United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
5403W
EPA 510-F-93-029
October 7993
4>EPA     An Overview of
           Underground Storage Tank
           Remediation Options

-------

-------
EPA
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
              Solid Waste and
              Emergency Response
              5403W
October 1993
An Overview Of
Underground Storage Tank
Remediation Options

Contents
             ,Groundwatef Remediation   .  ,   ;
                      "=   •••                    -^

              • In Situ Air Sparging With Soil Vapor Extraction
               EPA510-F-93-017

              • In Situ Bioremediatioii
               EPA 510-F-93-018

              • In Situ Bioventing Combined With Low
               Flow Air Sparging (Biosparging)
               EPA 510-F-93-019

              • Vacuum Enhanced Pump and Treat
               EPA 510-F-93-020

              • Pump and Treat
               EPA 510-F-93-030

-------

-------
xvEPA
                 United States
                 Environmental Protection
                 Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-017
October 1993
Groundwater

Remediation  For

UST  Sites


In Situ Air Sparging With

Soil Vapor Extraction


 In situ air sparging with soil vapor extraction (SVE) is
 a technique for removing dissolved volatile contaminants
from groundwater. The technique injects air into the
saturated zone. The air forms bubbles that rise into the
unsaturated zone, carrying trapped and dissolved
contaminants. Extraction wells in the unsaturated zone
capture sparged air. If necessary, the air can then be
treated using a variety of vapor treatment options.

This technique is most effective in homogenous, permeable
aquifers. Performance data for this technique are limited.

In situ  air sparging with soil vapor extraction is a rapid
remediation technique that can reduce contamination
levels in six months. It is also able to quickly remove
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from below the
groundwater table.
                     Petroleum Types And Constituents

                     • Gasoline and diesel    ~   ,            .  /

                     « Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                      benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX)

-------
la Situ Air Sparging With Soil Vapor Extraction
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Tuning2
Costs5
• Rapidly reduces volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from
below groundwater table
• Can enhance and accelerate effectiveness of soil vapor
extraction (SVE) and downgradient pumping
• Removes primarily volatile constituents
• Effectiveness is limited in low permeability or
heterogeneous media
• Difficult to control air distribution in groundwater
• Can promote vapor and plume migration
• Limited performance data are available; contaminant
levels may rebound over time
• Vertical or horizontal extraction and injection wells
• Trenches
• Vacuum pump, compressor, or blower
• Aboveground vapor treatment equipment (optional)
• Vapor treatment options (if needed):
• Vapor phase biofilter
• Granulated activated carbon
• Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
• Vacuum/pressure monitoring at the wellhead, pump,
compressor, blower, and observation points
• Airflow rate
• Vapor concentrations
• Dissolved oxygen
• Water levels
• Constituent concentrations in groundwater and soil
• Generally achieves maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
for volatile constituents
• For an ideal site3, ~90% reduction in 6 months to 1 year
• For an average site4, ~90% reduction in 6 months to 2
years
• For an ideal site3, $60,000 to $180,000
• For an average site4, $120,000 to $200,000
^Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
2Cteanup standards are determined by the state.
3An "ideal site" assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogenous, permeable subsurface.
^An "average site" assumes minimal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
^Costs include equqxnent, and operation and maintenance.

-------
IvyEPA
                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-018
October 1993
Groundwater
Remediation For
UST  Sites
In Situ Bioremediation
                   In situ bioremediation is a technique for removing
                   biodegradable contaminants from groundwater. The
                  technique relies on microorganisms and supplemental
                  oxygen and nutrients to break down petroleum products
                  in the groundwater.

                  In situ bioremediation offers the advantage of being able
                  to treat contamination in place, without the need for
                  pumping or the subsequent treatment of pumped
                  groundwater. The technique is most effective in
                  permeable aquifers.
                     Petroleum Types And Constituents

                     • Fresh or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fuel,
                       kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils,
                       and crude oils                   ~

                     • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                       benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX);
                       residual semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
                       such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; and
                       nonvolatile constituents     ,~  ,-°       ,->  .

