EPA/540/2-87/001
September 1987
HANDBOOK: RESPONDING TO
DISCHARGES OF SINKING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
By:
Kevin R. Boyer
Virginia E. Hodge
Roger S. Wetzel
Science Applications International Corporation
8400 Westpark Drive
McLean, Virginia 22102
Contract No. 68-03-3113
Project Officers
Anthony N. Tafuri
Releases Control Branch
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory
Edison, New Jersey 08837
John R. Sinclair
Environmental Technology Branch
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20593
HAZARDOUS WASTE ENGINEERING
RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY BRANCH
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. COAST GUARD
WASHINGTON, DC 20593
-------
NOTICE
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in
part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and
the United States Coast Guard under Contract No. 68-03-3113 to
Science Applications International Corporation. It has been
subject to the USEPA's peer and administrative review and has
been approved for publication as a USEPA document. Mention of
tradenamel or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
raent or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
FOREWARD
Today's rapidly developing and changing technologies and industrial
products and practices frequently carry with them the increased generation
of solid and hazardous wastes. These materials, if improperly dealt with,
can threaten both public health and the environment. Abandoned waste
sites and accidental releases of toxic and hazardous substances to the
environment also have important environmental and public health implica-
tions. The Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Environmental Technology
Branch of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) assist in providing an authoritative
and defensible engineering basis for assessing and solving these problems.
Products support the respective policies, programs, and regulations of the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Coast Guard, the permitting and
other responsibilities of state and local governments and the needs of
both large and small businesses in handling their wastes responsibly and
economically.
This document provides guidance on the response to spills of chemicals
that sink in water bodies and contaminate bottom materials. It describes
the decisionmaking process associated with defining spill parameters and
impacts and selecting appropriate response measures. It also describes
the cleanup and mitigative technologies that may be used, including
containment, removal, treatment, disposal, and in situ techniques. This
document provides governmental and industrial technical personnel with the
means to respond to bottom material contamination situations, whether for
quick response or for long-term remediation. For further information,
please contact the Land Pollution Control Division of the Hazardous Waste
Engineering Research Laboratory, USEPA, or the Environmental Technology
Branch of the Office of Research and Development, USCG.
Thomas R. Hauser, Director
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory, USEPA
Capt. John R. Wallace, Chief
Marine Technology Division
Office of Research and
Development, USCG
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
This handbook provides guidance for making decisions in response to
discharges of hazardous substances that sink in water bodies. It is
intended to be used by personnel that direct spill response actions and
emphasizes spilled contaminants that deposit on the bottom of water bodies.
The majority of the information provided also applies to long-term, chronic
contamination of bottom materials.
This handbook provides a framework for gathering information and for
evaluating the spilled material, the environmental setting of the spill,
and the potential impacts of interaction between the material and the
environment. Considerations pertaining to the spilled material include its
composition, chemical and physical characteristics, quantity, location, and
distribution within the water column and along the bottom of the water
body. The setting includes the depth, flow velocity, currents, tidal
action, and uses of the water body; the aquatic environment; and the path-
ways to potentially affected humans. Impacts of the interaction between
the spilled material and the environment include contamination of sediment
and water (affecting water supplies, fisheries, and recreation), bioaccum-
ulation and biomagnification of contaminants in organisms, and transport of
contaminants to previously unaffected areas.
The handbook also focuses on techniques for minimizing the impacts of
the spill on the environment. Responses are categorized into containment,
removal, treatment, and disposal of contaminants and contaminated materials
(generally water and sediments), as well as in situ response techniques.
Information and criteria are provided for selecting among the techniques
and combining various techniques into complete response alternatives.
Additional information and criteria are provided for selecting the most
appropriate response alternative for implementation and for assessing the
adequacy and effectiveness of the completed response.
This document was submitted in partial fulfillment of EPA Contract No.
68-03-3113, Task 14-1, by Science Applications International Corporation.
The work was sponsored by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and was conducted
during the period of October 1, 1984 through September 30, 1985.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Page
FORWARD
ABSTRACT ..,....*!!**. .... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . lv
••••'•• • * xiii
1. INTRODUCTION ....
l-l
1.1 PURPOSE ....
* * ' * 1-1
1.2 SCOPE
1-2
1.3 SUMMARY OF RESPONSE DECISIONMAKING PROCESS , o
1.3.1 Spill Characterization ........* , f
1.3.2 Response Needs ....... * *
1.3.3 Response Alternative Selection ! ' * * * }~s
1.3.4 Assessment of Response Effectiveness
and Need for Further Response 1-6
2. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE/DISCHARGE SITUATION AND IMPACTS ... 2-l
2.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISCHARGE .
2.1.1 Characterization of Discharge circumstances' .' .' ' 2-4
2.1.2 Characterization of Discharged Material ..... 2-6
2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE WATER BODY AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.2.1 Characterization of'the* Water* Body .'* * ' ' * " " Tf?
2.2.2 Characterization of the Environmental Setting* .' .' 2-21
2.3 DETERMINATION OF THE EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION . o „
t.3.1 Information Requirements .... • • • • ^-^
2.3.2 Methods for Obtaining Information .' * .* * ." .' .' .' 2-30
2.4 DETERMINATION OF EXPOSURE AND IMPACTS .
2.4.1 Information Requirements and Analysis* .'.'.'**" ill
2.4,2 Information Sources .... ... ^ si
•••»....... 2—36
2.5 LEVEL OF APPLICATION OF CHARACTERIZATION PROCESS .... 2-36
3. DETERMINATION OF RESPONSE NEEDS
3.1 ASSESSMENT OF NEED FOR RESPONSE 3_,
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
. Page
3.2 ESTABLISHMENT OF RESPONSE OBJECTIVES 3-3
3.2.1 Priorities ^
3.2.2 Response Criteria •
3.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF OBJECTIVES FOR IMMEDIATE RESPONSE .... 3-5
3.3.1 Priorities ~
3.3.2 Response Criteria
4. SELECTION OF RESPONSE MEASURES 4~1
4.1 SCREENING OF RESPONSE CATEGORIES • 4~3
4.1.1 Screening Process ~
4.1.2 Alternatives to the Removal Response Category ... 4-u
4.1.3 Process Summary •
4.2 SCREENING OF RESPONSE TECHNIQUES 4~14
4.3 DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES **-22
4.3.1 Combination of Response Categories .... 4-22
4.3.2 Combination of Techniques to Form Alternatives . . . 4-2J
4.4 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PREFERRED
ALTERNATIVE 4~2g
4.4.1 Performance
4.4.2 Reliability 7~^
4.4.3 Implementability *~L'
4.4.4 Environmental and Public Health Impacts 4-z/
4.4.5 Safety ~ 7
4.4.6 Cost . . ?";'
4.4.7 Ranking of Alternatives *~-4°
4.5 LEVEL OF APPLICATION OF RESPONSE SELECTION PROCESS .... 4-28
5. DETERMINATION OF RESPONSE COMPLETION 5~[
5.1 ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSE EFFECTIVENESS 5-1
5.1.1 Data Collection 5-3
5.1.2 Assessment of Meeting Response Objectives 3-4
5.2 DETERMINATION OF NEED FOR FURTHER RESPONSE 5-4
vi
-------
APPENDICES
A. CONTAINMENT TECHNIQUES ....
*** A-l
A.I CONTAINMENT CURTAINS . .
A-l
A.2 TRENCHES .....
.• A-4
A.3 DIKES
A-7
A. 4 COFFERDAMS ....
A-9
A.5 PNEUMATIC BARRIERS . . .
* A-13
A.6 FLOATING BREAKWATERS ...
