risk Assessment for the Air Characteristic Study. EPA-530-R-
99-019a. Volume 2. Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
USEPA. 2000. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethane (CASRN 79-34-5). 00-122/12-20-00. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
USEPA. 2001a. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, Washington,
DC. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/iris/
USEPA. 200 Ib. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for Cobalt
and Compounds (CASRN 7440-48-4). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
USEPA. 200 Ic. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for N-
Nitrosodimethylamine (CASRN 62-75-9). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
E-54
-------
IWEM Technical Background Document Appendix E
USEPA. 200 Id. Risk Assessment Paper for: Derivation of a Provisional RfD for N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine (CASRN 86-30-6). 00-122/3-16-01. National Center for
Environmental Assessment. Superfund Technical Support Center, Cincinnati,
OH.
Van den Berg, M., L. Birnbaum, A.T.C. Bosveld, et al. 1998. Toxic equivalency factors
(TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and wildlife. Environmental Health
Perspectives 106:775-792.
E-55
-------
APPENDIX F
TIER 1 LCTV TABLES
-------
Table F. 1 Landfill LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1 .OOE-05
2.20E+00
1 .80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4. OOE-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.3E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.3
2.2
2.2
58
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.3
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.014
0.11
4.3
0.011
0.012 c
0.026
1.0E+03b'c
0.20
0.015
0.011
0.014
0.030 a'
0.22
0.19
0.18
0.31
0.25
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.3E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.4
2.2
2.2
59
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.3
5.4
5.4
1.0E+03b'
0.013
27
9.4E-03"
97 c
0.27
17C
0.023
0.016
3.8
0.2
16
19"
0.14
2.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.2
80 M
5.4
13C
0.054
0.027
5.9
0.048
0.030a'
1.1
0.22
1.1
2.8
1.2
0.55
0.27
81
0.19
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.49
1.0E+03"'
6.9
1.0E+03"'
33
0.088
2.1
0.42
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.13
4.6
0.059
0.030 a'
0.049
0.44
66
0.74
0.57
0.022
1.0E+03b'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
1.4E+05
2.2
2.2
2.3
5.4
2.2
2.2
59
59
2.2
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.5
2.1E+07
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
2.8
160
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.8
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
5.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.5E-05
4.1E-05"
0.77 c
0.037
1.9E-04
4.3E-04
3.9E-03
9.3E-07
7.8E-04
4.8E-03C
1.0E+03b'c
6.0E-04
3.1E-03
1.0E+03b'c
3.9E-03
2.1E-03
0.030a'
2.1E-03
2.7E-03
0.016
4.3E-03C
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.091
13
2.3E-03
1.4C
4.9
0.097 c
3.6E-03
5.7
0.32 c
0.037 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.5E-03
0.013
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-03
8.9E-05
2.2E-03
0.030 a'
6.9
1.8E-03
0.013
1.0E+03b'
0.039 c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.I -1
-------
Table F. 1 Landfill LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dich loroethylene trans- 1 , 2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.5E+12
2.2
2.2
4.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.1E+06
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
3.0
5.5E-04
1.3
0.17
9.9E-03 "
7.0E-03 d
0.15
0.22
0.016
0.15
0.011
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.6E+12
2.2
2.2
4.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.1
2.7
2.7
0.27
2.7
5.5
9.2E-04
270
1.0E+03b'c
4.9
11
0.36"
0.26 "
0.54
1.1
0.49
0.16
0.54
4.9
1.6
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
58
0.55"
5.4
1.1
12C
5.4E-03
0.11
0.11
0.054
1.0E+03b'c
1.4
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200"'
200s'
200s-
1.0E+03"'
2.9
8.6E-04
8.0E-03
1.7
6.7
1.3
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.47
0.031
0.13
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.8E+13
1.0E+30
8.0E+03
1.2E+10
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.5
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+15
2.9
2.3
550
2.2
2.2
6.6E+12
2.2
2.2
4.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
13
1.0E+03b'c
1.9E-04
8.9E-03
4.8E-04
6.7E-04"
4.7E-04"
3.6E-04
3. 1 E-03
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
4.7E-08
0.015
2.3E-05
3. 1 E-04
3.1E-04
0.019
2. 7 E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.22
2.9E-03
11C
0.012"
1.5E-03
4.9E-04
6.4E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 ''
0.40
0.044
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.I -2
-------
Table F. 1 Landfill LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
CAS#
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
109864
110496
78933
108101
80626
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.2E+06
2.2
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.02 "'
1.6
1.3E-03
8.7
0.26 c'd
0.26 "
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
6.3E-03 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.037
5.8E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.3E+06
2.2
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.33
0.020 *'
1.0E+03"'
22
16
160
11
8.5
5.4
110
4.3E-03
2.5 c
6.3
11
110
0.16
0.89b'c'd
0.44
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.018
0.12C
1.0E+03b'c
0.055
0.023
600 c
0.16
16
11
0.028
2.5
7.2E-03
5.7E-03
27
10"
0.054
0.11
32
4.3
76
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
0.53
1.0E+03b'
660
7.3
0.025
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
110
49
3.0 e
3.0 e
1.0E+03b'c
1.5
1.0E+03b'
2.1E-03
0.015
1.0E+03b'
970
1.0E+03"'
73
2.7
12
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
7.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
7.4
2.2
3.9
1.0E+30
2.2
25
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
4.3E+06
2.2
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.4
6.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+07
2.2
3.1
2.2
2.2
1.3E+06
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
2.9E-05
1.0E+03b'
1.9E-03
1.2E-04
320 c
3.4E-05
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
3.0E-03
3.8E-04
1.0E+03b'c
0.30C
0.015
110C
0.23
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
0.024
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
3.3
0.038
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-04
8.0E-03 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.5E-03
2.3E-04
1.0E+03b'c
6.9 c
7.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.I -3
-------
Table F. 1 Landfill LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram
CAS#
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1 .OOE-07
2.20E-09
3.71 E-03 1.90E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
9.40E-01
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.1E+09
6.1
3.0
4.4E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3.0
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.011
2. 2 E-03
83 c
0.12
0.22
4.1 E-04 c
0.014 "
0.014 "
0.011
5.8E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.2E+09
6.1
3.0
4.5E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3.0
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.3c'd
0.54
3.3
0.28
1.1
1.1
0.027
4.3E-04
1.1
0.11
1.0E+03b'c
0.12
0.18
1.6
32
4.3E-03
0.32
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
82 c
4.2
2.2 c
0.054
0.30
0.37
0.016
11
0.017
3.4E-04C
2.2
24
0.54
1.6
1.0E+03b'c
5.8E-03
0.27
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"
38
22
0.042
0.33
0.73
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.1
3.1
8.0
0.64 "
0.70 *'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
8.1E+04
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
1.2E+09
6.1
3.0
4.5E+06
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+05
2.3
2.2
2.9
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2E+12
1.4E+04
3.0
17
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.029
1.4E-06
4.2E-06
4.0E-05
3.0E-05
0.044
9.7E-06
1.0E-04
3.7E-09
2.8E-03C
9.2E-04
1.8E-03
40 c
8.9E-04
1.2E-03
1.0E+03b'c
9.0E-06C
0.011
8.0E-03
4.1 E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
5.1E-05
9.5E-05
8.8E-04
4.4E-05
3.3E-03
1.2
9.9E-03
0.019
2.0
1.9E-07
0.27 c
100a'
23 c
0.038
1.0E+03b'c
3.1E-05C
5.7E-03
8.3E-03
0.047
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.I -4
-------
Table F. 1 Landfill LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionicacid 2-(2,4,5- (Silv
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
2.2
0.50 "'
0.18
0.16
0.021 d
0.012
0.011
0.11
4.4E-03
22
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
11
1.1
1.0E+03b'c
0.56
0.67"
0.24
16
5.4
0.43
0.54
0.39
1.6
0.50
54
0.16
110
110
110
110
16
LCTV based
on Inhalation
2.9
210C
1.9
0.64 M
0.64 "
0.50 *'
4.7
0.090
0.24
2.7
0.20 *'
2.9
3.1
2.9
3.1
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.3E+03
2.3
2.2
2.3
98
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
21
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.7E-05
8.9E-04
1 . 1 E-03
0.50 *'
0.028
4.9E-04"
4.9E-04"
0.019
0.019
3.7E-05
2.0E-04
3.0E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
17
0.080
0.50 "'
0.044
6.72E-04 "
6.7E-04 d
0.015
0.62
5.5E-03
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.I -5
-------
Table F.2 Landfill LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.1E+06
6.2E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11.0
8.2E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
280
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.040
0.33
13
0.030
1.0E+03b'c
0.13
1.0E+03b'c
0.60
0.043
0.033
0.055
0.030a'
0.61
0.55
0.50
1.3
1.0
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.1E+06
6.2E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11
8.4E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
280
LCTV based
on Ingestion
9.4 c
15
15
1.0E+03b'
0.043
74
0.032 d
1.0E+03b'c
0.74
53 c
0.068
0.050
12
0.45
45
52 e
0.45
6.0
1.0E+03b'c
3.7
220 M
15
52 c
0.15
0.083
17
0.2
0.030 *'
3.0
0.6
3.0
17C
3.4
1.5
0.74
260
0.75
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.3
1.0E+03"'
19
1.0E+03"'
91
0.25
5.7
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.37
13
0.23
0.030a'
0.13
1.2
180
2.1
1.6
0.059
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.4
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
8.8
6.1
6.6
1.6E+15
6.1
6.1
7.2
280
6.1
6.1
5.2E+06
6.4E+06
6.1
1.0E+30
79
6.1
1.0E+30
7.5
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
11
6.1
7.1
11
8.5E+07
6.1
6.1
6.1
36
6.9
6.1
6.3
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
280
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.9E-04
1.4E-04"
1.0E+03b'c
0.10
1.3E-03
0.023 c
0.011
2.6E-06
69 c
520 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.0E-03
8.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.012
8.2E-03
0.030 *'
0.013
7.9E-03
0.045
0.23 c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.25
45
6.6E-03
1.0E+03b'c
13
5.1 c
0.010
16
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.087
0.036
1.0E+03b'c
6.0E-03
2.4E-04
8.4E-03
0.030a'
43 c
5.2E-03
0.036
1.0E+03b'
2.0 c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.2-1
-------
Table F.2 Landfill LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.1E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
31
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
9.4
2.0E-03
3.7
0.46
0.027 "
0.019"
0.43
0.61
0.043
0.43
0.030
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.2E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
31
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.1
7.4
7.4
0.74
7.4
15
2.5E-03
740
1.0E+03b'c
13
30
0.45"
0.32 "
1.5
3.0
0.70 a'
0.45
1.5
13
4.5
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
220
1.5"
15
3.0
77 c
0.015
0.30
0.13 *'
0.15
1.0E+03b'c
3.8
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200 "'
200 *'
200 *'
1.0E+03"'
8.0
2.4E-03
0.028
4.7
7.5s'
3.5
0.45"
0.32 a'd
0.70 '
0.085
0.37
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.8
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.8
7.6
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
11
6.8
1.2E+06
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
31
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
6.7E-04
0.025
1.3E-03
1 .8E-03 "
1 .3E-03 d
9.8E-04
8.6E-03
5.9E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.4E-07
0.042
6.4E-05
8.6E-04
8.6E-04
0.053
7.4E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.77
7.9E-03
0.30C
0.034"
4.8E-03
1.3E-03
0.018
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'
1.1
0.12
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.2-2
-------
Table F.2 Landfill LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1 ,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
CAS#
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
109864
110496
78933
108101
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
570
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 "'
4.3
0.063
27
074b,c,d
0.74 "
8.0E-03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.15
0.019
10"
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
580
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.92 c
0.020 *'
1.0E+03"'
60
45
1.0E+03"'
30
37
15
300
0.012
11C
20
30
300
0.45
2gb,c,d
1.2
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.065
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.15
0.22
1.0E+03b'c
0.45
45
30
0.086
8.0
0.20 "
0.016
74
10"
0.15
0.30
90
12
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
1.5
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
20
1.2
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
310
130
8.8 "
8.8 "
1.0E+03b'c
4.0
1.0E+03"'
9.4E-03
0.043
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
200 *'
7.3
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.3
1.1E+22
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
55
6.1
17
1.0E+30
6.1
1.3E+03
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
11
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.2
1.0E+30
6.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.8
580
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.3
31
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.6