-------
In Situ Bioremediation
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Degrades contaminants in place
• Achieves lower concentration levels than pump and
treat
• Effectiveness is limited in low permeability or
heterogeneous media
• Ability to transport nutrients and oxygen might be
limited by soil and groundwater mineral content or pH
• Targets only biodegradable constituents
• Groundwater containment system
• Oxygen delivery equipment
• Nutrient delivery equipment
• Injection trenches
• Recovery walls or trenches
• Pumps
• Monitoring points
• Recirculated groundwater treatment options:
• Air stripping
• Granulated activated carbon
• Bioreactors
• Constituent concentrations in groundwater
• Mcrobial population in aquifer
• pH and total organic carbon
• Dissolved oxygen
• Nutrient concentration
• How rates
• Generally, can achieve maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs)
• Achieves > 90% reduction of biodegradable constituents
• For an ideal site3, ~90% in 6 months to 1 year
• For an average site4, ~90% in 6 months to 4 years
• Longer time required to degrade heavier hydrocarbons
• For an ideal site3, $150,000 to $250,000
• For an average site4, $200,000 to $500,000
'"Parameters to mentor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3An "ideal site* assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogeneous, permeable subsurface.
4An Average site" assumes mhhial delays h corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable surface.
5Costs Include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
&EPA
                United States
                Environmental Protection
                Agency
                 Solid Waste and
                 Emergency Response
                 5403V/
EPA510-F-93-019
October 1993
Groundwater
Remediation  For
UST Sites
In Situ Bioventing
Combined With  Low
Flow Air Sparging
(Biosparging)
                 In situ bioventing combined with low flow air sparging
                 (biosparging) stimulates the aerobic biodegradation of
                organic contaminants in groundwater by delivering
                oxygen to the saturated and unsaturated zones. The oxygen
                is delivered at a slow rate to encourage biodegradation
                rather than volatilization.

                Biosparging degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
                in place, reducing the need for subsequent vapor
                treatment and the costs of remediation. This technique
                is most effective in permeable aquifers.
                   Petr olejum Types Anid Constituents^ „

                   • Fresh or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fuel,
                    kerosene, motor oil, fuel oil, lubricating oils,
                    and crude oils     , -   x     "        :

                   • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                    benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX);
                    and residual semivolatile organic compounds
                    (SVOCs) such as polynuclear aromatic
                    hydrocarbons    - „    - -

-------
In Situ Bioventing Combined With Low Flow Air Sparging
(Biosparging)
Advantages
limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs3
• Degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in place
• Reduces air emissions and subsequent need for vapor
treatment
• Effectiveness is limited in low permeability or
heterogeneous media
• Difficult to control air distribution in groundwater
« limited performance data available
• Vertical or horizontal extraction and injection wells
• Vacuum pump, compressor, or blower
• Aboveground vapor treatment (optional)
• Vapor treatment options (might be needed for high
concentrations of contaminants):
« Vapor phase bio filters
• Granulated activated carbon
, • Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
• Vacuum/pressure monitoring at the pump, compressor,
blower, and observation points
• Airflow rate
• Dissolved oxygen
• Water levels
• Constituent concentrations in groundwater
• Generally achieves maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
for volatile constituents
• New application; to date, few sites have been fully
remediated
• Estimates for an ideal site4, $60,000 to $180,000
• Estimates for an average site5, $120,000 to $200,000
• Costs vary depending on vapor treatment costs and
treatment time
""Parameters to monitor are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^cleanup standards are determined by the state.
%osts Include equipment, and operation and maintenance.
4An Ideal sis" assumes no delays h correctivB action and a relatively homogenous, peimeable subsurface.
5An "average site* assumes m Wrnal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.