• A-15
A.7 TEMPORARY COVERING AND CAPPING
***•••••••• A"~lo
A.8 SUMMARY .....
"••••••••••» A-18
B. CONTAMINATED MATERIAL REMOVAL TECHNIQUES B_,
B.I MECHANICAL DREDGES
B.I.I Clamshell Dredges ...'**** B~2
B.I.2 Draglines ! ! * *
B.I.3 Conventional Earth Excavation Equipment .' .' .' ." .' Sis
B.I.4 Dipper Dredges T ... B fi
B.I.5 Bucket Ladder Dredges ...!!!!!)]]*** wl?
B.2 HYDRAULIC DREDGES
B.2.1 Portable Hydraulic Dredges' .' .'.*.'.*.* R~Q
B.2.2 Hand-Held Hydraulic Dredges ....!!!*""* Bin
B.2.3 Plain Suction Dredges f ,,
B.2.4 Cutterhead Dredges * „ ,*
B.2.5 Dustpan Dredges .!!**** R ,f
B.2.6 Hopper Dredges .....' „}*
•••••••« o—13
B.3 PNEUMATIC DREDGES
B.3.1 Airlift Dredges ..*!!.*.*.*!.* ^~?7
B.3.2 Pneuma Dredges ....
B.3.3 Oozer Dredges ...... 18
••••••«...... B—20
B.4 SUMMARY
... B-21
vii
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
C. TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR REMOVED CONTAMINATED
MATERIALS
C.I SEDIMENT/WATER SEPARATION Jf^
C. 1.1 Impoundment Settling Basins *£-•*
C.I.2 Conventional Clarifiers £-:>
C.I.3 High Rate Clarifiers Jf°
C.I.4 Hydraulic Classifiers • ^~'
C.I.5 Granular Media Filters £-y
C.I.6 Hydrocyclones ~
C.I.7 Summary
C.2 SEDIMENTS DEWATERING JfJ*
C.2.1 Dewatering Lagoons X~|7
C.2.2 Centrifugation J™
C.2.3 Filtration Jf"
C.2.4 Gravity Thickening £_~"
C.2.5 Summary
C.3 WATER TREATMENT ^"^
C.3.1 Activated Carbon Jf £
C.3.2 Biological Treatment Jf *°
C.3.3 Ion Exchange ~, '
C.3.4 Neutralization t }™
C.3.5 Precipitation Jf;>*
C.3.6 Flocculation
C.3.7 Ultrafiltration ~ JJ
C.3.8 Ozonation and Ultraviolet Radiation J.-J3
C.3.9 Discharge to Publicly Owned Treatment Works ... C-J/
C.3.10 Summary
C.4 TREATMENT OF SOLIDS .• • £""*}
C.4.1 Solidification/Stabilization ^-£i
C.4.2 Chemical and Biological Treatment « £J->
C.4.3 Summary
D. CONTAMINATED MATERIAL DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES D'1
n-2
D.I SEDIMENTS "
D.I.I Landfilling "~*
D.I.2 Open Water Disposal ~
D.I.3 Land Treatment/Disposal
D.2 LIQUIDS •
D.2.1 Direct Discharge " o
D.2.2 Deep Well Injection * •
viii
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
D.3 SLUDGE AND SOLID TREATMENT RESIDUALS . D-10
D.3.1 Landfilling ] D_10
D.3.2 Incineration ........... D-ll
D.3.3 Land Treatment/Disposal D-12
D.4 SUMMARY D_13
E. IN SITU CONTAMINANT TREATMENT AND ISOLATION TECHNIQUES .... E-l
E.I TREATMENT E-1
E. 1.1 Sorption ]] E-l
E.I.2 Chemical and Biological Treatment . E-4
E.2 ISOLATION E_7
E.2.1 Covering and Capping ] g-7
E.2.2 Fixation . E-ll
E.3 SUMMARY E_12
F. DATA ON CHEMICALS THAT SINK F_!
F.I BACKGROUND OF THE SINKERS LIST F_2
F.2 CONTENT OF THE SINKERS LIST F-3
F.2.1 Chemical Name and CHRIS Code F_3
F.2.2 Physical State \ \ F_6
F.2.3 Specific Gravity * * * F_6
F.2.4 Water Solubility * F-6
F.2.5 Toxicity !!!!!! F-6
F.2.6 Ignitability and Reactivity ! ! ! ! F-7
F.2.7 Bioaccumulation and Aquatic Persistence F-7
F.2.8 Recovery and Handling Hazards F-7
F.2.9 Recommended Response ..... F-8
G. GLOSSARY
H. REFERENCES . . . u ,
•••••«««««»»«.«•••«.. ti—j.
I. BLANK WORKSHEETS FOR DOCUMENTATION AND DECISIONMAKING 1-1
ix
-------
FIGURES
Number
1-1
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-10
2-11
3-1
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
Example Spilled Substance Data Worksheet
Example Site Map for Recording Data and
Example Site Map for Recording Data and
Example Site Map for Recording Data and Observations -
Example Site Map for Recording Data and Observations -
Alternative Response Categories and Response
Train Used in Overall Sinker Spill Response
Example Worksheet for Screening Response Categories . . .
Decision Process to Determine Applicability of
Example Worksheet for Screening Response Techniques . . .
Example Worksheet for Development of Response
Page
. 1-4
, 2-2
, 2-3
. 2-5
, 2-11
, 2-17
—21
, 2-22
, 2-35
. 3-2
. 4-2
. 4-8
. 4-19
. 4-25
-------
FIGURES (continued)
Number
4-7
5-1
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
C-l
Example Alternatives Evaluation Worksheet ......... 4-29
Sequence of Response Events ..... .. ......... 5-2
Applications of Containment Curtains to
Control Resuspended Material ............. . A- 2
Application of a Spill Containment Trench
to Control Sinking Substances . ............ A-5
Application of a Spill Containment Dike
to Control Sinking Substances ...... ....... A-8
Streamflow Diversion for Sediment Excavation
Using Two Cofferdams and Diversion Channel ....... A-ll
Streamflow Diversion for Sediment Excavation
Using Single Cofferdam . . .......... ..... A-12
Cro.ss-Section of a Pneumatic Barrier Application ..... A- 14
Tethered Float Breakwater ... ............. A-16
Typical Sequence of Steps for Treatment of Removed
Contaminated Bottom Materials .... ...... ... C-2
xi
-------
TABLES
Number
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
4-1
4-2
A-l
B-l
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
D-l
E-l
F-l
F-2
F-3
F-4
Discharged Material Information Requirements
Water Body Information Requirements and
Additional Information Sources for Water
Environmental Setting Information Sources
Decision Matrix for Screening Response Categories . . .
Technology Screening Criteria For Action
Summary of Contaminated Material Removal
Summary of Sediment/Water Separation Techniques ....
Summary of Solids Dewatering Techniques ....,..•
Summary of Biological Treatment Processes
Summary of Wastewater Treatment Techniques . . . . .
Summary of Solids Treatment Techniques
Summary of Contaminated Material Disposal
Summary of In Situ Contaminant Treatment and
Summary of Data on Chemicals that Sink
2-7
2-14
2-20
2-27
4-6
A— 1 ft
A-19
B-22
C-12
C-2 2
C-28
C-38
C-51
D-l 4
E— 1 "^
F-4
F-4
F-5
F-9
xii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared by Science Applications International
Corporation (SAIC), for USEPA's and the USCG's Offices of Research and
Development in partial fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3113, Task 14-1.