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.4E-03
1.0E+03b'
5.3E-03
3.3E-04
1.0E+03b'c
9.4E-05
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.011
0.035 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.043
1.0E+03b'c
0.62
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.067
0.11
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
9.1
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
2.2E-03
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
5.4E-03
0.021 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.2-3
-------
Table F.2 Landfill LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
CAS#
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
660
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
3.71E-03 1.90E-03 13
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
9.40E-01
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
200
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.031
6.E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.50
0.61
1.0E+03b'c
0.039"
0.039"
0.030
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
670
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
13
200
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
210
3.5 b'c'd
1.5
9.2
0.90
3.0
3.3
0.074
1.2E-03
3.0
0.32
1.0E+03b'c
13C
0.73 c
4.5
90
0.012
0.90
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
12
16C
0.15
1.0'
5.0s
0.045
30
0.055
1.0E+03b'c
9.4
300
0.70 s'
4.5
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
32
1.0E+03"
100
62
0.12
0.91
2.0
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
3.0
5.0 '
22
0.64"
0.70 *'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
1.0E+30
6.1
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.6
1.0E+30
670
22
1.0E+30
10
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.4E+15
6.5
6.1
22
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
7.5
1.0E+30
1.2E+13
13
200
6.1
6.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.080
3.9E-06
1.2E-05
1.1 E-04
8.4E-05
0.12
2.7E-05
2.8E-04
2.78E-08
1.0E+03b'c
3.7E-03
4.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
2.4E-03
3.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.068 d
0.011
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
1.4E-04
2.6E-04
2.4E-03
1.2E-04
9.1E-03
3.2
0.027
0.053
5.6
1.4E-06
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
0.053d
0.13
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.2-4
-------
Table F.2 Landfill LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram
Toluene
Toluenediamine
2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane
,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silv
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene
(1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.018
6.1
0.50"'
0.52
0.46
0.059M
0.037
0.030
0.30
0.012
61
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.019
0.74
30
3.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.6
0.96 M
0.73
45
15
1.0"'
1.5
1.4
4.5
1.8
150
0.20 "'
300 c
300 c
300 c
300 c
51
LCTV based
on Inhalation
7.9
580 c
5.5
0.96M
0.96"
0.50 "'
13
0.32
0.67
7.3
0.20 "'
7.9
8.5
7.9
8.6
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
1.8E+08
6.5
6.1
6.6
2.0E+04
7.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
9.3
6.1
6.1
610
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.8E-04
2.4E-03
3.1E-03
0.50 "'
0.080
1.4E-03"
1 .4E-03 d
0.053
0.053
1.3E-04
6.1E-03
8.2E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
46
0.22
0.50"'
0.12
1.8E-03"
1.8E-03"
0.041
1.7
0.015
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.2-5
-------
Table F.3 Landfill LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ch loroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1 .80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.8E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
3.4E+05
3.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.5E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
1.9E+04
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b
5.0s
100s
0.50 a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
0.50 a'
0.030 "'
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 a'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
3.4E+05
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.6E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
1.9E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
740 M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030s'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
6.0 a'
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
740 M
1.0E+03"'
0.50 a'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030 "'
410
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 "'
1.0E+03"'
190
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
2.2E+04
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
3.4E+05
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.6E+04
9.7E+04
1.5E+04
2.0E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"'
170
1.0E+03b'c
270
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
7.8E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
43
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 a'
0.030a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
110
LCTV based
on Inhalation
620
1.0E+03"'
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
190
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.88
0.50 '
0.030 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
90
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.3-1
-------
Table F.3 Landfill LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylenetrans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
CAS#
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.3E+04
2.9E+05
1.7E+04
6.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.4E+04
9.0E+04
3.7E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+05
3.5E+05
1.8E+04
4.5E+07
1.6E+05
1.9E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
8.8E+07
8.7E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
2.0E+04
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"
5.0s
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 '
0.45 "
0.32 '"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 '
W'
93
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.4E+04
3.0E+05
1.7E+04
6.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.5E+04
9.1E+04
3.7E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
3.5E+05
1.8E+04
4.6E+07
1.6E+05
1.9E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.0E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
2.0E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"
5.0s
1.0E+03"
200''
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.0
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45M
0.32 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
1.0E+03"'
10 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
540
1.0E+03"'
0.13a'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
200 '
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.00E+03b'c
6.6
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 s-
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 ""
0.32 "'"
0.70 '-
260
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.00E+038
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
1.9E+04
2.4E+04
3.0E+05
1.7E+04
6.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.5E+04
9.1E+04
3.8E+05
2.3E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
3.5E+05
1.9E+04
5.0E+07
1.6E+05
1.9E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
9.5E+07
9.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.5E+05
2.0E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5 *'
82 c
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.70s-
26
17
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03
0.13a'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5'-
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 b'd
0.32 '"
070s-
50
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 '
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.3-2
-------
Table F.3 Landfill LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and 1 1, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
CAS#
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
C
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.0E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.4E+05
1.6E+04
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.2E+04
1.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.1E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 a'c
1.00E+03b'c
5.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.5E+05
1.6E+04
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.3E+04
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.2E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020s'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
32
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03''
1.0E+03b'c
0.50s-
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 *'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.00E+03"
1.00E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
6.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.1E+04
1.0E+30
1.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.4E+04
1.5E+05
1.6E+04
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
7.3E+04
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
2.2E+04
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
35
140
7.4
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
14
19C
1.0E+03b'c
5.5 c
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
890 c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
130 c
8.0E-03 "'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "'
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.3-3
-------
Table F.3 Landfill LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
CAS#
7439976
126987
67561
72435
109864
110496
78933
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
2.45E-02
4.90E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
4.40E+02
5.10E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.2E+05
1.1E+05
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.7E+04
6.4E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+09
1.6E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.3E+07
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 af
10a'c
1.0E+03"'
97
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.3E+05
1.1E+05
1.8E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.8E+04
6.5E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.8E+04
1.7E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+09
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.3E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.20"
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
10"
390
810
200 *'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
2.0s-
3.1
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03"'
290
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0s-
1.0"
5.0 s
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.20 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
200 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.00E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 '-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
5.0 *'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.8E+05
1.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
2.0E+05
6.3E+05
1.1E+05
1.8E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
2.6E+04
1.8E+04
6.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
4.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.9E+04
1.7E+04
1.5E+05
1.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.7E+04
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.4E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
0.010
0.030
0.47
0.25
1.0E+03b'c
0.072
0.74
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
80
1.0E+03b'c
6.6
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.37
0.70
6.4
0.52
27
1.0E+03b'c
74
140
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
280
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.3-4
-------
Table F.3 Landfill LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silv
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
C
1 .OOE-07
2.20E-09
3.71 E-03 1.90E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
7.7E+05
5.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.1E+05
7.4E+04
6.8E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
3.8E+10
2.7E+04
4.3E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.0E+05
8.4E+04
1.1E+05
9.7E+04
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 "
0.64 "
0.70s-
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 '
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 M
0.96 M
0.50 "'
1.0 '
0.20 '
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
7.8E+05
5.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
3.2E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
3.1E+05
7.4E+04
6.8E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
4.2E+10
2.7E+04
4.4E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.0E+05
8.4E+04
1.1E+05
9.8E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70s-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96M
0.96M
1.0E+03"'
400 "'
1.0a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
0.20s-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 e
0.70 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 b'd
0.96 "
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
7.8E+05
5.5E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.5E+04
1.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.5E+09
2.9E+04
1.6E+04
1.7E+04
2.1E+05
1.0E+30
3.2E+05
7.5E+04
6.9E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
2.3E+04
2.3E+04
4.2E+10
2.7E+04
4.4E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
1.8E+04
1.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.6E+04
1.6E+04
1.1E+05
8.5E+04
1.1E+05
9.9E+04
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64M
0.64M
0.70 s-
0.50
6.9
100
0.50 s-
1.0E+03"'
0.96e
0.96M
0.50 s-
2.0'-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.20 "
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 b'd
0.64 b'd
0.70 '
1.0E+03"'
620
0.50 "
1.0E+03"'
0.96 e
0.96 b'd
0.50 '
2.0'-
0.20 '-
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.3-5
-------
Table F.4 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
1 1 1 444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.3