-------
&EPA
                United States
                Environmental Protection
                Agency
                 Solid Waste and

                 Emergency Response
                 5403W
EPA510-F-93-020
October 1993
Ground water

Remediation  For

UST Sites


Vacuum Enhanced

Pump And Treat


   Vacuum enhanced pump and treat is a technique that
   uses a surface-mounted vacuum pump to remove
contaminated soil vapors and groundwater simultaneously.
This method increases the rate of pumping, reducing
remediation time. The pumped water and soil vapors
can then be treated with a number of techniques.

Vacuum enhanced pump and treat is most effective when
used in aquifers with medium to low permeability (silts
and clays).

This method offers pumping rates that are 3 to 10 times
greater than conventional pump and treat rates.
Increased pumping rates result in decreased remediation
time.
                   Petroleum Types And Constituents

                   • Dissolved gasoline and diesel, jet fuel, and
                    kerosene

                   • Dissolved constituents such as benzene, toluene,
                    ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX)

-------
Vacuum Enhanced Pump And Treat
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Controls contaminant plume migration and reduces plurne
concentrations
• Increases recovery rate of pumping by 3 to 10 times, reducing
remediation time
• Effective in aquifers with low permeability
• Can remove residuals from dewatered aquifer soils
• Can require treatment of vapors from vacuum pump
• Generates larger volume of water for treatment in a shorter
time than conventional pump and treat
• Requires control of water table fluctuation to minimize
smearing contaminants
• High iron content/hardness can affect water treatment
• Vertical or horizontal extraction wells
• Trenches
• Vacuum blower or pump
• Water pumps
• Aboveground air/water treatment systems
• Vapor treatment options:
• Vapor phase biofilter
• Granulated activated carbon
• Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
• Water treatment options:
• Air stripping
• Granulated activated carbon
• Bioreactors
• Vacuum/pressure monitoring at well head, pump, blower
• Airflow rate
• Water discharge rate
• Water levels
• Constituent concentrations in groundwater
• Influent and effluent concentrations from water treatment
system
• Might not achieve maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
• For an ideal site3, 6 months to 1 year
• For an average site4, 6 months to 2 years
• For an ideal site3, $80,000 to $120,000
• For an average site4, $100,000 to $180,000
• Higher initial costs than some alternatives, but shorter
remediation time might lower total cost
'•Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3An Idea! site' assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogenous, permeable subsurface.
4An "average site* assumes minimal delays in corrective actfon and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
^Costs Includa equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
&EPA
                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-030
October 1993
Ground water
Remediation  F
UST Sites
Pump And Treat
                     Pump and treat is a technique that brings contaminated
                     groundwater above the ground through the use of
                  extraction wells. The water is then treated, normally
                  using one of three processes: granulated activated
                  carbon, air stripping, or bioremediation.

                  This technique is most effective in permeable aquifers. It
                  also can be used with in situ vapor extraction (SVE) to
                  enhance removal of volatile contaminants from the zone
                  of water table fluctuation.

                  A limitation of pump and treat is that it can take a long
                  time to achieve complete remediation, sometimes as long
                  as seven years even for an ideal site. In addition, this
                  method is subject to fluctuations of the water table that
                  can smear contaminants and complicate cleanups.
                     Petroleum Types And Constituents

                     • Dissolved gasoline and diesel, jet fuel, and
                      kerosene

                     • Dissolved constituents such as benzene, toluene,
                      ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX)

-------
Pump And Treat
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Controls contaminant plume migration and reduces
plume concentration
• Not very effective in aquifers with low permeability
• Can require expensive and lengthy long-term pumping
and treating
• High iron content/hardness can affect water treatment
• Requires control of water table fluctuation to miniroize
smearing contaminants
• Might require off-site discharge permits
• Vertical or horizontal extraction wells
• Trenches
• Water pumps
• Aboveground water handling and/or treatment systems
• Wastestream treatment options:
• Air stripping
• Granulated activated carbon
• Bioreactors
• Constituent concentrations in groundwater
• Influent and effluent concentrations from water
treatment system
• Water discharge rate
• Water levels
• Might not meet cleanup standards or maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs)
• For an ideal site3, 3 to 7 years
• For an average site4, 3 to 10 years or longer
• For anideal site3, $150,000 to $200,000
• For an average site4, $250,000 to $300,000
''Parameters to monitor* are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3An "ideal site" assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogenous, permeable subsurface.
*An "average site* assumes m'rimal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
'Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
k>EPA
                United States
                Environmental Protection
                Agency
                Solid Waste and
                Emergency Response
                5403W
October 1993
An Overview Of
Underground Storage Tank
Remediation Options
Contents
                  Soil Remediation     ,           ;