Anthony Tafuri of the Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory,
Releases Control Branch, was the USEPA Project Officer, and John Sinclair
of the Office of Research and Development, Environmental Technology Branch,
was the USCG Project Officer. Kevin Boyer and Virginia Hodge were the Task
Managers for SAIC. Major contributors of SAIC include Roger Wetzel, Claudia
Furraan, Douglas Sarno, Ellen Scopino, Kathleen Wagner, and Fredrick Zafran.
The preparation of this document was greatly aided by the constructive
review of LCDR D. D. Rome of the USCG Gulf Strike Team and LT J. C. Milbury
of the USCG Office of Research and Development. Appreciation is also
extended to numerous other individuals from Federal, state, and industry
organizations who were contacted on matters related to this document.
xiii
-------
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
Materials that are spilled into a water environment can either float,
dissolve or becorce suspended in the water column, or sink to the bottom
(where dissolution can later occur), depending on the material's chemical
and physical properties. Materials that sink to the bottom have the poten-
tial to contaminate bottom sediments and be carried downstream .by currents,
further spreading the contaalnation. Such spills can pose a serious threat
to public health and welfare and to the environment, and significant economic
consequences can result from the destruction of food resources, contamination
of water supplies, and reduction in recreational resources.
Contamination of bottom, materials (i.e., sediments, organic matter, and
interstitial water) by substances that sink (sinkers) can pose long-term
threats. Once contaminated, bottom materials can be an ongoing source of
contaminant release to the environment. Contaminants can be transported
long distances over time and often bioaccumulate and biomagnify in benthic
and aquatic organisms. Rapid and effective response techniques can be
applied to mitigate actual and potential damages from spilled sinkers. The
implementation of such techniques should protect resources and minimize
additional damage to public health, the environment, and property from anv
response measures taken.
This handbook provides information and guidance on the process and
techniques for responding to spills of sinkers to inland and coastal waters.
It is intended for use by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and Coast Guard (USCG) on-scene coordinators (OSCs) and state,
local, and private spill control cleanup personnel. The handbook outlines
the sequence of response events; the decisionmaking criteria for identifying
appropriate responses; and the techniques that are currently available to
contain, remove, treat, and dispose of contaminants and contaminated
materials. The procedures described are specific to the cleanup of bottom
materials that have been contaminated by spills of sinkers.
1-1
-------
Because it is usually not practical to call on a wide range of technical
disciplines in response to a spill or other discharge, this handbook does
not discuss complex scientific and engineering principles. The terminology
used is intended to be familiar to persons with a basic understanding, of
the physical and environmental sciences, spill response, hazardous materials,
navigation, construction, and regulations and their interrelationships. In
addition, a glossary of frequently used terms is provided in Appendix G.
However, because environmental contamination and cleanup can be technically
complex, users of this handbook should consult technical specialists whenever
possible.
1.2 SCOPE
This handbook addresses contamination of bottom materials of water
bodies through spills and other discharges of substances that sink in the
water environment and response techniques for contaminant cleanup. As
such, the handbook does not include response measures that may be taken to
prevent sinkers from reaching bottom materials or to protect receptors from
exposure, nor does it provide guidance for responding to discharges of sub-
stances that are not sinkers or are entrained in the water column. It also
does not address the implementation of response measures.
The guidance provided in this document is designed to protect public
health, the environment, and property. Furthermore, the procedures presented
are intended to supplement the knowledge of experienced response personnel
to quickly formulate appropriate mitigative measures. The approach focuses
on what decisions need to be made, the framework for the decisionmaking, and
the information needed; it does not address the "how to" aspects of decision-
making, data collection and analysis, and response implementation. Because
of the complexity of environmental contamination and cleanup, users of this
manual should consult referenced sources of information and technical special-
ists for further information on techniques that are evaluated and/or selected
through the decisionmaking process.
1.3 SUMMARY OF RESPONSE DECISIONMAKING PROCESS
In responding to spills of substances that sink, the following general
types of activities must be conducted:
• Obtaining data relevant to the decisionmaking process
• Analyzing these data with regard to the spill situation to address
specific decision parameters
1-2
-------
• Developing decisions on response needs and capabilities
• Applying techniques to mitigate and/or clean up contaminated
materials.
A process for conducting these activities is provided in this handbook.
The process is designed to aid the user in identifying and documenting data
needs, analysis requirements, and mitigating factors to consider in com-
pleting the selection. The process formalizes a decisionmaking process
that is often performed mentally rather than on paper. The amount of time
and the depth of analysis conducted at each step must be considered with
regard to the spill situation encountered. For example, a rapidly spreading
.or moving spill of highly toxic chemicals would require a quick analysis to
identify immediate response measures, while an area of stable, contaminated
sediments would permit more time to consider and select an appropriate
response. Where possible, guidance on critical factors and decision
criteria, as well as relatively "rough" analysis methods, are identified.
The response decision process has been designed to meet response needs
from quick-response spill situations to long-term cleanup efforts. This
process sets forth decision steps to facilitate the systematic selection of
techniques that are appropriate to the specific discharge situation being
addressed. To assist the user of the handbook in evaluating and selecting
between the available techniques, technical information on containment,
removal, treatment, disposal, and in-place (or in situ) treatment/isolation
techniques is provided in Appendices A through E.
Figure 1-1 shows the response activities identified as a generalized
sequence of response steps from the discovery of a spill to the completion
of the response. The response sequence begins with the discovery of con-
tamination or the potential for contamination of bottom materials. Such
contamination could result from a spill or from long-term discharges
attributable to a variety of sources. The causative discharge may be
ongoing or may have ceased some time past. Further, the affected area may
be confined to the area of the original discharge, or contamination may
have spread over a much larger area.
Response steps that follow discovery are: spill characterization,
determination of response needs, selection of a response alternative, and
assessment of the effectiveness of the response. Each step is briefly
described below and is described in detail in Sections 2 through 5. Work-
sheets are also provided to assist the user in tracking and documenting the
flow of information and bases for decisionmaking throughout the response
process. Supporting information for completing the worksheets and examples
of completed worksheets are provided in Sections 2 through 5. Blank work-
sheets are compiled from all of the sections in Appendix I. It is suggested
that users of this handbook make detached copies of the blank worksheets
for use in field response situations.
1-3
-------
FIGURE 1-1. SEQUENCE OF RESPONSE EVENTS
Define Immediate
Response Objectives
Define Response
Objectives
Develop and Evaluate
Response Alternatives
Select Preferred
Response Alternative
i ,
I Implement Response [•«-
Identify and Select
Immediate Response
Alternatives
1-4
-------
1.3.1 Spill Characterization
The initial response effort following discovery is to characterize the
spill situation and to obtain information pertinent to making decisions on
the need for and type of response; this effort is described in Section 2.
This effort involves identifying and characterizing the spilled substance,
the affected water body, and potential receptor/resources exposed. These*
data are used to determine the area of contamination, predict the future
movement of contaminants, quantify the contamination, identify receptors and
levels of exposure to contaminants, and determine impacts of the exposure.
1.3.2 Response Needs
Following spill characterization, the need for response action is
assessed based on the data obtained in the spill characterization; this
assessment is described in Section 3. The assessment focuses on determin-
ing whether existing present or future impacts or damages, which may occur
through contaminant movement and exposure, are significant and warrant a
response. The result of this assessment may be the decision that no
response is warranted. However, if response actions are warranted, the
need for immediate response measures to control contaminant movement or to
minimize exposure prior to full-scale response must be addressed along with
long-term response measures. Response objectives, priorities, and criteria
are then established to set the framework for selecting appropriate response
techniques.