1.3
380
1.3
1.3
3.6
36
1.3
1.3
110
110
1.3
1.0E+30
2.1
1.3
7.4E+10
1.3
190
1.3
1.3
4.0
1.3
1.3
1.5
130
1.3
1.3
1.3
4.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
9.7E+05
36
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
8.5E-03
0.080
2.7
6.4E-03
0.021 c
0.28
1.0E+03b'c
0.11
8.9E-03
8.3E-03
7.3E-03
0.030 a'
0.13
0.10
0.10
2.6
0.69
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
1.3
1.4
380
1.3
1.3
3.6
37
1.3
1.3
110
110
1.3
1.0E+30
2.2
1.4
7.5E+10
1.4
230
1.3
1.3
4.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
140
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
9.8E+05
37
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.0E+03b'
6.9E-03
16
5.2E-03"
0.28 c
0.16
27 c
0.014
0.013
2.4
0.097
9.7
11"
0.53
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
0.68
7.7
3.2
20 c
0.033
0.021
3.4
0.025
0.030a'
0.65
0.13
0.67
2.2
0.67
0.33
0.16
100
0.55
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.29
1.0E+03"'
4.1
1.0E+03"'
20
0.051
1.2
0.25
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
3.4
0.080
2.6
0.031
0.030 a'
0.029
0.27
40
0.44
0.34
0.013
1.0E+03b'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0E+30
1.7
1.5
1.6
380
1.5
1.5
3.8
37
1.6
1.5
110
110
1.5
1.0E+30
2.6
1.6
7.5E+10
1.6
230
1.6
1.5
4.2
1.6
1.6
1.7
140
1.6
1.5
1.6
4.7
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
2.2E+06
37
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.5E-05
2.7E-05"
2.1E-03
0.026
1.4E-04
2.9E-03
2.7E-03
6.4E-07
1.4E-03
8.6E-03C
1.0E+03b'c
2.2E-04
2.2E-03
1.0E+03b'c
2.6E-03
1.3E-03
0.030a'
1.7E-03
1.8E-03
1.1E-02
0.029 c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
6.2E-02
8.4E+00
1.6E-03
3.8E-03
3.3E+00
0.66 c
2.5E-03
4.0
0.57 c
0.067 c
1.0E+03b'c
2.8E-03
9.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03
6.2E-05
1.3E-03
0.030 a'
5.6
1.2E-03
9.0E-03
1.0E+03b'
0.27 c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.4-1
-------
Table F.4 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylenetrans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1 .06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.3
1.3
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
38
4.8E+03
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
5.3E+06
5.3E+06
3.3E+04
1.5
3.1
10
1.3
1.3
3.1E+04
1.3
1.3
6.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.6
1.4
150
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
5.5
2.8E-04
0.88
0.11
5.6E-03 "
4.0E-03 d
0.088
0.13
8.9E-03
0.088
6.3E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.3
1.3
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
38
4.9E+03
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
5.9E+06
5.9E+06
3.3E+04
1.5
3.1
11
1.3
1.3
3.1E+04
1.4
1.3
6.6
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.6
1.4
160
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.2
1.6
1.6
0.16
1.6
4.2
5.5E-04
160
1.0E+03b'c
3.3
6.6
0.22"
0.15"
0.33
0.65
0.29
0.10
0.3
2.9
1.0
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
40 c
30
0.054
3.2
0.66
16C
3.2E-03
0.065
0.065
0.032
1.0E+03b'c
1.0
0.15
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200s-
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
2.2
5.1E-04
4.2E-03
1.1
4.4
0.78
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.28
0.018
0.081
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
940
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.9
1.5
1.5
4.4E+08
3.2E+04
1.0E+30
42
4.9E+03
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.3E+07
1.3E+07
3.3E+04
1.8
3.2
12
1.5
1.5
3.1E+04
1.6
1.6
6.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0E+30
1.5
1.8
1.6
200
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
9.0 c
1Qb,c,d
0.066
0.064C
1.2E-04
6.7E-03
3.9E-04
4.6E-04"
3.2E-04"
2.5E-04
2.2E-03
1.5E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20 c
6.6E-08
0.010
1.6E-05
2.2E-04
2.2E-04
0.013
1.9E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.14
2.2E-03
8.9 c
8.5E-03 d
1.0E-03
3.4E-04
4.4E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
3.3 c
94 c
0.13 '-
0.27
0.032
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.4-2
-------
Table F.4 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
CAS#
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
80626
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.8
150
7.6E+04
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.1
1.3
1.6
1.0E+30
1.4
3.5
1.3
7.3E+03
1.3
7.7
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
220
1.7
1.0E+30
3.3E+03
5.6
43
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.8E+03
1.9
17
1.4
1.3
550
1.3
1.3
3.4
1.3
1.3
1.1E+20
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
1.0
1.7E-04
4.9
0.044
0.29 "
8.0E-03 a'
0.66 c
0.043 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.078
2.5E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.9
150
8.3E+04
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.2
1.3
1.7
1.0E+30
1.5
3.8
1.3
8.3E+03
1.3
7.7
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.7
230
1.7
1.0E+30
3.3E+03
5.6
43
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
1.8E+03
1.9
17
1.4
1.3
550
1.3
1.3
3.4
1.4
1.3
1.8E+20
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.27
0.020s'
1.0E+03"'
13
9.7
49
6.5
3.8
3.6
65
2.6E-03
7.5 c
3.8
6.5
65
0.097
1.0"
0.34
8.0E-03''
1.1C
0.041
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.13
390 c
0.097
9.7
6.5
0.041
1.6
3.3E-03
3.3E-03
16
1.0E+01 "
0.065
0.032
19
2.6
45
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.32
1.0E+03b'
400
4.82
3.7E-03
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
67
29
3.5 e
3.5 e
1.0E+03 b'c
0.95
710
9.4E-04
8.8E-03
1.0E+03b'
670
580
44
1.6
7.0
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.1
150
8.8E+04
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.0
1.0E+30
1.6
4.3
1.5
8.6E+03
1.5
7.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.9
290
1.9
1.0E+30
3.4E+03
5.7
43
1.0E+30
5.0E+08
1.8E+03
2.2
17
1.6
1.5
550
1.5
1.6
3.5
1.6
1.5
1.8E+20
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
860
1.0E+03 "
4.9E-06
0.81
1.3E-03
1.0E-04
0.021
2.9E-05
8.0E-03a'
0.036
7.1E-03
2.6E-03
3.1 c
1.1E-05C
0.015
0.044 c
0.16
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.018
3.6E-04
4.5
1.0E+03b'
2.3
0.0
0.5
6.9E-04
8.0E-03 "'
9.6E-01 c
3.5E-03
1.5E-03
71 c
2.6E-04 c
7.1E-03
2.1E+01 c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.4-3
-------
Table F.4 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
CAS#
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4. 02 E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
68
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
930
41
15
680
6.8
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.7E+19
1.0E+30
390
1.4
1.3
14
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.1
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.5
3.0
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
6.3E-03
1.5E-03
0.20 c
0.063
0.14
8.1E-06C
8.2E-03 "
8.2E-03 "
6.4E-03
2.5E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
75
1.3
1.0E+30
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
960
41
15
680
6.8
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2E+20
1.0E+30
390
1.4
1.3
14
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
4.1
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.6
3.2
1.3
1.3
1.0E+30
1.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.46
0.32
2.0
0.16
0.74
0.77
0.016
2.6E-04
0.69
0.066
140 c
0.80
0.50
1.1
19
2.6E-03
0.19
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
0.19C
2.6
11C
0.032
0.16
0.17
0.010
6.9
0.030
6.6E-06
1.1
4.7
0.33
0.98
1.0E+03b'c
2.6E-03
0.17
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"
22
13
0.029
0.20
0.44
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.65
1.8
5.1
0.64 "
0.70s'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
83
1.5
1.0E+30
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.2E+03
41
15
680
7.0
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6E+20
1.0E+30
390
1.6
1.5
14
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
4.3
2.0E+04
2.7E+02
1.8
3.8
1.6
1.6
1.0E+30
1.6
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.020
9.8E-07
2.9E-06
2.8E-05
2.1E-05
0.032
6.7E-06
7.0E-05
1.8E-08
4.3E-07
2.6E-03
1.3E-03
0.095C
6. 1 E-04
8.4E-04
1.3E-04
1.7E-07
6.7E-03
1 .8E-03
2.9E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.043
3.5E-05
6.5E-05
6.1 E-04
3.1E-05
2.3E-03
0.84
6.8E-03
0.013
1.4
9.2E-07
4.1E-05
90
0.055
0.026
2.0E-03 c
6.0E-07
3.4E-03
1.9E-03
0.033
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.4-4
-------
Table F.4 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Toluene
Toluenediamine2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
7.34E+00 2.10E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
42
1.3
1.4
2.6
5.9
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
3.5
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.5
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
1.3
0.13
0.10
0.18
0.012"
6.7E-03
6.4E-03
0.063
2.5E-03
15
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
42
1.4
1.5
2.6
6.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
3.5
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.6
0.66
1.0E+03b'c
0.64
0.40"
0.14
9.8
3.5
0.26
0.32
0.21
1.0
2.6
32
0.10
74
72
74
73
13
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.8
140
2.2
0.38 M
0.38 "
0.50 a'
2.8
0.048
0.15
1.6
0.20s'
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.1
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
44
1.6
1.6
2.8
7.4
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
4.2
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
LCTV based
on Ingestion
4.6E-05
6. 1 E-04
7.7E-04
3.9E-03
0.019
3.4E-04"
3.4E-04"
0.014
0.014
2.3E-05
4.1E-05
2.0E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
11
0.055
0.16
0.030
4.7E-04 "
4.7E-04 d
0.011
0.44
3.8E-03
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.4-5
-------
Table F.5 Surface Impoundment for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
17
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
1.0E+30
4.8
3.9
4.1
3.7E+08
3.9
3.9
42.4
910
4.1
3.9
2.6E+04
2.6E+04
3.9
1.0E+30
17
4.5
1.0E+30
4.6
1.5E+08
4.2
3.9
55
4.2
4.5
6.0
1.1E+05
4.1
3.9
4.8
87
4.4
3.9
4.1
3.9
4.1
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.026
0.26
7.3
0.020
5.2 c
4.5
1.0E+03b'c
0.37
0.029
0.029
0.030
0.030a'
0.48
0.35
0.32
57
5.0s
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
17
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.8
4.0
4.2
3.7E+08
4.0
4.0
43
910
4.1
4.0
2.7E+04
2.6E+04
4.0
1.0E+30
17
4.5
1.0E+30
4.7
1.5E+08
4.3
4.0
55
4.2
4.5
6.1
1.1E+05
4.1
4.0
4.9
87
4.5
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.1
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
25 c
9.7
9.7
1.0E+03b'
0.024
48
0.018"
1.0E+03b'c
0.48
310 c
0.047
0.048
7.0
0.29
29
34 e
8.7
4.4
1.0E+03b'c
2.3
140M
9.7
270 c
0.10
0.069
11
0.10
0.030 "'
2.0
0.39
2.4
43 c
2.2
1.0
0.50
450
5.0s
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.87
1.0E+03b'
12
1.0E+03"'
59
0.16
3.7
0.50 '
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.26
8.5
0.13
0.030a'
0.090
1.0
120
1.3
1.0
0.040
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
17
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
5.6
4.5
4.8
3.7E+08
4.5
4.5
43
910
4.7
4.5
2.7E+04
2.6E+04
4.5
1.0E+30
21
5.0
1.0E+30
5.3
2.6E+08
4.8
4.5
55
4.7
5.1
6.8
1.1E+05
4.6
4.5
5.3
87
5.1
4.5
4.7
4.5
4.7
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.2E-04
9.0E-05 d
1.0E+03b'c
7.6E-02
1.1E-03
0.073 c
8.2E-03
1.9E-06
0.35 c
2.1 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.9E-03
6.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
8.2E-03
5.0E-03
0.030 "'
3.1E-02
5.8E-03
3.3E-02
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.18
29
4.8E-03
1.0E+03b'c
9.9
16C
7.5E-03
12
140 c
17C
1.0E+03b'c
0.023
0.030
1.0E+03b'c
4.2E-03
1.9E-04
5.2E-03
0.030a'
100 c
3.8E-03
0.027
1.0E+03b'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.5-1
-------
Table F.5 Surface Impoundment for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
CAS#
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1 .06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
910
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.3
9.8
3.9
4.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
5.5
6.7
6.6
8.7
4.3
4.5
4.4
4.0
3.9
4.1
4.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.1
33
2.8E+03
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
4.7
4.4
140
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
8.4
5.5
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
61
1.1E-03
4.0
0.49
0.018 "
0.012"
0.28
0.39
0.028
0.27
0.020
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
910
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
9.8
4.0
4.1
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
5.5
6.8
6.6
8.7
4.3
4.6
4.5
4.1
4.0
4.1
4.7
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.2
33
2.9E+03
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.8
4.4
140
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
8.5
5.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
8.0
5.0
5.0
0.50
5.2
24
1.6E-03
500
1.0E+03b'c
15
21
0.45"
0.32 "
1.0
1.9
0.70 *'
0.34
1.0
8.7
2.9
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
120
0.98"
9.7
2.2
340 c
9.7E-03
0.19
0.13 *'
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
5.2
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200 "'
200 *'
200 *'
1.0E+03"'
13
1.5E-03
0.016
5.2
7.5 *'
2.5
0.45"
0.32 a'd
0.70 "'
0.055
0.24
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
910
4.6
4.6
4.6
4.8
10
4.5
4.6
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.9E+05
1.0E+30
6.4
7.2
7.0
9.1
4.9
5.3
5.2
4.6
4.5
4.7
5.1
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.0
34
3.7E+03
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
5.2
4.9
140
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
8.8
5.9
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.73 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
310 c
1.0E+03b'c
4.4E-04
2.8E-02
2.0E-03
1 .4E-03 "
9.6E-04 d
7.5E-04
6.4E-03
4.3E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
6.9E-07
3.1E-02
5.5E-05
6.4E-04
6.4E-04
4.0E-02
7.2E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
6.6 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.50
9.1E-03
45 c
0.025"
3.3E-03
1.0E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'
0.81
0.12
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.5-2