                  • In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
                   EPA510-F-93-021
                  • In Situ Bioremediation—Bioventing
                   EPA510-F-93-022
                  • Ex Situ Bioremediation—Biomounding
                   EPA 510-F-93-023
                  • On-Site Low Temperature Thermal Desorption
                   EPA510-F-93-024
                  • Ex Situ Bioremediation—Land Farming
                   EPA 510-F-93-025
                  • In Situ Passive Biodegradation
                   (Natural Attenuation)
                   EPA510-F-93-026
                  • Excavation and Off-Site Treatment
                   EPA 510-F-93-027
                  • Excavation With Off-Site Landfill Disposal
                   EPA 510-F-93-028

-------

-------
&EPA
                   United States
                   Environmental Protection
                   Agency
                   Solid Waste and
                   Emergency Response
                   5403W
EPA510-F-93-021
October 1993
Soil  Remediation  For
UST Sites
In  Situ  Soil  Vapor
Extraction
                    In situ soil vapor extraction (SVE) is a technique for
                    removing contaminants from unsaturated soils. The
                   technique draws fresh air into the ground with a vacuum
                   pump. The air brings the contaminants to the surface,
                   where they can be treated and safely discharged.

                   In situ soil vapor extraction is most effective in
                   coarse-grained soils such as sand and gravel. It requires a
                   minimum 5-foot-thick unsaturated zone of soil. This
                   technique can be used in conjunction with air sparging,
                   groundwater pumping, or bioremediation systems.

                   This technique is able to treat large volumes of soil
                   effectively and with minimal disruption to business
                   operations. It also can remove contamination from near
                   or under fixed structures.
                      Petroleum Types And Constituents

                      * Fresh and weathered gasoline and diesel

                      • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                       benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylene
                       (BTEX); and semivolatile organic compounds
                       (SVOCs)                       /

-------
In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Effectively treats large volumes (>1,000 cu yd) of soil
• Removes contamination near or under fixed structures
• Causes minimal disruption to business operations
• Removes volatile contaminants from the zone of water
table fluctuation '
• Effectiveness limited in heterogeneous soils or soils with
high clay or organic content
• Airflow may not contact all parts of soil
• Leaves residual constituents in soil
• Might require air discharge permits
• Vertical or horizontal extraction wells
• Trenches
• Vacuum blower or pump
• Injection and passive inlet wells
• Aboveground vapor treatment equipment (optional)
• Vapor treatment options (if needed):
• Vapor phase biofllter
• Granulated activated carbon
• Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
• Vapor concentration
• Airflow rate
• Can remove 90% of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
• For an ideal site3, 90% in 6 months to 1 year
• For an average site4, 90% in 6 months to 3 years
• Longer time required for heterogeneous soils and less
volatile constituents
• For an ideal site3, $40,000 to $120,000
• For an average site4, $100,000 to $150,000
• Vapor treatment costs can drastically affect total costs
'Taramelers to monitor* are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3An Ideal site" assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogeneous, permeable subsurface.
*An laverage sle" assumes m Wmal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
5Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
                   United States
                   Environmental Protection
                   Agency
                   Solid Waste and
                   Emergency Response
                   5403W
EPA510-F-93-022
October 1993
v°/EPA
Soil  Remediation  For
UST Sites
In  Situ  Bioremediation:
Bioventing
                     In situ bioremediation—bioventing—is a technique for
                     removing biodegradable contaminants from
                   unsaturated soils. The technique injects oxygen into
                   contaminated soil The oxygen stimulates the aerobic
                   biodegradation of the organic contaminants in the soil
                   Oxygen is delivered at a low rate to encourage
                   biodegradation rather than volatilization.