1.3.3 Response Alternative Selection
Given the need for a response to a spill, response alternatives are
developed and evaluated and the preferred alternative is selected and
implemented. This process begins with selecting applicable categories of
response actions based on response objectives and site data. Techniques
within each identified category are screened to eliminate those techniques
that are not applicable or are not practical to the situation. Individual
techniques are then combined into response alternatives, which are evaluated
against response objectives and technical, environmental, and other relevant
criteria, to select an alternative that will most effectively resolve the
identified problems. Throughout this process, the objectives may be revised
to reflect the limitations of available techniques. Further, situations
may arise where no response is possible or where no response is the preferred
alternative.
Section 4 presents this evaluation and selection process. Appendices
A through E provide detailed information on temporary containment, removal,
treatment, disposal, and in-place (or in situ) remediation techniques and are
reference tools for this analysis.
1-5
-------
Upon selection, the preferred alternative is implemented to resolve
the site problems. It should be noted that this document does not address
response action implementation and operation.
1.3.4 Assessment of Response Effectiveness and Need for Further
Response
After the response action has been implemented and completed, the
site should be monitored and evaluated to assess the effectiveness of the
response actions, whether the response objectives were met, and whether the
implemented response sufficiently minimizes future risk to public health
and the environment. These assessments are described in Section 5. The
extent of cleanup, presence of residual contamination, and present and
future damages that may be incurred from remaining contamination are spe-
cifically addressed. As a result of this assessment, a decision is made
that either further response action is necessary or that the response is
complete. Where further response action is indicated, the decisionmaking
process would recommence with establishing new response objectives.
1-6
-------
SECTION 2
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISCHARGE SITUATION AND IMPACTS
The first activity that is conducted following the discovery of a
discharge of a sinking substance is to collect and analyze data that define
the physical situation of the spill and the impacts that have resulted.
This characterization process defines the important factors that form the
foundation for subsequent decisionmaking. Figure 2-1 identifies the overall
sequence of response events and the relationship of the spill and impacts
characterization to the overall process.
The ultimate goal of the characterization process is to define known
or anticipated spill impacts in order to assess the need for, and the urgency
of spill response. To achieve this goal, data need to.be collected in the
following areas:
• • Spill circumstances
• Chemical characteristics
• Receptor identification and locations
» Environmental monitoring (chemical movement)
• Water body characteristics
• Regulatory standards and other criteria for assessing exposure
and contamination.
These data feed into analyses of the present and future extent of contami-
nation, exposure, and impacts. Figure 2-2 illustrates the analytical
process leading to the identification of spill impacts.
Subsequent sections describe each step of the characterization process.
Section 2.1 addresses the characterization of the discharge, both the spill
circumstances and the discharged materials. Section 2.2 provides guidance
on characterizing the water body involved and its environmental setting
(i.e., receptors). Section 2.3 focuses on determining the extent of pre-
sent and future contamination. Section 2.4 describes the exposure and
impacts analysis process. Section 2.5 addresses the application of the
overall process at different levels of detail.
2-1
-------
FIGURE 2-1. SEQUENCE OF RESPONSE EVENTS
Define Immediate
Response Objectives
Define Response
• Objectives
Develop and Evaluate
Response Alternatives
Select Preferred
Response Alternative
r •*- ,
I Implement Response
Identify a.nd Select
Immediate Response
Alternatives
2-2
-------
FIGURE 2-2. PROCESS FOR DETERMINING SPILL IMPACTS
ro
I
Receptor Data
Spill Circumstances
Data
Monitoring Data
Water Body Data
Present Extent of
Contamination
Future Extent
of
Contamination
Exposure
Impacts
Chemical Data
Standards and
Criteria
-------
2.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISCHARGE
The two major components in characterizing a spill of sinking
substances are the spill circumstances and the nature of the spilled sub-
stances. Collection of information defining these components establishes
the framework .for analyzing the spill situation and selecting an appropriate
and timely response. The factors relevant to characterizing the spill
circumstances and the discharged material, as well as sources of this
information, are described in the following sections.
2.1.1 Characterization of Discharge Circumstances
Information on the circumstances surrounding the discharge or spill of
substances into a water body is useful for the response decisionmaking pro-
cess. The information collected through observation when the situation is
first encountered can be used to identify the specific substances involved
and the extent of resulting contamination. Specific spill information that
is needed and sources of this information are identified below.
2.1.1.1 Information Requirements
Figure 2-3 is an example completed worksheet used to record and
summarize pertinent information regarding the circumstances, status, and
characteristics of a discharge. A blank worksheet is provided in Appendix
I. This information provides background and time-related data that can be
used to determine the nature of the problem and the need for immediate
action (such as stopping ongoing or intermittent contaminant sources or
shutting off affected water intakes). This information may also be used in
subsequent analyses to estimate the current extent of contamination or the
future extent of contamination based on the rates of spill spread. All of
these analyses contribute to the spill response decision process.
The worksheet shown in Figure 2-3 also provides space for recording
additional pertinent information based on observation of the discharge
situation. An example is an observation of a fish kill, apparently related
to the discharge situation, which may indicate that the materials involved
in the discharge are highly toxic to aquatic species. Human uses of the
area could also be noted based on litter or other evidence near the site.
2.1.1.2 Information Sources
The information to be recorded on the Figure 2-3 worksheet is generally
derived through observation of the spill circumstances and the surrounding
2-4
-------
FIGURE 2-3. EXAMPLE DISCHARGE SUMMARY WORKSHEET
Site
Time of Observation ///S2> A«m*
Tirrna r\f TJa^o•l• T3^J,T rf-y_ . . /*» _•
Type of Water Body &,*>
,
*,,,.*
CIRCUMSTANCES OF DISCHARGE
Location //•/'M J^Jk ffst
oource
Cause
Status (Circle One):C^ Discrete
Time Elapsed Since Discharge Began
>
Quantity of Material Released
Duration of Release (if intermittent)
Substances Released
Continuous
Quantit
ft gag
Form of Release (Circle One):
Powder Crystal/Pellets Chunks
Semi-Solid
EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
Sediments
Water Body
OBSERVATIONS
l.
*m
n
2-5
-------
area as well as through interviews with witnesses or other knowledgeable
parties. Additional information (such as discharge rates or contamination
spread rates) may be estimated from measured observations.
Information on the chemicals spilled and the quantity spilled must
be obtained from specific sources, which include:
• Captain or crew of vessel
• Shipping papers, transport or waste manifests, cargo labels, or
other identifying papers/markings
• Shipping agent
• Company discharge records or environmental permits
• USEPA Regional Office or state permit data.
Sampling may be necessary to identify or confirm the chemicals involved
in the absence of any identifying data or where available data provide
conflicting answers.
2.1.2 Characterization of Discharged Material
Sinking materials are chemical substances that are denser than water
and are relatively insoluble in water. When a sinking material is spilled
and enters a surface water body, it tends to fall or flow to the bottom
and, when the material is a liquid, it will permeate or move along the top
of the sediments. Once the material has reached the bottom, its properties
determine its fate in the environment and potential hazards posed to the
population, the environment, and property. Appendix F provides and explains
a list of 468 chemicals that have been identified as sinking chemicals.
2.1.2.1 Information Needs
Table 2-1 lists important physical, chemical, and biological properties
that should be determined for each sinking substance involved in a spill to
a water body. Such data should also be collected for any breakdown products
of the spilled substance that may result from hydrolysis or other chemical
reactions in the environment or from biological transformation (e.g.,
microbial metabolism). These data will be used in subsequent analyses to
assess the spread of contamination and the likely impacts. These data may
also be used in the technology selection and evaluation process (described
in Section 4) to identify containment, removal, treatment, or disposal
methods applicable to the chemicals of interest or to identify adverse
2-6
-------
TABLE 2-1. DISCHARGED MATERIAL INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCES
Information Factor Use of Information
Information Source
Specific Gravity
Physical State
Particle Size
Water Solubility
Ability to settle to bottoms and
prediction of movement along bottom.