-------
Table F.5 Surface Impoundment for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylenedibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
CAS#
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
4.0E+07
12
6.5E+06
1.0E+30
3.9
3.9
3.9
18
3.9
7.7
1.0E+30
6.3
79
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
110
3.9
3.9
3.9
10
5.8E+07
10
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.1
3.9
2.3E+10
3.9
4.1
38
4.1
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
4.4
4.0E-03
14
2gb,c,d
2.9 e
8.0E-03''
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.78
6.9E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
4.0E+07
12
6.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.0
4.0
4.0
18
4.0
7.9
1.0E+30
6.4
82
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
110
4.0
4.0
4.0
10
5.8E+07
10
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.1
4.0
2.3E+10
4.0
4.2
38
4.2
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.8C
0.020 *'
1.0E+03"'
39
29
400
19
17
16
190
7.8E-03
110C
11
19
190
0.29
10b,c,d
2.0
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 *'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.34
2.0
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
29
20
0.46
4.9
9.4E-03
0.010
48
10"
0.19
0.10
58
7.8
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
21
0.080
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
200
87
35 e
35 e
1.0E+03b'c
4.0
1.0E+03"'
2.7E-03
0.027
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
130
4.8
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.6E+07
12
6.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.5
4.5
4.5
22
4.5
9.1
1.0E+30
6.8
100
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
110
4.5
4.5
4.5
11
6.4E+07
11
1.0E+30
4.2E+15
76
1.2E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.2E+14
14
270
6.5
4.5
2.3E+10
4.5
4.7
38
4.8
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.1E-04
1.0E+03"'
4.0E-03
5.6E-04
1.0E+03b'c
1.6E-04
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.095
0.073 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.097
1.0E+03b'c
0.477
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
0.074
8.4E-03
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
6.8
0.18
1.0E+03b'c
3.8E-03
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.047
0.043C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.046
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.5-3
-------
Table F.5 Surface Impoundment for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
CAS#
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
3.9
7.7E+06
3.9
1.0E+30
3.9
4.0
7.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.2
3.9
5.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.2
1.7E+14
1.1E+03
230
3.9E+11
95
6.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+08
5.1
3.9
220
3.9
4.4
4.1
5.6
50
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
7.3
46
4.3
4.4
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020
6.6E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.56
0.86C
0.027 "
0.027 "
0.022
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
4.0
7.9E+06
4.0
1.0E+30
4.0
4.1
7.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.3
4.0
5.6
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.2
1.7E+14
1.1E+03
230
3.9E+11
96
6.7
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+08
5.1
4.0
220
4.0
4.4
4.1
5.6
51
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
7.3
46
4.4
4.4
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
140
2.3 b'c'd
1.0
6.0
0.44
3.4
2.5
0.048
7.8E-04
2.7
0.21
1.0E+03b'c
21 c
7.0 c
4.9
58
7.8E-03
0.58
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
9.4
160 c
0.10
0.43
0.61
0.030
27
0.37
0.71 c
5.4
68
0.70 a'
3.3
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
21
1.0E+03"
67
41
0.13
0.59
1.3
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.9
5.0 '
20
0.64"
0.70 *'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.5
9.0E+06
4.5
1.0E+30
4.5
4.6
7.3
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.8
4.5
6.0
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.8
1.8E+14
1.1E+03
230
3.9E+11
96
7.0
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.6E+08
5.6
4.5
220
4.5
5.0
4.7
6.0
51
1.0E+30
2.9E+07
8.0
54
4.9
4.9
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.059
2.9E-06
8.5E-06
8.5E-05
6.2E-05
0.12
2.0E-05
2.1 E-04
2.9E-07
240 c
0.036
5.7E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.8E-03
2.7E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.019 c
0.030
0.026
9.1E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.13
1.0E-04
1.9E-04
1.8E-03
9.5E-05
6.8E-03
3.1
0.020
0.039
4.1
1.5E-05
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.077
1.0E+03b'c
0.064C
0.015
0.027
0.10
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.5-4
-------
Table F.5 Surface Impoundment for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionicacid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
5.5
4.6
3.9
3.9
3.9
1.7E+05
4.4
6.2
26
390
4.6
4.2
4.3
5.9
4.4
4.0
3.9
5.0
3.9
3.9
83
3.9
3.9
6.8
6.4
7.1
6.7
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
6.6E-03
4.6
0.50 a'
0.35
1.8
0.039"
0.023
0.021
0.20
7.8E-03
67
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
5.5
4.6
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.7E+05
4.4
6.2
26
400
4.6
4.3
4.3
5.9
4.4
4.1
4.0
5.1
4.0
4.0
84
4.0
4.0
6.8
6.5
7.1
6.8
LCTV based
on Ingestion
7.4E-03
0.67
23
2.1
1.0E+03b'c
6.4
0.96 M
0.45
32
14
0.80
1.0
0.75
2.9
41
97
0.20 *'
340 c
320 c
350 c
330 c
68
LCTV based
on Inhalation
6.0
590 c
22
0.96M
0.96 "
0.50 *'
9.0
0.17
0.44
4.8
0.20 *'
8.9
9.0
9.2
9.5
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
5.9
5.1
4.5
4.5
4.5
1.7E+05
4.9
6.6
26
490
5.3
4.8
4.8
6.3
4.9
4.6
4.5
5.9
4.5
4.5
89
4.5
4.5
7.2
6.9
7.4
7.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.4E-04
1.8E-03
2.3E-03
0.50 *'
0.060
1 .OE-03 "
1 .OE-03 d
0.042
0.043
8.1E-05
8.8E-04
6.0E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
34
0.16
0.50 "'
0.094
1.4E-03"
1.4E-03"
0.033
1.4
0.011
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.5-5
-------
Table F. 6 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-ch loroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
0.0171
0.0122
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
0.021
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+08
2.7E+05
9.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.4E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+06
1.0E+30
3.9E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.7E+06
9.1E+11
1.0E+30
3.4E+05
2.8E+05
6.6E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.7E+05
5.5E+05
2.8E+05
3.5E+05
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b'
5.0s
100s
0.50 '-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
0.50 '-
0.030 "'
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 a'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+08
2.7E+05
9.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.5E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.5E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+06
1.0E+30
3.94E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.7E+06
9.4E+11
1.0E+30
3.5E+05
2.8E+05
6.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.8E+05
5.5E+05
2.9E+05
3.5E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
740 M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030s'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
6.0 '
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
740 M
1.0E+03"'
0.50 '-
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030 "'
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
2.8E+05
9.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
5.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+06
1.0E+30
4.1E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
3.8E+05
1.8E+06
9.4E+11
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
2.8E+05
6.9E+05
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
2.9E+05
5.7E+05
3.0E+05
3.7E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
170
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.501 "'
0.13
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
780
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 '
0.030s-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
750"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
16
0.50 '-
0.030 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.6-1
-------
Table F. 6 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dich loroethylene trans- 1 , 2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
CAS#
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1 .06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1 .42E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.6
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.3E+05
3.4E+05
3.3E+05
4.1E+05
4.0E+06
2.8E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.2E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.6E+06
4.3E+05
6.4E+07
3.8E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.4E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
3.2E+05
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
2.2E+05
3.2E+05
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5s-
0.45 "
0.32 '"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
W'
1.0E+03"'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.3E+05
3.4E+05
3.3E+05
4.1E+05
4.0E+06
2.8E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.2E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.7E+06
4.4E+05
6.4E+07
3.9E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.4E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
3.2E+05
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+05
2.2E+05
3.3E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"'
5.0 "
1.0E+03"'
200 a'
200 '
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
120
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45M
0.32 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
1.0E+03"'
10 '
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
610
1.0E+03"'
0.13a'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
200s-
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
110
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 s-
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 ""
0.32 "'"
0.70 '-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+038
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.6E+05
3.6E+05
3.6E+05
4.2E+05
4.1E+06
3.0E+05
3.3E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.3E+08
1.7E+06
1.6E+06
3.8E+06
4.4E+05
6.7E+07
4.0E+07
3.0E+05
2.8E+05
3.6E+05
8.7E+05
2.3E+05
3.4E+05
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+06
5.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.5E+05
2.2E+05
3.4E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5'-
810C
0.45"
0.32 '"
0.70s-
490
300
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
11
0.13a'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5 ''
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 ""
0.32 '"
0.70 '
900
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 '
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.6-2
-------
Table F. 6 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and 1 1, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1 ,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
CAS#
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.9
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
0.196
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
C
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.5
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1 .44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.4E+09
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.2E+05
2.7E+05
4.5E+06
1.0E+30
4.5E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.02 a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.5E+09
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.78E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.2E+05
2.8E+05
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+06
1.0E+30
1.3E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.5E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020 a'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
540
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 a'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.6E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.7E+09
1.1E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.5E+06
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
3.0E+05
2.2E+05
2.9E+05
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
4.7E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.5E+06
1.0E+30
1.4E+06
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
2.2E+05
3.7E+05
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
36
1.0E+03b'
130 c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
240
250 c
1.0E+03b'c
72 c
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 a'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 a'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0s'
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.6-3
-------
Table F. 6 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
CAS#
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
0.147
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
9.2E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
6.8E+05
1.8E+06
3.0E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
4.0E+05
2.7E+05
1.1E+06
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+06
2.9E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.0E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
6.2E+05
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 "
10a'c
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.2E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.9E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
6.8E+05
1.8E+06
3.0E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
4.1E+05
2.7E+05
1.1E+06
2.8E+05
2.7E+05
2.7E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.6E+06
2.9E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
6.3E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.20"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
10"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
200s'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
2.0 "'
53