                   Bioventing is most effective in coarse-grained soils such as
                   sand and gravel. It requires a minimum 5-foot-thick
                   unsaturated zone. This technique can be used in
                   conjunction with air sparging or groundwater pumping
                   systems.

                   This technique is able to treat large volumes of soil
                   effectively and with minimal disruption to business
                   operations.  It also can remove contamination from near
                   or under fixed structures. Bioventing also reduces the
                   need for aboveground treatment because it works to
                   degrade contaminants in place.
                      Petroleum Types And Constituents     ;

                      • Fresh or weathered gasoline,' diesel, jet fuel,^
                        kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils,
                        and crude oils

                      • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                        benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylene (BTEX);
                        residual semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs),
                        such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons;^ and
                        nonvolatile constituents  .    /   -   •"" ' ,

-------
In Situ Bioremediation: Bioventing
" ' '• " • '• • • ^"^" . .,.'•, .'... .' . . i i ,'.,,:,-•'"' . ••-..'
Advantages
limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Degrades semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) and
nonvolatile organic compounds
• Effectively treats large volumes (>1,000 cu yd) of soil
• Causes minimal disruption to business operations
• Degrades contaminants near or under fixed structures
• Degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in place, which
reduces air emissions and subsequent need for treatment
• Targets only biodegradable constituents
• Is a relatively slow process
• Requires sufficient nutrients, moisture, active indigenous
microbial population, and pH of 6-9 to degrade contaminants
• Effectiveness limited in heterogeneous soils
• Vertical or horizontal extraction wells
• Trenches
• Vacuum blower or pump
• Injection and passive inlet wells
• Vapor treatment (optional)
• Nutrient delivery equipment (optional)
• Vapor treatment options (might be needed for high
concentrations of contaminants):
• Vapor phase biofllter
• Granulated activated carbon
• Internal combustion engine
• Catalytic oxidation unit
• Thermal incinerator
• Vapor concentration
• Airflow rate
• In situ respiration rate (oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide
production)
• Soil contaminant concentration
• Microbial population
• Soil pH, moisture, and nutrients
• Treats > 90% of biodegradable constituents
• For an ideal site3, ~90% in 1 to 2 years
• For an average site4, ~90% in 1 to 4 years
• Longer time required to degrade heavier hydrocarbons
• For an ideal site3, $40,000 to $120,000
• For an average site4, $100,000 to $150,000
• Vapor treatment and longer treatment times increase costs
''Parameters to monitor* are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3An Ideal site" assumes no delays In corrective action and a relatively homogenous, permeable subsurface.
4An "average sla" assumes minimal delays in cxxrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
^Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
IvvEPA
                   United States
                   Environmental Protection
                   Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-023
October 1993
Soil Remediation For
UST Sites
Ex  Situ  Bioremediation:
Biomounding
                     Ex situ bioremediation—Momounding—is a technique
                     for removing biodegradable contaminants from
                   excavated mounds of soil. Nutrients are added to the soil
                   mounds, which are often several feet high, to facilitate
                   bioremediation. Aeration conduits and irrigation systems
                   are constructed in the mound.

                   Biomounding is most appropriate for shallow
                   contamination sites that cover a large horizontal area.
                   This is a low-maintenance technique that requires a
                   relatively short treatment time. Biomounding also
                   provides better control over aeration, moisture,
                   nutrient levels, and soil texture than other methods.
                      Petroleum Types And Constituents
                                           •f        <    >
                      • Fresh, or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fuel,
                        kerosene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils,
                        and crude oils
                                                            i- '
                      • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
                        benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene.(BTEX);
                        residual semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
                        such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; and  ^
                        nonvolatile constituents                 '  ,