Once settled, to estimate future
extent of contamination and impacts.
Prediction of potential to remain sus-
pended in water column.
Ability to solubilize.,
Prediction of movement along bottom or
into water column, once settled.
Selection of containment, removal,
treatment, and disposal technique.
Ability to remain in water column rather
than settle.
Selection of containment, removal, or
treatment technique.
Prediction of dissolution from sediments
into water column.
Prediction of solubilization rather than
settling to the bottom.
Selection of containment or treatment
technique.
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
Appendix F.
Observation of spill.
Transport manifest or container
label.
Discussion with notifier of spill
company agent or other
knowledgeable person.
Observation of spill.
Transport manifest or container
label.
Discussion with notifier of spill
company agent or other
knowledgeable person.
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
-------
TABLE 2-1. (continued)
Information Factor
Water Reactivity
Chemical Reactivity
Ignitability
to
oo
Use of Information
Surface Tension
Octanol-Water Partition
Coefficient
Potential for rapid dispersement through-
out water body.
Potential for transformation into another
substance of greater or lesser concern.
Selection of chemical management measures
during and upon removal.
Selection of treatment and disposal
techniques.
Selection of treatment techniques for
removed materials.
Selection of special handling and manage-
ment techniques during and upon removal.
Selection of treatment and disposal
techniques.
Prediction of compound-water interaction
and compound settlement and dispersal.
Information Source
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
References in Note 1,
Appendix F.
References in Note
Observation of spill.
References in Note 1.
Prediction of compound-water interaction. References in Note 1.
(continued)
1 -
See Reference Nos. 8. 9, 35. 38, 41, 42. 51, 53, 56, 64. 72, /3. 74, 75, 8U, and 8Z in
Appendix H. Also consult USEPA, Duluth, MN, "AQUIRE" database on aquatic toxicology,
Occupational Health Services, Inc., New York, NY, "HAZARDLINE" database on physical/
chemLal properties, toxicology, spill response, and waste disposal; and NationalOceanic
and Atmospheric Administration's Hazardous Materials Response Project, Seattle, WA, for
information on degree of hazard.
-------
TABLE 2-1. (continued)
Ni
Information Factor
Use of Information
Sediment-Water
Partition Coefficient
Bioaccumulation^
Aquatic Persistence
Transformation Rate
Constants or Half-Lives
o Hydrolysis
o Oxidation
o Biotrans formation
Toxicity
o Aquatic Species
o Mammals
o Human (ingestion)
o Food Chain
Assessment of future extent of con-
tamination based on compound
distribution between sediments
and water. •
Estimation of future contamination,
exposure, and impacts.
Prediction of future extent of contami-
nation and estimation of .future
exposure and impacts
Prediction of chemical transformation into
substances of greater or lesser concern.
Prediction of future extent of contami-
nation and estimation of future
exposure and impacts.
Evaluation of health impacts of expected
exposure levels on receptors of concern.
Selection of special handling or management
procedures during and following removal.
Information Source
References in Note 1.
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
References in Note 1.
Appendix F.
References in Note 1.
nn ' ' ' ' » 56» 64> 72> 73> 74> 75, 80, and 82 in
Appendix H Also consult USEPA, Duluth, MN, "AQUIRE" database on aquatic toxicology;
Occupational Health Services, Inc., New York, NY, "HAZARDLINE" database on physical/
sPm response, and waste disposal; and National Oceanic
Hazardous Materlals Response project» Seattle> WA«
2 "
n/ ii
sediment/soil
octanol-water partition coefficient, bioconcentration factor, and
on (sediment-water partition coefficient).
-------
environmental or human health effects from contaminated sediment disturbance
and recension during their removal. Specific data usage is summarized
in the second column of Table 2-1.
Figure 2-4 is an example completed worksheet for use in collecting the
chemical data needed for further analysis. A blank worksheet is provided
in Spendix I For a given spill situation, each chemical involved would
be listed and the necessary data would be obtained.
2.1.2.2 Information Sources
Table 2-1 identifies information sources for each information factor
listed. Numerous texts and documents presently avf ^^J^^f
physical, chemical, and biological information needs identified in Table
2-1. Most of this information has been compiled and analyzed, and is pre
sented in Appendix F as part of the chemical sinkers list.
The amount of available data varies for each chemical. Some chemicals
h*v* been studied to a greater extent than others and therefore have more
data avXlaDle. Thus, data for each factor identified in Table 2-1 may not
be available. In such situations, best judgment based on knowledge of
comical behavior or observations of the spill situation will be necessary
ss
^d^^^^^^^
£?er cSumn through chemical solubility, chemical ^^"^ifl^dissolu-
that of water, low surface tension of the chemical, or significant dissolu
tion to the water from contaminated sediments.
The source of each piece of information that is noted on the worksheet
in Figure 2-4 should be specifically identified.
2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE WATER BODY AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Once the spill circumstances are identified, information should be
collected concerning the characteristics of the water body into which
sinking substances were spilled and the surrounding environmental setting
that may be affected.
The following sections identify important information needs and
potential sources of this information.
2-10
-------
FIGURE 2-4. EXAMPLE SPILLED SUBSTANCE DATA WORKSHEET
Information
Factor
Substance A Information Substance B Information
Source Source
1. Specific Gravity
2. Physical State
3. Particle Size
*«
A>f **/,'
4. Water Solubility 800 fj>m
5. Water Reactivity A/*
6. Chemical Reactivity
7. Ignitability
8. Surface Tension
cJie*»ieA/
(continued)
2-11
-------
FIGURE 2-4. (continued)
Information
Factor
Substance A Information
Source
Substance B Information
Source
9. Octanol-water
partition coeffi
cient
10. Sediment-water £ 3 /
partition coeffi-
cient
11. Bioaccumulation
12. Aquatic persistence //i«A
13. Transformation
rate constants
• Hydrolysis
• Oxidation
• Biotrans-
formation
14. Toxicity
<•.»«.£ e,r-
na,*aot>OK
j
rifuaL: species-.*,-**. ™^faiyri^c*i**-i*rr«*
. Mammals - 0^1 r^-W^^Wo-S/icT V/ ^
• Human - Or+l LO^xCo ~*/l£f} O.+S^/I ML*. •£•' I* c«»'*r nfk*
• Food chain $ptJft W»A/-W» AAwte>t"i££:
I tlf-y — 0.9.****
^ /gAy — ^o^/y^ .
T*itc.
2-12
-------
2.2.1 Characterization of the Water Body
Spills of sinking chemicals may occur in any type of surface watpr
Each water body has certain physical and chemical characteristics Sat affect
nolo^rr* °VP1illed -^stances and the application of particular
nologies to control or remove the contaminants.
2.2.1.1 Information Requirements
steps. Specific data usage is summarized in the second column of Table 2-2
s sna an-s
;:
2.2.1.2 Information Sources
2-13
-------
TABLE 2-2. WATER BODY INFOMATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCES
Information Factor
Use of Information
Information Sources
Depth to Contaminated
Bottom Materials
Depth of Water Body
or Water Channel
(minimum, maximum,
mean)
Ability of dredges to reach and
remove contaminated materials.
Ability to operate/maneuver dredging
equipment.
Accessibility of dredging equipment
to site.
Prediction of discharged substances
or sediments movement.
Width of Water Body or Ability to operate/maneuver dredging
Water Channel
,L (minimum, maximum,
•**• mean)
Configuration of
Channel or Water
Body
equipment.
Accessibility of dredging euqipment
to site.
Prediction; of discharged substances
or sediments movement.