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03"'
430
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
1.0"
5.0 "
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.20 a'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
200 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 a'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
5.0 a'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.7E+05
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
1.0E+30
2.4E+05
7.0E+05
1.9E+06
3.2E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
2.9E+05
4.2E+05
2.9E+05
1.1E+06
2.9E+05
2.8E+05
2.8E+05
7.0E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+06
3.0E+05
2.2E+05
2.2E+05
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+06
3.1E+05
1.0E+30
2.9E+05
6.3E+05
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03"'
0.18
0.54
7.5
3.9
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
13
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
120
340
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
6.5
12
110
8.4
430
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.6-4
-------
Table F. 6 Surface Impoundment LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
0.734
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
0.0979
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
3.4E+05
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
5.9E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.5E+05
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
9.3E+05
1.3E+06
3.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+06
4.0E+05
4.1E+05
7.3E+06
4.6E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.3E+09
2.9E+05
2.3E+05
1.0E+30
2.6E+05
2.8E+05
1.7E+06
1.5E+06
1.9E+06
1.6E+06
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 "
0.64 "
0.70 a'
380
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 a'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 M
0.96 M
0.50 a'
1.0a'
0.20 a'
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.5E+05
1.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.00E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.6E+05
2.7E+05
2.9E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
9.5E+05
1.3E+06
3.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+06
4.1E+05
4.1E+05
7.3E+06
4.6E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.3E+09
2.9E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.7E+05
2.8E+05
1.7E+06
1.5E+06
1.9E+06
1.6E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
0.70 a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
570
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96M
0.96M
1.0E+03"'
400 a'
1.0a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20s'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 "
0.70 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 b'd
0.96 b'd
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.5E+05
1.1E+06
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+05
6.0E+05
1.0E+30
3.6E+06
5.7E+05
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
2.5E+05
1.0E+30
9.9E+05
1.4E+06
3.3E+07
1.0E+30
3.1E+06
4.2E+05
4.3E+05
7.3E+06
4.9E+05
3.1E+05
2.6E+05
1.5E+09
3.0E+05
2.4E+05
1.0E+30
2.8E+05
3.0E+05
1.8E+06
1.6E+06
1.9E+06
1.7E+06
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64M
0.64M
0.70 "'
8.4
120
120
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
0.96"
0.96M
0.50 "'
2.0"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.20"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 M
0.64 b'd
0.70 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.50 a'
1.0E+03"'
0.96 "
0.96 b'd
0.50 "'
2.0 a'
0.20 a'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.6-5
-------
Table F.7 Waste Pile LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Aero le in
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
65
10
10
10
10
1.0E+30
12
10
11
1.1E+07
10
10
170
3.3E+03
11
10
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
10
1.0E+30
33
12
1.0E+30
12
8.6E+06
11
10
210
11
12
15
1.1E+05
11
10
14
330
12
10
11
10
11
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.087
1.0
24
0.055
9.1 c
8.1
1.0E+03b'c
0.95
0.078
0.10
0.077
0.030a'
1.4
0.94
0.86
67
5.0s
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
66
11
11
11
11
1.0E+30
12
11
12
1.1E+07
11
11
170
3.3E+03
12
11
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
11
1.0E+30
35
13
1.0E+30
12
8.9E+06
12
11
210
12
12
16
1.1E+05
11
11
14
330
12
11
11
11
12
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
97 c
27
27
1.0E+03b'
0.061
130
0.045 d
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
0.16
0.20
24
0.81
81
95 e
16
12
1.0E+03b'c
6.1
400 M
27
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
0.26
30
0.27
0.030 "'
5.6
1.1
6.9
160 c
6.0
2.8
1.4
1.0E+03"
5.0s
LCTV based
on Inhalation
2.4
1.0E+03"'
34
1.0E+03"'
170
0.44
10
0.50s'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.71
23
0.33
0.030a'
0.25
2.8
330
3.7
2.9
0.11
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
70
15
15
15
15
1.0E+30
17
15
16
1.1E+07
15
15
174
3.3E+03
16
15
4.6E+04
4.6E+04
15
1.0E+30
49
17
1.0E+30
17
2.7E+07
16
15
210
16
17
21
1.1E+05
16
15
19
340
17
15
16
15
16
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
3.7E-04
2.8E-04 d
63 c
0.26
5.5E-04
0.26 c
0.03
6.3E-06
0.61 c
3.7 c
1.0E+03b'c
4.3E-03
0.024
1.0E+03b'c
0.027
0.016
0.030 "'
0.12
0.020
0.11
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.62
88
0.016
110C
33
59 c
0.025
39
250 c
29 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.054
0.10
1.0E+03b'c
0.014
6.5E-04
0.016
0.030a'
400 c
0.013
0.089
1.0E+03b'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F. 7-1
-------
Table F.7 Waste Pile LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
CAS#
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
3.3E+03
11
11
11
12
35
10
11
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
13
22
21
30
12
12
11
11
10
11
13
10
10
10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
15
130
3.1E+03
10
10
6.0E+16
13
12
550
10
10
10
10
1.0E+30
10
29
16
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
150
2.7E-03
13
1.6
0.046"
0.033d
0.76
1.0
0.076
0.72
0.052
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.3E+03
11
11
11
12
35
11
12
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
14
22
21
31
12
12
12
11
11
11
13
11
11
11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
15
130
3.4E+03
11
11
6.1E+16
14
12
550
11
11
11
11
1.0E+30
11
29
17
LCTV based
on Ingestion
27
14
14
1.4
15
85 c
4.6E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
48
59
0.45"
0.32 "
2.8
5.4
0.70s-
1.0
2.7
24
8.1
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
300
2.7"
27
6.1
1.0E+03b'c
0.027
0.54
0.13s-
0.27
1.0E+03b'c
18
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200 '-
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
45
4.3E-03
0.040
17
7.5 s-
7.0
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.70s-
0.15
0.67
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.3E+03
16
16
16
17
39
15
16
1.0E+30
6.7E+17
1.0E+30
1.5E+05
1.8E+12
19
27
26
35
17
17
16
16
15
16
18
15
15
15
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.5E+13
22
137
4.7E+03
15
15
6.1E+16
18
17
560
15
15
15
15
1.0E+30
15
33
21
LCTV based
on Ingestion
2.6 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
240 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03
0.10
7.5E-03
4.6E-03 "
3.2E-03 d
2.5E-03
0.021
0.015
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
2.8E-06
0.10
1.9E-04
2.1E-03
2.1E-03
0.13
2.5E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
24 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.5
0.034
170C
0.085"
0.010
3.5E-03
0.044
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'
2.72
0.42
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F. 7-2
-------
Table F.7 Waste Pile LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
CAS#
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1 .44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.8E+06
45
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
10
10
10
43
10
20
1.0E+30
20
150
10
1.2E+12
10
450
10
10
10
37
5.9E+06
37
1.0E+30
4.2E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+09
51
1.1E+03
19
10
9.9E+07
10
11
150
11
10
1.0E+30
10
10
10
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020"'
14
7.4E-03
38
11b'c'd
11"
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.9
0.020
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.8E+06
45
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
11
11
11
45
11
21
1.0E+30
20
150
11
1.4E+12
11
450
11
11
11
37
6.0E+06
37
1.0E+30
4.3E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
51
1.1E+03
19
11
1.0E+08
11
12
150
12
11
1.0E+30
11
11
11
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
6.6 c
0.020 a'
1.0E+03b'
110
81
990
54
47
49
540
0.022
440 c
32
54
540
0.81
40b,c,d
7.2 c
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 a'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.3
8.2
1.0E+03b'c
0.81
81
56
1.8
17
0.027
0.028
130
10"
0.54
0.27
160
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
2.6
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
66
0.15
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
560
240
140 "
140 "
1.0E+03b'c
13C
1.0E+03"'
8.4E-03
0.075
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
200s'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
4.7E+06
49
2.4E+06
1.0E+30
15
15
15
64
15
30
1.0E+30
25
220
15
3.4E+12
15
450
15
15
15
41
8.6E+06
41
1.0E+30
4.3E+09
310
4.3E+03
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+09
55
1.1E+03
24
15
1.0E+08
15
16
160
16
15
1.0E+30
15
15
15
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
2.5E-04
1.0E+03b'
0.013
2.2E-03
640 c
6.2E-04
8.0E-03 "'
1.0E+03b'c
0.38
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
29 c
0.38
1.0E+03b'c
1.6
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.27
0.019
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
23
0.69C
1.0E+03b'c
0.015
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.19
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
670 c
0.18
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F. 7-3
-------
Table F.7 Waste Pile LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
CAS#
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1 .96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
10
10
2.0E+05
10
1.0E+30
10
10
22
10
10
10
10
11
10
17
10
10
10
11
2.1E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.2E+08
390
21
10
10
10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
14
10
910
10
12
11
17
200
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
19
120
12
12
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.052
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
0.46
1.7
0.059C
0.073 "
0.073 "
0.059
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
11
11
2.1E+05
11
1.0E+30
11
11
23
11
11
11
11
12
11
17
11
11
11
12
2.1E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.3E+08
390
21
11
11
11
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
15
11
910
11
13
12
17
200
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
20
130
12
13
LCTV based
on Ingestion
22
380
6.2 b'c'd
2.7
16
1.2
11
9.9
0.13
2.2E-03
8.3
0.57
1.0E+03b'c
76 c
29 c
16
160
0.022
1.6
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
27
670 c
0.27
1.0'
2.0
0.085
83
1.5C
0.049 c
14
190
0.70s-
9.2
LCTV based
on Inhalation
13
58
1.0E+03"
190
110
0.43
1.7
3.6
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
5.4
5.0 a'
61
0.64"
0.70s-
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
15
15
3.1E+05
15
1.0E+30
15
15
27
15
15
15
15
16
15
21
15
15
15
16
3.4E+08
3.9E+03
940
3.3E+08
390
26
15
15
15
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.4E+07
19
15
910
15
17
16
21
210
2.3E+15
2.0E+06
26
180
17
17
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.20
9.7E-06
2.9E-05
2.9E-04
2.1 E-04
0.42
6.6E-05
6.9E-04
1.2E-06
0.21 c
0.14
0.021
1.0E+03b'c
6.1 E-03
9.1 E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1.3E-03C
0.095
0.085
0.031
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.43
3.5E-04
6.5E-04
6.0E-03
3.3E-04
0.023
11
0.068
0.13
14
5.9E-05
20 c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.26
1.0E+03b'c
4.4E-03C
0.048
0.088
0.35
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F. 7-4
-------
Table F.7 Waste Pile LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
16
13
10
10
10
1.6E+05
12
19
100
610
12
11
12
18
12
11
10
12
10
10
200
10
10
22
20
23
21
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.019
13
0.50"'
0.94
7.1
0.11 d
0.060
0.057
0.54
0.021
210C
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
17
13
11
11
11
1.6E+05
12
20
100
640
12
12
12
18
12
11
11
13
11
11
210
11
11
22
21
23
22
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
0.021
2.0
64
5.9
1.0E+03b'c
25.2
0.96 M
0.96"
88
45
1.0a'
2.7
1.9
8.1
57
270
0.20s'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
180
LCTV based
on Inhalation
17
1.0E+03b'c
86 c
0.96M
0.96"
0.50s'
25
0.44
1.2
13
0.20 "'
29
29
30
30
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
21
18
15
15
15
1.7E+05
17
24
110
920
17
16
16
23
17
16
15
18
15
15
260
15
15
27
25
28
27
LCTV based
on Ingestion
4.6E-04
6.1E-03
7.7E-03
0.50 "'
0.20
3.5E-03 "
3.5E-03 d
0.14
0.15
2.5E-04
2.5E-03
2.0E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
110
0.54
0.50 ''
0.32
4.8E-03"
4.8E-03"
0.11
2.0 *'
0.038
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F. 7-5
-------
Table F.8 Waste Pile LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1 .50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1 .80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
210
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
29
24
25
2.6E+11
24
24
560
2.2E+04
26
24
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
24
1.0E+30
120
32
1.0E+30
29
7.9E+09
28
24
760
27
29
42
9.2E+06
26
24
37
1.6E+03
29
24
26
24
26
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.16
2.0
48
0.13
290 c
21
1.0E+03b'c
2.3
0.19
0.20
0.21
0.030 *'
3.7
2.3
2.0
160
5.0s
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
210
24
24
25
24
1.0E+30
30
24
26
2.6E+11
24
24
560
2.2E+04
27
24
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
24
1.0E+30
130
33
1.0E+30
30
8.0E+09
28
24
760
28
29
43
9.5E+06
26
24
37
1.6E+03
29
24
26
24
27
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
300 c
60
60
1.0E+03b'
0.15
300
0.11 d
1.0E+03b'c
3.0
1.0E+03b'c
0.34
0.38
50
1.8
180
210"
52
32
1.0E+03b'c
15
880 M
60
1.0E+03b'c