-------
    Ex Situ Bioremediation:  Biomounding
    Advantages
   Degrades semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) and
   nonvolatile organic compounds
   Requires low maintenance
   Entails a relatively short treatment time
   Enhances control and management of aeration, moisture,
   nutrients, and soil texture
   Can use treated soil as backfill
    limitations
   Targets only biodegradable constituents
   Must excavate soil and remove debris
   Requires sufficient nutrients, moisture, active indigenous
   microbial population, and pH of 6-9 to degrade contaminants
    System
    Components
   Plastic liner
   Gravel and slotted pipe to provide air to mound
   Nutrients
   Blower
   Soil vapor sampling probes
   Irrigation system (optional)
   Plastic cover (optional)
   Vapor treatment equipment (optional)
   Wastestream
   Treatment
   Vapor treatment options (might be needed for high
   concentrations of contaminants):
   •  Granulated activated carbon
   •  Internal combustion engine
   •  Catalytic oxidation unit
   •  Thermal incinerator
   Parameters to
   Monitor1
•  Vapor concentration
•  Airflow rate
•  Soil contaminant concentration
•  Microbial population
•  Soil pH, moisture, and nutrients
•  Leachate analysis (optional)
   Cleanup Levels
   and Timing2
  Treats > 90% of biodegradable constituents
  For an ideal site3, -90% in 6 months to 18 months
• For an average site4, ~90% in 6 months to 2 years
• Longer time required to degrade heavier hydrocarbons
   Costs5
• For an average site4, $80,000 to $125,000 ($80 to $125/cu yd)
• Unit costs generally decrease as soil volume increases
''Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
An "ideal site* assumes no delays h corrective action and a relatively homogeneous, permeable subsurface.
An "^average sle* assumes mWmal delays n corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
TJosts include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
&EPA
                 United States
                 Environmental Protection
                 Agency
                 Solid Waste and
                 Emergency Response
                 5403W
EPA510-F-93-024
October 1993
Soil  Remediation  For
UST Sites
On-Site  Low
Temperature Thermal
Desorption
                   Low temperature thermal desorption is a technique
                   for removing contaminants from large volumes
                 (greater than 1,000 cubic yards) of soil. The technique
                 heats contaminated soil to relatively low temperatures
                 (200-1,000°F). The heat causes contaminants to vaporize
                 so that they can be treated with air emissions treatment
                 systems.

                 On-site thermal treatment is most effective on soil that
                 contains high levels of hydrocarbons. It requires less time
                 than bioremediation or soil vapor extraction (SVE). On-site
                 thermal treatment can be implemented rapidly and works
                 quickly—within six to eight weeks—at a relatively low cost.
                    Petroleum Types And Constituents

                    • All types of petroleum products  „

-------
On-Site Low Temperature Thermal Desorption
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs3
• Rapid to implement
• Minimizes long-term liability
• Can reuse some types of soil for backfill
• Expensive for soil with high moisture or day content
• Might require air discharge permits
• Excavation equipment
• Sorting and sizing equipment
• Rotary kiln
• Offgas treatment equipment
• Air emissions equipment
• Contaminant concentrations in pre- and post-treatment
soil
• Can excavate to cleanup standards
• >99% removal efficiency
• Typically completed in 6 to 8 weeks
• For an average site4, $60,000 to $100,000 ($60 to
$100/cu yd)
 "Parameters to monitor* are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3Costs h&de equjxnent, and operation and maintenance.
 An "(average sStf" assurtes mWmal delays h corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.

-------
&EPA
                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-025
October 1993
Soil Remediation  For

UST Sites

Ex  Situ  Bioremediation:

Land  Farming

   Ex situ bioremediation—land fanning (or land
   treatment)—is a technique for removing
biodegradable contaminants from excavated soil The
excavated soil and added nutrients are spread over a
lined treatment area. The area is periodically tilled to
facilitate the natural release of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and the biodegradation of
contaminants.
Land farming is effective on many soil types and a variety
of contaminants. It is also easy and inexpensive to design,
operate, and maintain.
                     Petroleum Types And Constituents

                     • Fresh of weathered gasoline,* diesel, jet fuel, kerO-
                       sene, motor oil, heavy fuel oil, lubricating oils, and
                       crude oils         ,    , -'  '       "".-.'