Ability to operate/maneuver dredging
equipment.
Accessibility of dredging equipment
to site.
Prediction of discharged substances
or sediments movement.
Navigation chart.
Direct measurement.
Remote sensing (sonar).
Navigation chart.
Table 2-3.
Remote sensing (sonar).
Navigation chart.
USGS topographic map.
Table 2-3.
Table 2-3.
Remote sensing (sonar, video
sounders).
(continued)
-------
TABLE 2-2. (continued)
Information Factor
Use of Information
Water Current Direction Prediction of discharged substances
^surface, subsurface) or sediments movement.
Water Current Velocity
(surface, subsurface)
Tidal Cycle (time of
high and low tides,
velocity of tide,
amplitude of tide)
,L Wave Height
Ui
Suspended Particulate
Concentration
Water Temperature
Profile
Prediction of discharged substances
or sediments movement.
Ability of dredging equipment to
operate.
Prediction of discharged substances
or sediments movement.
Ability to operate/maneuver dredging
equipment.
Potential for contaminants to adhere
to particulates rather than
settling to sediments.
Impact on need for containment.
Impact on containment method selection.
Ability of discharged material to
solubilize while settling to
sediments.
Ability of discharged material to
settle out.
Information Sources
Navigation chart.
Table 2-3.
Direct measurement/observation.
Navigation chart.
Table 2-3.
Direct measurement.
Table 2-3.
Direct measurement/observation.
Table 2-3.
Table 2-3
Observation (general estimate),
Table 2-3.
(continued)
-------
TABLE 2-2. (continued)
Information Factor
Salinity Profile
Seasonal Considerations
(drought, snow melt,
storm flood)
Sediment Type and Grain
Size
Sediment Organic Carbon
Content
Use of Information
Ability of discharged material to
solubilize while settling to
sediments.
Impact on sediment treatment option.
Affect on physical characteristics
of the water body, thereby
affecting ability to operate/
maneuver dredging equipment and
prediction of contaminant.
movement*
Impact on type of dredging equipment
may be used.
Impact on sediment treatment and
disposal method selection.
Impact on containment method
selection.
Impact on adhesion of contaminants
to sediments.
Impact on treatment method selection.
Information Sources
Table 2-3.
Table 2-3.
Direct measurement observation.
Table 2-3.
Sampling and analysis
Remote sensing (in-situ
nuclear density probe),
Table 2-3.
Sampling and analysis.
-------
FIGURE 2-5. EXAMPLE WATER BODY DATA COLLECTION WORKSHEET
Information.
Requirements
Site-Specific
Data
Information
Source
WATER BODY;
Depth of Water Body
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Width of Water Body
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Water Current Direction
Surface
Subsurface
Water Current Velocity
Surface
Subsurface
Tidal Cycle
Time of high tide
Time of low tide
Velocity of tide
Amplitude of tide
Wave Height
,f>
A/sf
m*. *T
(continued)
2-17
-------
FIGURE 2-5. (continued)
Information
Requirements
Site-Specific
Data
Information
Source
SEDIMENTS;
Depth to Contaminated
Sediments
Sediment Type
Sediment Grain Size i
Sediment Organic
Carbon Content
WATER:
I?r
Suspended Particulate
Concentration
Water Temperature
Profile
Salinity Profile
SI
SEASONAL CONSIDERATIONS;
Seasonal Conditions
and Impacts
Drought
Snow melt
Storm flood
SKETCH
A///f - A/e-/-
i WATER BODY
BODY/CHANNEL CONFIGURATION (CROSS-SECTION)
•F+.
fjso-Pf. /p
1 *K5* jf^
spfej^as^g^^
- -- ------ -..- ___. *.••
2-18
-------
to
I—"
V0
FIGURE 2-6. EXAMPLE SITE MAP FOR RECORDING DATA AND
OBSERVATIONS - WATER BODY
i
5,000 Gallons
Chemical X
Not to Scale
-------
TABLE 2-3. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SOURCES FOR WATER BODY DATA
Source
Information Available
U.S. Coast Guard District
Offices
U.S. Geologic Survey
U.S. National Weather Service
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Department of Interior
and State Departments of
Natural Resources
Scripps Institute of Oceanography
and Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institute
State Water Departments
State Coastal Department
Local Municipalities and
Universities
Historical spill data, local
meteorological data, oceano-
graphic data.
Topographic maps, data on the
geologic and hydrologic features
of a spill area, topographic
data.
Meteorological and nautical data.
Historical water data for spill
site, predicted flow patterns of
an area.
Nautical and meteorological data,
visual reconaissance capabilities,
modeling of contaminant trajectory.
Identification and location of
endangered species and habitats.
Data on currents, waves, and tides.
Data concerning all water systems
within a state.
Data on currents, waves, and tides.
Historical knowledge of area;
environmental and geologic
knowledge of area.
Adapted from Byroade, Twedell, and LeBoff, 1981.
2-20
-------
In the absence of any specific data or estimates based on general
information, sampling or direct measurements may need to be conducted to
define the necessary data. These activities may range from taking soundings
or measuring currents to sampling sediments for analysis. Where such
activities are indicated, they should be planned and conducted in conjunc-
tion with other sampling or monitoring activities in the data collection
and analysis effort to ensure efficient use of time and resources.
2.2.2 Characterization of Environmental Setting
The biological environment surrounding the spill of a sinking chemical
consists of species, populations, and communities (i.e., receptors) at risk
of exposure to the spilled substances. The receptors may be at risk through
exposure to toxic substances or the destruction of their living environment
(habitat). Economically important receptors, such as fish and shellfish,
may also be affected by a spill of sinking chemicals. The economic and
public welfare value of the water body for drinking water, industrial use,
or recreational use may also be reduced as a result of the spilli Thus,
the identification of receptors surrounding the spill area (flora, fauna,
and human) and the uses of the water body information to assess exposure
and impacts of the spill, as well as the need for immediate protective
measures, need to be applied.
2.2.2.1 Information Requirements
For the purposes of spill response decisionmaking, the environmental
setting of the area surrounding the spill of sinking substances includes
the following:
• Distinctive, sensitive, or protected habitats
• Endangered species
• Sensitive or indicator species
• Sensitive water body use
• Potential receptors.
All of these components represent environmental areas or species subject to
exposure that may require protection during cleanup or may be considered in
evaluating the need for immediate response.
Figure 2-7 is an example completed worksheet for compiling environ-
mental setting data. A blank worksheet is provided in Appendix I. This
worksheet provides a detailed breakdown of information under each of the
five components identified above.
2-21
-------
FIGURE 2-7. EXAMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WORKSHEET
Site Information
Information
Sources
DISTINCTIVE HABITATS (Check and list if near spill area)
L. Breeding Grounds, Nesting, or Roosting Sites
2. Wildlife/Refuges
3. Endangered Species Habitats
4. Marshes or Swamps (e.g., mangrove)
5. Subtidal Seagrass Systems
6. Harvesting Beds
7. Coral Reefs
8. Soft Bottom Benthos
9. Unused Natural Ecosystem (ecologically or
aesthetically important)
10. Other
(continued)
2-22
-------
FIGURE 2-7. (continued)
Site Information
Information
Sources
ENDANGERED SPECIES (List)
SENSITIVE SPECIES (Check if applicable and list)
V 1. Aquatic (Fish/Shellfish)
"That
2. Birds
3. Reptiles/Amphibians
4. Mammals'
5. Plants
SENSITIVE WATER BODY USAGE (Check if applicable)
Type of Use Distance Downstream From Spill
CONSUMPTIVE WATER USE
y 1. Drinking Water Supply
2. Industrial Water Supply
3. Irrigation
4. Fire Water Supply
RECREATIONAL USE
1. State/National Park
2. Swimming
3. Boating
4. Fishing
5. Other
— ltnil
(continued)
2-23
-------
FIGURE 2-7. (continued)
Site Information
Information
Sources
COMMERCIAL USE (Check if applicable and list)
_ 1. Shellfish
_ 2. Finfish
i/ 3. Resort area or other waterfront property
KefiJc*ce4 **A
i/ 4. Marinas
C
y*_5. Harbor/Docks
6. Transportation (shipping lanes)
POTENTIAL RECEPTORS (Check if applicable and identify)
2. Shellfish
3. Aquatic Plants
4. Reptiles/Amphibians
5. Other aquatic or benthic receptors
6. Birds
7• Mammals
8. Humans
Vol. ftr* Pef+*
Adapted from Byroad, Twedell, and LeBoff, 1981.