0.68
0.67
72
0.50s'
0.030s-
13
2.4
18
760 c
14
6.0 *'
3.3
1.0E+03"
5.0 s
LCTV based
on Inhalation
5.3
1.0E+03"'
76
1.0E+03b'
365
1.0
23
0.50 '-
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.7
56
0.50 "'
0.030 "'
0.58
7.4
730
6.0 "'
6.3
0.26
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
210
33
33
34
33
1.0E+30
41
33
36
2.6E+11
33
33
560
2.2E+04
35
33
1.5E+06
1.5E+06
33
1.0E+30
180
42
1.0E+30
40
1.7E+10
37
33
760
36
40
57
9.5E+06
35
33
47
1.6E+03
40
33
35
33
35
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
8.9E-04
6.6E-04"
1.0E+03b'c
0.56
0.012
1.7C
0.06
1.4E-05
19C
120 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.016
0.058
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
0.043
0.030"'
0.56
0.046
0.25
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.4
210
0.036
1.0E+03b'c
73
390 c
0.056
87
1.0E+03b'c
950 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.20
0.25
1.0E+03b'c
0.032
1.5E-03
0.044
0.030 "'
1.0E+03b'c
0.030
0.20
1.0E+03"'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.8-1
-------
Table F.8 Waste Pile LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT, p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
CAS#
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
2.2E+04
26
26
26
29
110
24
26
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
35
64
61
92
29
28
27
25
24
26
34
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
40
430
5.0E+04
24
24
1.0E+30
35
31
2.5E+03
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
24
87
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
370
7.1E-03
38
4.6
0.11 "
0.075 d
1.8
2.4
0.18
1.7
0.12
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.2E+04
26
26
26
29
110
24
26
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
36
64
61
93
30
29
28
26
24
27
35
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
41
430
5.3E+04
24
24
1.0E+30
36
31
2.5E+03
24
24
24
24
1.0E+30
24
89
LCTV based
on Ingestion
73
32
32
3.2
36
260 c
0.010
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
140
150
0.45"
0.32 "
6.3
12
0.70s-
2.6
6.0
53
18
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
800
6.0"
60
15
1.0E+03b'c
0.06
1.2
0.13a'
0.60
1.0E+03b'c
54 c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200s-
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
140 c
9.5E-03
0.11
49
7.5 s-
17
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.70 '
0.34
1.5
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.2E+04
35
35
35
38
120
33
35
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+07
1.0E+30
50
73
70
100
38
40
38
35
33
35
44
33
33
33
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
55
430
7.6E+04
33
33
1.0E+30
46
39
2.5E+03
33
33
33
33
1.0E+30
33
95
LCTV based
on Ingestion
17C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.4E-03
0.28
0.022
0.010 "
7.1E-03"
5.7E-03
0.047
0.032
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
8.9E-06
0.23
4.8E-04
4.7E-03
4.7E-03
0.29
LCTV based
on Inhalation
160 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.9
0.091
500 c
0.19"
0.024
7.8E-03
0.10
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 '-
6.0
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.8-2
-------
Table F.8 Waste Pile LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
CAS#
122667
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
C
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
C
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
45
1.6E+09
138
5.5E+08
1.0E+30
24
24
24
150
24
58
1.0E+30
57
900
24
1.0E+30
24
1.5E+03
24
24
24
110
6.0E+09
110
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
160
4.6E+03
53
24
1.7E+14
24
27
490
25
24
1.0E+30
24
24
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
39.6
0.045
72
3gb,c,d
38 e
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 "
0.039
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
45
1.6E+09
139
5.6E+08
1.0E+30
24
24
24
150
24
60
1.0E+30
57
930
24
1.0E+30
24
1.5E+03
24
24
24
110
6.1E+09
110
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
160
4.6E+03
53
24
1.7E+14
24
27
490
26
24
1.0E+30
24
24
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
20 c
0.020s'
1.0E+03"'
240
180
1.0E+03"'
120
130
140
1.0E+03"'
0.048
1.0E+03b'c
66
120
1.0E+03"'
1.8
13Qb,c,d
22 c
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 a'
34
1.0E+03b'c
1.8
180
130
6.0
37
0.058
0.063
300
10"
1.2
0.60
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
5.8
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
190 c
0.91
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
530
450 "
450 "
1.0E+03b'c
35 c
1.0E+03"'
0.019
0.17
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
56
2.4E+09
150
5.6E+08
1.0E+30
33
33
33
214
33
82
1.0E+30
66
1.4E+03
33
1.0E+30
33
1.5E+03
33
33
33
120
8.1E+09
120
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+03
3.4E+04
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
170
4.6E+03
63
33
1.7E+14
33
36
500
36
33
1.0E+30
33
33
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.007
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.6E-03
1.0E+03b'
0.029
6.5E-03
1.0E+03b'c
1 .9E-03
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.2
1.0E+03b'c
3.6
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.1
1.0E+03"'
0.72
0.11
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
50
2.1C
1.0E+03b'c
0.044
8.0E-03 "'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.55
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.8-3
-------
Table F.8 Waste Pile LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
CAS#
78933
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1 .96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86 E-03
Inhalation
NC
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
24
24
24
2.7E+07
24
1.0E+30
24
25
66
24
24
24
24
28
24
46
24
24
24
26
6.6E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
61
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.3E+11
39
24
3.6E+03
24
31
26
47
670
1.0E+30
8.9E+09
58
510
30
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.12
0.061
1.0E+03b'c
0.87
4.7
270 c
0.18 "
0.18"
0.15
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
24
24
24
2.8E+07
24
1.0E+30
24
25
67
24
24
24
24
29
24
47
24
24
24
27
7.0E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
62
24
24
24
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.3E+11
40
24
3.6E+03
24
32
27
47
670
1.0E+30
9.0E+09
59
520
30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
200s-
48
830
9.2 b'c'd
6.0
37
2.8
33 c
22
0.30
4.8E-03
23
1.3
1.0E+03b'c
560 c
97 c
46
360
0.048
3.6
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
73 c
1.0E+03b'c
0.60
1.0'
3.8
0.20
230
4.9 c
220 c
43
770
0.70s-
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200 "'
29
130
1.0E+03"
410
250
1.3
2.0 '-
8.0
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
12
5.0 *'
170
0.64 "
0.70 "'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
33
33
33
4.5E+07
33
1.0E+30
33
34
76
33
33
33
33
37
33
57
33
33
33
37
9.4E+17
2.9E+04
3.8E+03
3.6E+17
1.3E+03
71
33
33
33
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.4E+11
51
33
3.6E+03
33
40
36
57
670
1.0E+30
9.0E+09
72
710
39
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.44
2.2E-05
6.3E-05
6.7E-04
4.6E-04
1.1
1.5E-04
1.5E-03
4.7E-06
1.0E+03b'c
0.49
0.057
1.0E+03b'c
0.013
0.022
1.0E+03b'c
5.8 c
0.27
0.34
0.072
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0
7. 7 E-04
1.4E-03
0.013
7.4E-04
0.050
30
0.15
0.29
31
2.4E-04 c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.57
1.0E+03b'c
20 c
0.14
0.32"
0.70 "'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.8-4
-------
Table F.8 Waste Pile LCTVs for Compacted Clay Liner
Common Name
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Compacted Clay Liner
Peak
DAF
31
1.0E+30
45
33
24
24
24
9.5E+06
29
54
340
5.8E+03
29
28
29
50
30
26
24
32
24
24
1.2E+03
24
24
65
58
67
64
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.035
33
0.50 "'
2.3
24
0.25 M
0.14
0.14
1.0 '
0.048
640 c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
32
1.0E+30
45
34
24
24
24
9.7E+06
29
55
340
6.0E+03
30
29
29
51
31
26
24
32
24
24
1.2E+03
24
24
65
59
68
64
LCTV based
on Ingestion
23
1.0E+03b'c
0.046
5.5
170
14
1.0E+03b'c
83 c
0.96M
0.96"
210
120
1.0"'
6.0
4.8
18
170
600
0.2 *'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
430
LCTV based
on Inhalation
44
1.0E+03b'c
280 c
0.96 M
0.96 "
0.50 *'
61
1.1
2.7
29
0.20 *'
84
83
88
89
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
40
1.0E+30
56
43
33
33
33
9.7E+06
39
64
340
8.7E+03
40
37
38
61
40
35
33
44
33
33
1.4E+03
33
33
74
68
77
73
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E-03
0.013
0.017
0.50 *'
0.47
7.8E-03"
7.8E-03"
0.33
0.35
6.1E-04
0.014
4.5E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
250
1.2
0.50 "'
0.74
0.11 "
0.011 d
0.25
2.0 "'
0.084
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.8-5
-------
Table F.9 Waste Pile LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1.76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.00E+01
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
6.9E+07
7.4E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.1E+07
5.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.2E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.2E+07
6.0E+08
1.9E+08
1.0E+30
9.5E+08
7.5E+07
2.2E+08
7.2E+07
9.6E+07
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03b'
5.0s
100s
0.50 '-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
0.50 '-
0.030 "'
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 a'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.1E+07
7.7E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
6.0E+08
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
7.4E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.4E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.3E+07
6.0E+08
2.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+09
7.6E+07
2.2E+08
7.3E+07
9.8E+07
LCTV based on
Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
740 "
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
100s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0a
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
6.0 '
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
740 M
1.0E+03"'
0.50s'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 "'
0.030s-
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03"'
6.0 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
7.9E+07
7.6E+07
8.1E+07
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
6.2E+08
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.7E+07
8.7E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.8E+08
1.0E+30
2.3E+09
1.0E+30
1.2E+08
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.8E+09
1.2E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.6E+07
6.0E+08
2.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+09
7.8E+07
2.3E+08
7.7E+07
9.9E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
750 M
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
5.0 a
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
36
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.50 '
0.030 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
750 b'd
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50s'
0.030s-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.9-1
-------
Table F.9 Waste Pile LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
ChloropropeneS- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a, hjanthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropene trans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
CAS#
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
C
8.05E-04
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1.32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1.06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
Inhalation
NC
3.00E-03
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
C
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.1E+07
9.1E+07
1.2E+08
1.2E+09
7.7E+07
8.7E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.5E+08
4.3E+08
1.3E+09
1.2E+08
3.4E+14
3.0E+21
7.3E+08
5.8E+08
8.5E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
8.5E+07
8.3E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
8.9E+11
9.2E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 s-
0.45 "
0.32 "'"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
Wa'
1.0E+03"'
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.1E+07
9.2E+07
9.1E+07
1.2E+08
1.2E+09
7.8E+07
8.8E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
4.3E+08
1.4E+09
1.2E+08
3.5E+14
3.0E+21
7.4E+08
5.8E+08
8.7E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
8.6E+07
8.5E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
9.1E+11
9.4E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV based on
Ingestion
1.0E+03"'
5.0s
1.0E+03"'
200''
200s-
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 M
0.32 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
1.0E+03"'
10 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
200 '
200s'
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
7.5 s-
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 "
0.32 "'"
0.70s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
9.6E+07
9.6E+07
9.6E+07
1.2E+08
1.3E+09
8.3E+07
8.8E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
4.5E+08
1.4E+09
1.3E+08
4.2E+14
3.0E+21
7.4E+08
5.8E+08
9.3E+07
1.3E+11
3.1E+08
9.0E+07
8.8E+07
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.9E+08
7.7E+07
1.0E+30
9.3E+11
9.4E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.45 "
0.32 "'"
0.70s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
7.5 '
1.0E+03b'c
0.45M
0.32 "'"
0.70s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.9-2
-------
Table F.9 Waste Pile LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Dinitrotoluene2,4-
Dinitrotoluene2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
Endosulfan (Endosulfan I and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethyl benzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
CAS#
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
C
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
1.09E+03
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
1.00E+01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
C
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
8.9E+07
4.4E+08
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.3E+07
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
2.9E+08
7.5E+07