                     • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such, as    , :
                       benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BJEX);
                       residual semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
                       such as poiynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; and,,
                       nonvolatile constituents     , : /

-------
Ex Situ Bioremediation: Land Farming
• • , ••:'••.-•,',! - :',•'' ••' . •• ^^- .• •. •, , • • ." • .
- '" ':.' . • • •• '•': .: • • . •• .'••''•, "• -• , , • • • •• . • "'•'..'' ','.••' ,,,,''. . • " • ••
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestxeam
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs5
• Simple and inexpensive to design, operate, and maintain
• Effective on many soil types with a variety of
contaminants
• Targets only biodegradable constituents
• - Requires substantial space
• Nutrients (fertilizer)
• lined treatment cell with berms around the perimeter
• Tilling equipment
• lime (needed for low pH)
• Irrigation equipment (optional)
• Might need to treat or dispose of collected rainwater or
leachate
• Soil contaminant concentration
• MLcrobial population in soil
• Soil pH, moisture, and nutrients
• Leachate analysis (optional)
• Treats > 90% of biodegradable constituents
• For an ideal site3, -90% in 6 months to 2 years
• For an average site4, ~90% in 6 months to 3 years
• Longer time required to degrade heavier hydrocarbons
• For an average site4, $20,000 to $70,000 ($20 to $70/cu yd)
• Costs vary with the amount of soil to be treated and the
design of the containment cell
'"Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^Cleanup levels are determined by the state.
fyn "Heal site" assumes no delays in corrective action and a relatively homogeneous, permeable subsurface.
 An "average site* assumes minftnal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.
%osts include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
v>EPA
                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
                  Solid Waste and
                  Emergency Response
                  5403W
EPA510-F-93-026
October 1993
Soil Remediation  For
UST Sites
In Situ Passive
Biodegradation
(Natural Attenuation)
                   In situ passive biodegradation (natural attenuation) is
                   an approach for removing biodegradable contaminants
                  from soil. This method of remediation relies on
                  microorganisms to break down petroleum products in the
                  soil. It does not require the addition of oxygen or nutrients
                  to facilitate the process.

                  In situ passive biodegradation is extremely slow. It is most
                  appropriate when expedient remediation is not needed
                  and nearby receptors will not be affected by
                  contaminated soil. To date, few sites have been fully
                  remediated using this approach.

                  This technique offers low cost and minimal disruption to
                  business operations. In addition, this method generates
                  no wastestreams.
                     Petroleum Types And Constituents

                     • Presh or weathered gasoline, diesel, jet fjiel, ,   ~ ,
                      kerosene  ->r   '  -  { ^     " • " " "~ 5 <,   fv>,
                                                   * \ ^ '~   ~^',"
                     • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as ,   ^
                      benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylene (BTEX);
                      residual semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)
                      such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; and  „
                      nonvolatile constituents             ,  ^
                                                                     \

-------
   In Situ Passive Biodegradation (Natural Attenuation)
   Advantages
 •  Costs substantially less than other methods
 •  Eventually degrades volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
   semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and
   nonvolatile organic compounds
 •  Causes minimal disruption to business operations
 •  Generates no wastestreams
 •  Reduces potential for human contact with contaminated
   soil or soil vapor
   Limitations
• Targets only biodegradable constituents
• Is an extremely slow process
• Requires sufficient nutrients, moisture, active
  indigenous microbial population, and pH of 6-9 to
  degrade contaminants
• To date, few sites have been fully remediated
   System
   Components
• Monitoring wells
• Soil borings
• Soil vapor probes
   Wastestream
   Treatment
  None
   Parameters to
   Monitor1
• Soil and groundwater contaminant concentrations
• Oxygen and carbon dioxide
   Cleanup Levels
   and Timing2
  Can achieve risk-based cleanup levels
  Computer models project average remediation times of
  50 to 200 years
  Longer time required to degrade heavier hydrocarbons
   Costs3
  Costs vary depending on monitoring frequency and risk
  assessments
  Average risk assessment costs: $10,000 to $50,000
  Average monitoring and reporting costs: $10,000 to
  $60,000
 "Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
3Costs Include equipment, and operation and maintenance.