2-24
-------
This information should also be recorded on a site map, as described
in Section 2.2.1. Figure 2-8 provides an example map; note that the en-
vironmental setting information has been recorded onto the same map as the
water body characteristics (Figure 2-6). This data-overlaying process
helps to build an overview of the spill, its movement, and crucial areas
the spill may impact; thus, the data presented on the map reflect distance
and time components of the spill.
2.2.2.2 Information Sources
Table 2-4 identifies Federal and state agencies and organizations that
may be able to provide environmental setting information. For each agency
or organization identified, the type of information or the services avail-
able are described.
Topographic maps from the USGS are useful information tools. These
maps show state parks, marshes, wildlife refuges, and other distinctive
habitat areas. They also identify nearby dwellings, towns, and cities. As
described in Section 2.2.2.1, these maps may be used as a base map to
record collected site data.
2.3 DETERMINATION OF THE EXTENT'OF CONTAMINATION
An essential component in evaluating the impact of discharged sinking
material is to assess the spread of contaminants from the sediments along
the bottom and into the water column. The objective of this assessment is
to determine the environmental concentrations of these substances or their
transformation products and to plot migration pathways and concentration
gradients over time. From this information, it is possible to determine
levels of exposure to species, populations, and environmental systems
identified earlier to evaluate risk of adverse effects.
2.3.1 Information Requirements
Determining the extent of contamination for a spill of sinking sub-
stances involves two components: (1) the current extent of contamination,
and (2) the future extent of contamination. The first component provides a
picture of the contamination situation as it exists at a certain time
(generally, when the OSC^first arrives on site). The second component
considers the dynamic aspects of contamination to characterize the contami-
nation situation as it changes over time, i.e., to build a series of
pictures of the contamination situation at specific intervals within a
defined period of time. Both components address (for sediments and water
column) the dimensions of the contaminated areas and the concentration
gradient within the contamination zone.
2-25
-------
FIGURE 2-8. EXAMPLE SITE MAP FOR RECORDING DATA AND
OBSERVATIONS - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
10
to
cr>
5,000 Gallons
Substance X
Wildlife
Refuge
Legend
i Recreational Boating
\™"j Commercial Shipping
og Commercial Fishing
A Recreational Fishing
Drinking
Water
Intake
-------
TABLE 2-4. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING INFORMATION SOURCES
Source
Information Available
U.S. Pish and Wildlife
Service
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
State Water Departments
State Fish and Game
Departments
State Coastal Department
State and Local Parks and
Recreation Departments
State and Local Universities
and Colleges
State and Local Historical
and Conservation Groups
National Conservation and
Wildlife Organizations
State and Local
Government Officials
Data pertaining to possible sensitive and
unique areas, data concerning threatened
species in a spill area, directions to take
concerning the protection or cleanup of
important ecological systems (rookeries,
hatcheries, etc.).
Data pertaining to wildlife species, in
general, and sensitive species in particular.
Data concerning all water systems within a
state, data concerning water uses in an
area. .
Data detailing locations of major aquatic
breeding and habitat areas within a state,
data concerning wildlife water uses.
Data on coastal shoreline development areas,
data on where the recreational, commercial,
and wilderness shorelines are located.
Data on the recreational use of certain
areas, data on the habitats of recreational
wildlife (game fishes, birds, etc.).
Data pertaining to wildlife species, in
general, and sensitive species in particular.
Input as to the aesthetic and historical
values of an area.
Input concerning the existence of threatened
or endangered species in a spill area.
Information concerning water uses, outside
considerations, spill area uniqueness.
Adapted from Byroade, Twedell, and LeBoff, 1981.
2-27
-------
The following sections address the information requirements to deter-
mine the current and future extent of contamination for a spill of sinking
chemicals.
2.3.1.1 Current Extent of Contamination
The fundamental process for determining the current extent of contami-
nation is to define the boundaries of the contaminated bottom materials and
the area of the water column that is contaminated. Where pools of liquid
contaminants exist on top of bottom materials, the areal extent of the
liquid should be defined and the surrounding areas of contaminated sedi-
ments should be identified.
Defining the extent of contamination of bottom materials includes the
number of contaminated areas, the length and the width (distance dimensions)
of contamination associated with each area, and the depth of contamination
(from top of sediments) for each area. For the water column, the extent of
contamination includes the length and the width (distance dimensions) along
the water body that contamination from the sediments exists and the depths
within the water column that are contaminated (e.g., is the entire water
column from the bottom to water surface contaminated, or is only a portion
of the water column contaminated). The areal extent of water contamination
should also be defined. All of this information may be obtained through
monitoring studies (observations, remote sensing, or sampling) and spill
circumstances data (Section 2.1.1).
This information should be mapped to provide a visual summary of the
contaminated area (sediments and water column). The number of contaminated
areas and zones of contamination can be recorded directly onto the data
overlay maps described in previous sections.
Subsurface cross-sections of the sediments and the water column should
also be drawn to further describe the vertical and areal extent of contami-
nation. Figure 2-9 provides an example map that illustrates the current
areas of contamination.
The concentration gradient for the contaminants should be defined
within each contamination area for both water and sediments. This informa-
tion may also be recorded on a map, as shown in Figure 2-9. Concentration
data can only be obtained through sampling and analysis and through direct
measurement (e.g., conductivity).
2-28
-------
FIGURE 2-9. EXAMPLE SITE MAP FOR RECORDING DATA AND
OBSERVATIONS - CURRENT EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
NS
NJ
VO
5,000 Gallons
Substance X
Wildlife
Refuge
20 Ft. Deep .* c*
Recreational Boating
• ""• Commercial Shipping
> 1
~ Commercial Fishing
Drinking
Water
Intake
Recreational Fishing
• Extent of Bottom Contamination
Extent of Water Contamination
Present Time
-------
2.3.1.2 Future Extent of Contamination
The information used to assess the current extent of contamination is
also used to assess the future extent of contamination:
• Sediments
- Number of contamination areas
- Length and width of each area
- Depth of contamination in sediments
- Contaminant concentration gradient
• Water Body
- Areal extent of contamination zone
- Vertical depth of contamination across the contamination zone
- Contaminant concentration gradient.
For future contamination, this information must be predicted or esti-
mated for specific future time periods to build a picture as to how far the
contamination area is spreading, at what rate it is spreading, and how the
contaminant concentrations are changing over time. These changes are esti-
mated or predicted based on the current situation, the chemical data
(Section 2.1.2),'and the water body data (Section 2.2.1), and may require
monitoring studies as well.
This information can be mapped along with other information to provide
a visual summary of how the contamination zone may change over specific
time periods. Figure 2-10 provides an example map that illustrates this
process.