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0 '
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
9.1E+07
4.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
7.4E+07
8.0E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
1.0E+30
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
2.9E+08
7.6E+07
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.4E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
3.9E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV based on
Ingestion
0.13 *'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.020 *'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 *'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
9.5E+07
4.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.6E+07
1.0E+30
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
7.7E+07
8.2E+07
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.2E+08
1.0E+30
7.9E+07
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
2.9E+08
8.0E+07
1.5E+09
1.0E+30
1.5E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.1E+09
1.0E+30
4.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
3.0E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.13 *'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03 *'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 *'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 *'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.13a'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
3.0 "'
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.9-3
-------
Table F.9 Waste Pile LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
CAS#
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
80626
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
Inhalation
NC
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
C
1.20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
6.2E+08
7.3E+07
1.0E+30
7.1E+07
7.4E+07
7.1E+07
7.9E+07
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.6E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.7E+08
5.1E+08
8.1E+07
7.4E+07
7.4E+07
7.3E+07
1.2E+08
8.0E+07
3.2E+08
7.4E+07
7.3E+07
7.1E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
7.9E+07
2.9E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.4E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
0.20 "
10"
1.0E+03"'
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.2E+08
7.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.2E+07
7.6E+07
7.2E+07
8.1E+07
7.6E+07
1.0E+30
7.7E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.7E+08
5.1E+08
8.4E+07
7.6E+07
7.5E+07
7.5E+07
1.2E+08
8.0E+07
3.2E+08
7.5E+07
7.3E+07
7.2E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.6E+08
8.0E+07
3.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.5E+07
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV based on
Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
0.20 "
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
10"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
200 *'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
2.0 *'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
5.0s-
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.20"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
200s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
2.0 '
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
5.0 '
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.4E+08
7.8E+07
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
8.0E+07
7.6E+07
8.3E+07
7.9E+07
1.0E+30
8.0E+07
1.0E+30
3.8E+08
3.9E+08
5.2E+08
8.7E+07
8.0E+07
7.8E+07
7.8E+07
1.3E+08
8.2E+07
3.3E+08
7.7E+07
7.7E+07
7.6E+07
3.1E+09
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
4.8E+08
8.4E+07
3.0E+08
2.9E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
8.9E+07
1.0E+30
8.0E+07
1.6E+10
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
50
150
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
340
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.9-4
-------
Table F.9 Waste Pile LCTVs for Composite Liner
Common Name
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidineo-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionic acid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
7.34E-01
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
6.19E-09
6.19E-10
3.71 E-03
4.83E-04
1.86 E-03
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
Composite Liner
Peak
DAF
1 . 1 E+09
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.1E+07
8.3E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.4E+08
3.7E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.3E+09
1.1E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.4E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.2E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.4E+07
7.6E+07
4.6E+08
4.1E+08
5.0E+08
4.8E+08
LCTV
based on MCL
(mg/L)
1.0'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 "
0.64 "
0.70 a'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 M
0.96 M
0.50 *'
1.0"'
0.20 "'
1.0E+03b'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
1.2E+09
3.0E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.3E+07
8.3E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.4E+08
3.8E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.3E+09
1.1E+08
1.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.4E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.5E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.5E+07
7.8E+07
4.7E+08
4.1E+08
5.2E+08
4.8E+08
LCTV based on
Ingestion
1.0'
5.0s
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.70 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96 "
0.96 M
1.0E+03"'
400s-
1.0a'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.64e
0.70s-
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.96M
0.96e
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.20 "'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
1.2E+09
3.1E+08
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.3E+08
1.3E+10
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.7E+08
7.5E+07
8.6E+07
3.9E+08
1.0E+30
4.7E+08
3.8E+08
1.6E+10
1.0E+30
3.5E+09
1.2E+08
1.2E+08
1.0E+30
1.5E+08
7.5E+08
4.7E+08
1.0E+30
8.8E+07
3.5E+08
1.0E+30
7.8E+07
8.1E+07
4.8E+08
4.2E+08
5.2E+08
4.9E+08
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64 M
0.64 M
0.70 "'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.50 "'
1.0E+03"'
0.96 "
0.96 b'd
0.50 "'
2.0s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
0.20 ''
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.64M
0.64M
0.70s-
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.50 '
1.0E+03"'
0.96"
0.96M
0.50 "'
2.0s-
0.20s-
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.9-5
-------
Table F. 10 Land Treatment Unit LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Acenaphthene
Acetaldehyde [Ethanal]
Acetone (2-propanone)
Acetonitrile (methyl cyanide)
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid [propenoic acid]
Acrylonitrile
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Aniline (benzeneamine)
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benz{a}anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo{a}pyrene
Benzo{b}fluoranthene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl chloride
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
Butadiene 1, 3-
Butanol n-
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,2-sec-(Dinoseb)
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chloro-1 ,3-butadiene 2-(Chloroprene)
Chloroaniline p-
Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzilate
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane [Ethyl chloride]
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Chlorophenol 2-
Chloropropene 3- (Allyl Chloride)
Chromium (III) (Chromic Ion)
Chromium (VI)
Chrysene
CAS#
83329
75070
67641
75058
98862
107028
79061
79107
107131
309002
107186
62533
120127
7440360
7440382
7440393
56553
71432
92875
50328
205992
100516
100447
7440417
111444
39638329
117817
75274
74839
106990
71363
85687
88857
7440439
75150
56235
57749
126998
106478
108907
510156
124481
75003
67663
74873
95578
107051
16065831
18540299
218019
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
6.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E+00
5.00E-03
2.00E-04
4.00E-03
6.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
1.00E-01
8.00E-02
8.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E-01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
4.90E-03
1.22E+01
2.45E-02
7.34E-04
1.22E-01
7.34E+00
9.79E-03
7.34E-03
1.71E+00
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E-02
9.79E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
3.43E-02
2.45E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E-02
1.22E-02
2.45E+00
1.71E-02
1.22E-02
4.90E-01
9.79E-02
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
2.45E-01
1.22E-01
3.67E+01
7.34E-02
C
2.15E-05
1.79E-04
5.68E-06
1.69E-02
6.44E-05
8.05E-05
1 .76E-03
4.20E-07
1.32E-05
8.05E-05
5.68E-04
8.78E-05
1.38E-03
6.90E-03
1.56E-03
7.43E-04
2.76E-04
3.58E-04
1.15E-03
7.43E-03
8.05E-04
Inhalation
NC
2.20E-01
1.50E+03
3.10E+00
3.30E-04
1.50E+01
3.80E-02
9.30E-01
1.90E-01
1.80E+02
1.50E-02
6.00E-02
1.90E+00
2.10E-02
2.80E-02
2.20E-02
2.00E-01
3.00E+01
3.30E-01
2.60E-01
9.70E-03
3.00E-03
C
4.10E-02
5.10E+00
1.00E-03
1.00E-05
2.20E+00
1.80E-02
1.60E-03
2.60E+00
5.40E-03
6.30E-04
5.20E-04
1.10E-03
5.90E-03
2.80E+01
8.00E-04
4.00E-05
7.60E-04
1.50E-03
1.20E+00
7.50E-04
5.90E-03
1.90E-03
7.30E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
8.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.2
1.9
2.0
7.6E+07
1.9
1.9
21
370
2.0
1.9
9.2E+03
9.5E+03
1.9
1.0E+30
6.8
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
6.9E+07
2.0
1.9
26
2.0
2.1
2.8
3.5E+04
2.0
1.9
2.4
39
2.1
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
370
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.013
0.13
3.5
9.9E-03
1.8C
5.0
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.014
0.015
0.014
0.030 a'
0.24
0.17
0.16
43
5.0s
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
8.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.2
1.9
2.0
7.7E+07
1.9
1.9
22
370
2.0
1.9
9.3E+03
9.5E+03
1.9
1.0E+30
7.0
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
6.9E+07
2.1
1.9
26
2.0
2.2
2.8
3.6E+04
2.0
1.9
2.4
39
2.2
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
370
LCTV based
on Ingestion
13C
4.7
4.7
1.0E+03"'
0.011
23
8.2E-03"
1.0E+03b'c
0.23
160 c
0.024
0.026
3.6
0.14
14
16"
9.8
2.2
1.0E+03b'c
1.1
69 ""
4.7
130 c
0.049
0.038
5.3
0.048
0.030a'
0.98
0.19
1.2
19C
1.1
0.49
0.24
260
5.0s
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.42
1.0E+03b'
6.0
1.0E+03b'
29
0.076
1.8
0.38
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
0.12
4.1
0.059
0.030 "'
0.044
0.48
57
0.66
0.50
0.019
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
8.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.2
2.3
7.8E+07
2.2
2.2
22
370
2.3
2.2
9.3E+03
9.5E+03
2.2
1.0E+30
8.2
2.5
1.0E+30
2.5
1.2E+08
2.3
2.2
27
2.3
2.5
3.2
3.6E+04
2.3
2.2
2.7
40
2.5
2.2
2.3
2.2
2.3
1.0E+30
370
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.6E-05
4.2E-05"
440 c
0.037
5.6E-04
0.030C
4.0E-03
9.2E-07
0.12C
0.77 c
1.0E+03b'c
7.2E-04
3.4E-03
1.0E+03b'c
3.9E-03
2.4E-03
0.030a'
0.014
2.8E-03
0.016
0.30C
LCTV based
on Inhalation
0.090
13
2.3E-03
780 c
4.8
6.7 c
3.7E-03
5.7
50 c
6.0 c
1.0E+03b'c
9.0E-03
0.015
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-03
9.3E-05
2.4E-03
0.030 "'
48 c
1.9E-03
0.013
1.0E+03"'
2.7 c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.10- 1
-------
Table F. 10 Land Treatment Unit LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Cobalt
Copper
Cresol m-
Cresol o-
Cresol p-
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanol
Cyclohexanone
ODD
DDE
DDT p,p'-
Diallate
Dibenz{a,h}anthracene
Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,2-
Dichlorobenzene 1,4-
Dichlorobenzidine 3,3'-
Dichlorodifluoromethane (Freon 12)
Dichloroethane 1,1-
Dichloroethane 1,2-
Dichloroethylene cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene trans- 1 ,2-
Dichloroethylene 1,1-
Dichlorophenol 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-(2,4-D)
Dichloropropane 1,2-
Dichloropropene 1,3-(mixture of isomers)
Dichloropropene cis-1,3-
Dichloropropenetrans-1,3-
Dieldrin
Diethyl phthalate
Diethylstilbestrol
Dimethoate
Dimethoxybenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethyl formamide N,N- [DMF]
Dimethylbenz{a}anthracene 7,12-
Dimethylbenzidine 3,3'-
Dimethylphenol 2,4-
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dinitrobenzene 1,3-
Dinitrophenol 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene 2,6-
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dioxane 1,4-
Diphenylamine
Diphenylhydrazine 1, 2-
Disulfoton
CAS#
7440484
7440508
108394
95487
106445
1319773
98828
108930
108941
72548
72559
50293
2303164
53703
96128
95501
106467
91941
75718
75343
107062
156592
156605
75354
120832
94757
78875
542756
10061015
10061026
60571
84662
56531
60515
119904
68122
57976
119937
105679
84742
99650
51285
121142
606202
117840
123911
122394
122667
298044
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.30E+00
2.00E-04
6.00E-01
7.50E-02
5.00E-03
7.00E-02
1.00E-01
7.00E-03
7.00E-02
5.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E-01
1.22E+00
1.22E+00
1.22E-01
1.22E+00
2.45E+00
4.16E-04
1.22E+02
1.22E-02
2.20E+00
4.90E+00
2.45E+00
2.45E-01
4.90E-01
2.20E-01
7.34E-02
2.45E-01
2.20E+00
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-03
1.96E+01
4.90E-03
2.45E+00
4.90E-01
2.45E+00
2.45E-03
4.90E-02
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
4.90E-01
6.12E-01
9.79E-04
C
4.02E-04
2.84E-04
2.84E-04
1.58E-03
1 .32E-05
6.90E-05
4.02E-03
2.15E-04
1 .06E-03
1.61E-04
1.42E-03
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
9.66E-04
6.04E-06
2.05E-08
6.90E-03
1.05E-05
1.42E-04
1.42E-04
8.78E-03
1.21E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.20E+03
8.80E+02
1.30E+03
1.10E+03
1.30E+00
3.90E-04
2.90E-03
7.70E-01
3.00E+00
5.80E-01
1.60E+00
1.00E+01
2.10E-01
1.40E-02
6.10E-02
7.00E-02
7.50E-02
7.10E+02
1.09E+03
C
8.80E-03
3.80E-01
7.90E-02
1.30E-03
4.90E+00
7.40E-03
6.30E-04
2.20E-04
2.90E-03
3.30E-03
3.50E-03
1.00E-04
3.00E-03
8.12E-01
1.80E-01
2.00E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
5.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.8E+04
1.0E+30
2.5
3.4
3.3
4.4
2.1
2.1
2.1
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7
17
1.3E+03