-------
&EPA
                 United States
                 Environmental Protection
                 Agency
                 Solid Waste and
                 Emergency Response
                 5403W
EPA510-F-93-027
October 1993
Soil  Remediation For
UST  Sites
Excavation And Off-Site
Treatment
                   Excavation and off-site treatment is a method for
                   removing contaminants from small volumes (less than
                 1,000 cubic yards) of soil that cannot be treated
                 effectively on site. Contaminated soil is excavated and
                 then treated. Typical treatment facilities include:
                   • Low temperature thermal desorption facilities

                   • Asphalt plants

                   • Incinerators
                 This technique can be used with many different kinds of
                 soils and contaminants. It offers the benefit of actually
                 destroying contaminants rather than simply moving them
                 from one location to another.
                    Petroleum Types And ^ohstituents

                    « All types of,petrpleuni:products,    , ,-

-------
Excavation And Off-Site Treatment
Advantages
limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs3
• Easy and rapid to implement
• Destroys contaminants
• Minimizes long-term liability
• Can reuse some types of soil for backfill
• Effective on soils with varying concentrations and
constituents
• Expensive for large volumes of soil with low contaminant
concentrations, high moisture, or clay content
• Transportation costs can be high
• System components can include:
• Excavation equipment
• Trucking equipment .
• Equipment for sorting and sizing -
• Rotary dryer or kiln
• Thermal screw
• Offgas treatment equipment
• Air emissions equipment
• Contaminant concentrations in pre- and post-treatment
soil
• Can excavate to cleanup standards
• >99% removal efficiency
• Typically completed in 1 to 3 days
• For an average site4, $70,000 to $180,000 ($70 to
$180/cu yd)
^Parameters to monitor" are for performance puiposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
^Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
^Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.
4An ^average site" assumes mh'mal delays in corrective action and a moderately heterogeneous and permeable subsurface.

-------
k-xEPA
                  United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
                 Solid Waste and
                 Emergency Response
                 5403V/
EPA510-F-93-028
October 1993
Soil  Remediation For
UST Sites
Excavation With  Off-Site
Landfill  Disposal
                    Excavation with off-site landfill disposal involves
                    removing small volumes (less than 1,000 cubic yards)
                  of soil with high concentrations of contaminants.
                  Contaminated soil is excavated and trucked to a landfill
                  for disposal

                  A limitation of this method is that it simply moves
                  contaminants to a landfill without treating or destroying
                  them. The technique also is subject to extensive land
                  disposal restrictions, which can vary between states and
                  counties. It is also subject to constraints in landfill capacity.
                    Petroleum Types And Constituents

                    • All types of petroleum products

-------
Excavation With Of f -Site Landfill Disposal
Advantages
Limitations
System
Components
Wastestream
Treatment
Parameters to
Monitor1
Cleanup Levels
and Timing2
Costs3
• Easy and rapid to implement for small volumes of
soil
• Simply moves contaminants; does not treat
• Not cost-effective for large soil volumes or soil with low
contaminant concentrations
• Cannot remove soil from under buildings or structures
t,
• Might need to meet landfill acceptance criteria or
address landfill capacity constraints
• Can pose long-term liability
• Excavation equipment
• Trucking equipment
• Land disposal restrictions in some states/counties
• Confirmatory soil sampling after excavation
• Can excavate to cleanup standards
• Concentrations will persist in landfill
• Typically completed in 1 to 3 days
• For an average site4, $45,000 to $200,000 ($45 to
$200/cu yd)
 '"Parameters to monitor" are for performance purposes only; compliance monitoring parameters vary by state.
 Cleanup standards are determined by the state.
 "Costs include equipment, and operation and maintenance.
' 4M laverage sRa" assumes m'rtnal debys h correcBve action and a moderately heterogeneous, permeable subsurface.

-------