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.3
2.1
65
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
4.3
2.7
1.3E+07
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
61
4.9E-04
2.0
0.25
8.5E-03 "
6.0E-03 d
0.14
0.19
0.014
0.13
9.4E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
5.0
1.9
2.0
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
6.9E+04
1.0E+30
2.5
3.4
3.3
4.4
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.0
2.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.7
17
1.3E+03
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
2.3
2.1
65
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
4.3
2.7
1.3E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
5.0
2.4
2.4
0.24
2.5
12
8.0E-04
240
1.0E+03b'c
7.4
10
0.32"
0.22 "
0.48
0.94
0.44
0.17
0.47
4.2
1.4
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
53
0.47"
4.7
1.1
160 c
4.7E-03
0.094
0.094
0.047
1.0E+03b'c
2.6
1.0E+03b'c
LCTV based
on Inhalation
200"'
200s'
200s-
1.0E+03"'
6.5
7.5E-04
7.2E-03
2.6
7.5 s-
1.2
0.45"
0.32 "'"
0.42
0.027
0.12
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.4
5.2
2.2
2.3
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
7.1E+04
1.0E+30
2.8
3.7
3.6
4.7
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.3
2.6
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
3.1
17
1.6E+03
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.6
2.4
66
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
4.5
3.0
1.5E+07
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
110C
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-04
0.014
1.0E-03
6.6E-04"
4.7E-04"
3.7E-04
3.1E-03
2.1E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
3.5E-07
0.015
2.7E-05
3. 1 E-04
3.1E-04
0.019
3.6E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.22
4.6E-03
23 c
0.012"
1.5E-03
5.0E-04
6.4E-03
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.13 ''
0.39
0.060
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.10-2
-------
Table F. 10 Land Treatment Unit LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1 and II, mixture)
Endrin
Epichlorohydrin
Epoxybutane, 1, 2-
Ethoxyethanol 2-
Ethoxyethanol acetate 2-
Ethyl acetate
Ethyl ether
Ethyl methacrylate
Ethyl methanesulfonate
Ethylbenzene
Ethylene dibromide (1,2-Dibromoethane)
Ethylene glycol
Ethylene oxide
Ethylene thiourea
Fluoranthene
Fluoride
Formaldehyde
Formic acid
Furfural
HCH beta-
HCH (Lindane) gamma-
HCH alpha-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachlorodibenzofurans [HxCDFs]
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [HxCDDs]
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorophene
Hexane n-
Hydrogen Sulfide
lndeno{1,2,3-cd}pyrene
Isobutyl alcohol
Isophorone
Kepone
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methacrylonitrile
Methanol
Methoxychlor
Methoxyethanol acetate 2-
Methoxyethanol 2-
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Methyl methacrylate
CAS#
115297
72208
106898
106887
110805
111159
141786
60297
97632
62500
100414
106934
107211
75218
96457
206440
16984488
50000
64186
98011
319857
58899
319846
76448
1024573
87683
118741
77474
55684941
34465468
67721
70304
110543
7783064
193395
78831
78591
143500
7439921
7439965
7439976
126987
67561
72435
110496
109864
78933
108101
80626
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
2.00E-03
7.00E-01
5.00E-05
4.00E+00
2.00E-04
4.00E-04
2.00E-04
1.00E-03
5.00E-02
1.50E-02
2.00E-03
4.00E-02
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
1.47E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E-02
9.79E+00
7.34E+00
2.20E+01
4.90E+00
2.20E+00
2.45E+00
4.90E+01
1.96E-03
9.79E-01
2.90E+00
4.90E+00
4.90E+01
7.34E-02
7.34E-03
1.96E-01
1.22E-02
3.18E-04
7.34E-03
1.96E-02
1.47E-01
2.45E-02
7.34E-03
2.69E+02
7.34E-02
7.34E+00
4.90E+00
1.22E-02
1.15E+00
2.45E-03
2.45E-03
1.22E+01
1.22E-01
4.90E-02
2.45E-02
1.47E+01
1.96E+00
3.43E+01
C
9.75E-03
3.30E-07
1.14E-06
9.47E-05
8.78E-04
5.36E-05
7.43E-05
1.53E-05
2.15E-05
1.06E-05
1.24E-03
6.04E-05
6.19E-09
6.19E-09
6.90E-03
8.05E-05
1.02E-01
Inhalation
NC
6.00E-02
2.40E-01
2.90E+03
3.00E+02
3.30E+00
9.80E-04
1.20E+04
4.10E-01
5.10E+01
2.20E+01
6.90E-04
6.60E-01
5.33E+02
7.00E-04
6.50E-03
1.54E+03
5.10E+02
4.40E+02
3.30E+01
1.20E+00
5.30E+00
C
1.90E-01
1.10E-02
8.40E-05
5.20E-04
1.60E+03
1.50E+00
1.70E-02
1.60E-03
3.60E-04
1.50E-05
2.80E-04
6.10E-04
3.60E-05
1.44E-07
1.43E-07
3.30E-03
3.80E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
6.1
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7
1.9
3.4
1.0E+30
3.1
31
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
55
1.9
1.9
1.9
5.2
2.1E+07
5.2
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
6.9
130
3.0
1.9
3.0E+09
1.9
2.0
19
2.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
0.020 a'
2.2
1.5E-03
6.2
15b,c,d
1.5"
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.13a'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.25
3.3E-03
10a'c
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
6.1
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.8
1.9
3.4
1.0E+30
3.2
32
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
55
1.9
1.9
1.9
5.3
2.1E+07
5.3
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
6.9
130
3.0
1.9
3.1E+09
1.9
2.0
19
2.0
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.90C
0.020 a'
1.0E+03"'
19
14
150
9.4
7.6
7.7
94
3.7E-03
54 c
5.2
9.4
94
0.14
5.3b'c'd
1.0
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.29
0.13"
1.0E+03b'c
0.17
0.95
820 c
0.14
14
9.8
0.23
2.4
4.4E-03
4.9E-03
23
1.0E+01 a'c
0.094
0.047
28
3.7
66
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.46
1.0E+03b'
570
10.4
0.0
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
97.4
42.0
18"
1.8E+01 "
1.0E+03b'c
2.0
1.0E+03"'
1.3E-03
0.0
1.0E+03"'
970
840
63.0
2.3
10.1
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
6.4
2.0E+06
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
8.0
2.2
4.0
1.0E+30
3.4
38
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
55
2.2
2.2
2.2
5.5
2.3E+07
5.5
1.0E+30
2.8E+15
39
500
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
2.0E+14
7.2
130
3.3
2.2
3.1E+09
2.2
2.3
19
2.3
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03"'
4.4E-05
1.0E+03"'
1.9E-03
2.9E-04
1.0E+03b'c
8.4E-05
8.0E-03a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.049
0.030C
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.050
1.0E+03b'c
0.23
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'
0.038
3.2E-03
1.0E+03b'
1.0E+03b'
3.3
0.093
1.0E+03b'c
2.0E-03
8.0E-03 a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
0.018 c
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03b'c
0.024
1.0E+03b'c
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.10-3
-------
Table F. 10 Land Treatment Unit LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Methyl parathion
Methyl tert-butyl ether [MTBE]
Methylcholanthrene 3-
Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)
Molybdenum
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitropropane 2-
Nitrosodiethylamine N-
Nitrosodimethylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-butylamine N-
Nitroso-di-n-propylamine N-
Nitrosodiphenylamine N-
Nitrosomethylethylamine N-
Nitrosopiperidine N-
Nitrosopyrrolidine N-
Octamethyl pyrophosphoramide
Parathion (ethyl)
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorodibenzofurans [PeCDFs]
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins [PeCDDs]
Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phenylenediamine 1,3-
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors)
Pronamide
Propylene oxide [1,2-Epoxypropane]
Pyrene
Pyridine
Safrole
Selenium
Silver
Strychnine and salts
Styrene
Tetrachlorobenzene 1,2,4,5-
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,1,2-
Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachlorophenol 2,3,4,6-
Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate (Sulfotep)
Thallium
Thiram [Thiuram]
CAS#
298000
1634044
56495
74953
75092
7439987
91203
7440020
98953
79469
55185
62759
924163
621647
86306
10595956
100754
930552
152169
56382
608935
30402154
36088229
82688
87865
108952
62384
108452
298022
85449
1336363
23950585
75569
129000
110861
94597
7782492
7440224
57249
100425
95943
51207319
1746016
630206
79345
127184
58902
3689245
7440280
137268
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
5.00E-03
1.00E-03
5.00E-04
5.00E-02
1.00E-01
3.00E-08
5.00E-03
2.00E-03
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
6.12E-03
2.45E-01
1.47E+00
1.22E-01
4.90E-01
4.90E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-04
4.90E-01
4.90E-02
1.47E-01
1.96E-02
7.34E-02
7.34E-01
1.47E+01
1.96E-03
1.47E-01
4.90E-03
4.90E+01
4.90E-04
1.84E+00
7.34E-01
2.45E-02
1.22E-01
1.22E-01
7.34E-03
4.90E+00
7.34E-03
2.45E-08
0.734
1.47E+00
2.45E-01
7.34E-01
1.22E-02
1.96E-03
1.22E-01
C
1.29E-02
6.44E-07
1.89E-06
1.79E-05
1.38E-05
1.97E-02
4.39E-06
4.60E-05
1.24E-09
6.19E-10
3.71E-04
8.05E-04
2.41 E-04
4.02E-04
5.36E-04
6.19E-09
6.44E-10
3.71E-03
4.83E-04
1.86E-03
Inhalation
NC
1.70E+01
1.00E+01
1.90E-02
1.50E-01
3.30E-01
9.00E+02
1.30E+04
4.90E-01
1.40E+00
3.60E+00
9.40E-01
C
1 .20E-03
2.80E-02
2.30E-05
4.30E-05
4.00E-04
2.00E-05
1.50E-03
5.20E-01
4.50E-03
8.70E-03
9.20E-01
6.29E-08
6.00E-08
5.40E+01
1.40E-04
1.70E-02
1.00E-07
2.20E-09
1.90E-03
5.00E-04
2.10E-02
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
3.6E+05
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
1.9
3.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
3.1E+12
440
110
3.0E+10
48
3.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
2.5
1.9
110
1.9
2.2
2.0
2.8
25
1.0E+30
6.6E+06
3.3
18
2.1
2.1
1.0E+30
2.7
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
9.7E-03
3.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
0.078
0.28
0.20 c
0.013 "
0.013 "
0.011
3.2E-03
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
3.7E+05
1.9
1.0E+30
1.9
2.0
3.5
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.8
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.0
3.1E+12
440
110
3.1E+10
48
3.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
2.5
1.9
110
1.9
2.2
2.0
2.8
26
1.0E+30
6.6E+06
3.3
18
2.1
2.2
1.0E+30
2.7
LCTV based
on Ingestion
1.1b'c'd
0.47
2.9
0.22
1.7
1.2
0.023
3. 7 E-04
1.4
0.098
1.0E+03b'c
8.6 c
3.6 c
2.4
28
3.7E-03
0.28
1.0E+03b'c
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03b'c
4.6
79 c
0.047
0.21
0.26
0.015
14
0.19
0.16C
2.5
26
0.52
1.6
1.0E+03b'c
3.7E-03
0.33
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03"
32.5
20
0.1
0.3
0.6
1.0E+03"'
1.0E+03"'
0.94
2.7
10
0.64 "
0.70 a'
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
3.8E+05
2.2
1.0E+30
2.2
2.2
3.8
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.2
3.0
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
3.4E+12
440
110
3.1E+10
48
3.6
2.2
2.2
2.2
1.0E+30
1.0E+30
1.1E+08
2.8
2.2
110
2.2
2.4
2.3
3.0
26
1.0E+30
6.7E+06
3.7
21
2.4
2.4
1.0E+30
3.0
LCTV based
on Ingestion
0.029
1.4E-06
4. 1 E-06
4.2E-05
3.0E-05
0.060
9.6E-06
1.0E-04
1.5E-07
20 c
0.018
2.9E-03
1.0E+03b'c
8.8E-04
1.3E-03
1.0E+03b'c
4.3E-03C
0.014
1 .OE-02
4.5E-03
LCTV based
on Inhalation
1.0E+03b'c
0.063
5.0E-05
9.4E-05
8.8E-04
4.7E-05
3.3E-03
1.6
9.9E-03
0.019
2.0
7.1 E-06
1.0E+03b'c
100a'
1.0E+03b'c
0.037
1.0E+03b'c
0.015 c
7.1E-03
0.010
0.050
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.10-4
-------
Table F. 10 Land Treatment Unit LCTVs for No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Common Name
Toluene
Toluenediamine 2,4-
Toluidine o-
Toluidine p-
Toxaphene (chlorinated camphenes)
Tribromomethane (Bromoform)
Trichloro-1 ,2,2-trifluoro- ethane 1,1,2-
Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-
Trichloroethane 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 1,1,2-
Trichloroethylene (1,1 ,2-Trichloroethylene)
Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)
Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-
Trichlorophenol 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenoxy)propionicacid 2-(2,4,5- (Silvex)
Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4,5-
Trichloropropane 1,2,3-
Triethylamine
Trinitrobenzene (1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene) sym-
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate
Vanadium
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl chloride
Xylene m-
Xylene o-
Xylene p-
Xylenes (total)
Zinc
CAS#
108883
95807
95534
106490
8001352
75252
76131
120821
71556
79005
79016
75694
95954
88062
93721
93765
96184
121448
99354
126727
7440622
108054
75014
108383
95476
106423
1330207
7440666
MCL
(mg/L)
Ingestion
1.00E+00
3.00E-03
8.00E-02
7.00E-02
2.00E-01
5.00E-03
5.00E-03
5.00E-02
2.00E-03
1.00E+01
HBN (mg/L)
Ingestion
NC
4.90E+00
4.90E-01
7.34E+02
2.45E-01
6.85E+00
9.79E-02
7.34E+00
2.45E+00
1.96E-01
2.45E-01
1.47E-01
7.34E-01
1.71E-01
2.45E+01
7.34E-02
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
4.90E+01
7.34E+00
C
3.02E-05
4.02E-04
5.08E-04
8.78E-05
1.22E-02
1.69E-03
8.78E-03
8.78E-03
1.38E-05
9.89E-06
1.34E-04
Inhalation
NC
1.30E+00
9.50E+01
8.30E-01
6.90E+00
1.90E+00
2.10E+00
3.40E-02
1.10E-01
1.20E+00
2.90E-01
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
1.30E+00
1.40E+00
C
7.50E+00
3.60E-02
3.60E-03
1.90E-02
1.10E-03
6.80E-03
2.80E-01
2.50E-03
No Liner/In-Situ Soil
Peak
DAF
2.2
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7E+04
2.1
3.1
13
150
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.9
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.3
1.9
1.9
29
1.9
1.9
3.4
3.2
3.5
3.4
LCTV
based on
MCL
(mg/L)
2.2
0.50 a'
0.17
0.93
0.019"
0.011
0.010
0.098
3.8E-03
34
Non-Carcinogenic Effect
7-yr Avg
DAF
2.3
1.9
1.9
1.9
6.7E+04
2.1
3.1
13
150
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.9
2.1
2.0
1.9
2.4
1.9
1.9
29
1.9
1.9
3.4
3.2
3.5
3.4
LCTV based
on Ingestion
11
1.0
1.0E+03b'c
3.3
0.61 M
0.21
15
7.2
0.39
0.47
0.35
1.4
34
47
0.14
170 c
160
170
170
45
LCTV based
on Inhalation
2.9
290 c
11
0.58 M
0.58 "
0.50 a'
4.4
0.080
0.21
2.3
0.20s'
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Carcinogenic Effect
30-yr Avg
DAF
2.5
2.2
2.2
2.2
6.8E+04
2.4
3.3
14
170
2.5
2.3
2.4
3.2
2.4
2.3
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.2
31
2.2
2.2
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.7
LCTV based
on Ingestion
6.6E-05
8.8E-04
1.1E-03
0.50 "'
0.030
5.1E-04"
5.1E-04"
0.021
0.021
3.7E-05
3.1E-04
2.9E-04
LCTV based
on Inhalation
16
0.079
0.50 '-
0.046
6.9E-04 "
6.9E-04 d
0.016
0.68
5.5E-03
a - Toxicity cap
b- 1,000 mg/1 (Policy)
c - Solubility (Warning)
F.10-5
-------