2.3.2 Methods for Obtaining Information
The information required to determine the extent of contamination may
be obtained through monitoring studies, prediction methods, or a combination
of the two. Application of these methods often requires a well-considered
plan that must be specific to the water body characteristics, spill condi-
tions, spill volume, and overall immediacy of resolution. The following
sections briefly describe these information collection methods.
2.3.2.1 Monitoring Methods
Monitoring methods that may be used to collect information include:
• Direct (visual) observation and measurement
2-30
.
-------
FIGURE 2-10. EXAMPLE SITE MAP FOR RECORDING DATA AND
OBSERVATIONS - FUTURE EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
ho
u>
5,000 Gallons
Substance X
Wildlife
Refuge
20 Ft. Deep-.
1 Foot/Sec.
Recfeatioral Boating
Comrnercisl Shipping
Commerciil fishing
Recreational Fishing
Extent of Bottom Comarniostion
" Extant of Water Conttnwiition
«6 Present Time
tj. t3 Future Times
Drinking
Water
Intake
-------
• Remote sensing
• Sampling and analysis.
These methods are generally used to define current contamination.
Direct observation is limited by spill and by environmental conditions.
In shallow or clear water, direct observation may be used to identify the
area of contamination of bottom materials if the contaminant is a distinc-
tive color; otherwise, divers may be needed to establish the extent of the
area. When distinctively colored contaminants have entered the water column,
discoloration of the water may be used as a guide to the extent of contami-
nation. The Discharge Summary Worksheet, presented earlier as Figure 2-3,
provides space to note observations of contamination dimensions.
Remote sensing techniques and equipment can provide information about
subsurface conditions more quickly than sampling. Remote sensing may be
used to monitor contaminants in bottom materials both to detect the presence
of contaminants and to quantify their concentrations. These methods may be
conducted on a one-time basis to define the current situation or on a con-
tinuing basis to quantify movement and concentration changes over time.
Techniques currently in use include electrical conductivity, x-ray
fluorescence, and photography (underwater and aerial). These methods may
be used to determine the areal extent of contamination on top of sediments,
to monitor the movement of chemicals along the bottom, and to detect the
contaminants in sediments or the water column.
Sampling is the fundamental tool for determining the extent of contami-
nation. Sampling may be applied to bottom materials or to the water column
on a one-time basis to determine current contamination dimensions or on a
continuous basis to define changes in location and concentration over time,
enabling prediction of these variables.
A variety of grab samplers, corers, and sample bottles are available.
These may be used to obtain samples of sediments, contaminants pooled on
top of sediments, and the water column at various depths. The samples may
be analyzed for contaminant concentrations and for sediment characteristics
using either portable/transportable on-site facilities or off-site
laboratories.
2.3.2.2 Predictive Methods
Predictive methods that may be used in determining future contaminant
location and concentration include general estimates or the application of
models.
General estimates provide a quick means of determining the rate of
contaminant movement and thereby estimating the spread of contamination in
2-32
-------
bottom materials or through the water column in an "order-of-magnitude"
level of analysis. These estimates can be made based on observations or
sampling results within a certain time period and extrapolated for longer
intervals. Such a method provides a "rough" estimate, which may be suf-
ficient where immediate response action is indicated to control the spill
or to protect human health or the environment. However, these estimates
are limited in their application because they do not take into account
the dynamic nature of the water body, the sediments, and the contaminant
concentration and transformation.
Modeling studies are useful predictive tools to indicate the possible
areal extent of contaminated sediments, contaminant movement, and water
column contamination over time. Such studies may also indicate locations
where contaminants or contaminated bottom materials tend to accumulate.
Mathematical models are available for predicting sediment transport,
erosion, and deposition, as well as contaminant transport in rivers,
estuaries, lakes, and oceans. Numerous methods are available, and some
involve the use of numerical computer models. Vyas and Herblch (1977) and
Neely and Blau (1976) are information sources on the use of models in
analyzing sediment transport and deposition. Methods for analyzing trans-
port in water bodies are further described in Fischer et al. (1979).
Physical models can also be used to predict the behavior of water bodies
under varying conditions. For example, existing scale models of the
Chesapeake Bay, the San Francisco Bay, and the Mississippi River are used
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for hydraulic modeling.
The application of models to obtain information to define the extent
of contamination requires a substantial amount of information on the water
body, the status of the situation, and properties of the substances.
Monitoring studies may be necessary to obtain appropriate data. Further,
the user must be trained and a substantial amount of time must be spent
collecting and analyzing the data. Therefore, predictive studies are most
applicable to complex environmental situations or where sufficient evaluation
time is available.
2.4 DETERMINATION OF EXPOSURE AND IMPACTS
The final data collection and analysis step involves determining the
exposure and the impacts associated with the spill situation. In analyzing
exposure, identified receptors are evaluated with respect to the extent of
present and future contamination. In analyzing impacts, exposure is evalu-
ated with respect to regulatory standards and criteria (for environmental
concentrations of the chemicals involved), as well as chemical data that
define the potential for harm (e.g., carcinogenicity, toxicity, etc.).
2-33
-------
Together, these analyses address the following questions, for both the
present and the future:
• Who or what are the affected receptors?
• What are the substances to which the receptors are (will be)
exposed?
• To what extent are the receptors being (going to be) exposed to the
substances?
The answers to these questions form the basis for deciding the significance
of the spill situation, the immediacy of the need for response, and the
most appropriate response methods.
2.4.1 Information Requirements and Analysis
Figure 2-11 is an example completed worksheet for collecting and
organizing exposure and impact data. A blank worksheet is provided in
Appendix I. For each chemical involved in a spill of sinking substances or
a situation of contamination, the exposure and impacts analysisjequires
identification of each potential resource or receptor that may be affected
as determined in- Sections 2.2.2 and 2.3. For each receptor or resource,
the following data are .needed: (1) type of exposure (ingestion, direct
contact, etc?), and (2) the exposure level for the media Involved <^iment,
water, contaminated fish, etc.) at the present and over time. This informa
tion can be extrapolated from the data collected, as identified in Sections
2.1 through 2.4.
Finally, for each situation identified, the relevant regulatory expo-
sure level should be identified; in the absence of regulatory standards,
other exposure indices, such as carcinogenic levels or lethal Jose/LD50)
levels, should be used. These standards and criteria establish a level that,
when compared to the contamination problem (present or future), may be used
to assess the potential damage or harm to public health and to the environ-
ment that may result. These standards can only be applied to situations
relevant to the standard.
This analysis must also consider acute exposure and chronic exposure
because the potential for harm or damage will be different for these situa-
tions (e.g., the acute exposure may result in some damage, but the chronic
exposure may result in severe damage to public health or to the environ-
ment). Bioaccumulation and biomagnificatlon should also be considered.
Because chemicals transform in the environment over time, this analysis
process should be repeated for each transformation product, as identified in
earlier steps.
2-34
-------
FIGURE 2-11. EXAMPLE EXPOSURE AND IMPACT DATA WORKSHEET
RESOURCE/ TYPE.OF EXPOSURE LEVEL
RECEPTOR EXPOSURE CURRENT TIME 1 TIME 2 TIME 3
(12.00 ) - (/Vtfo ). (/£00)
0*yl ?*yl p*yl
i
OJ
TW-
a
J
REGULATORY
STANDARD OR
OTHER EXPOSURE
CRITERIA
COMMENT ON POTENTIAL
FOR HARM
*$/c tf
{o 00*
-------
2.4.2 Information Sources
The information used as input to the analysis of exposure and impacts
will have been collected or generated during earlier analyses, as outlined
In Sections 2.1 through 2.3. New data requirements are those regulatory
standards and criteria that are relevant to the situation under analysis.
Particular standards and criteria of interest include:
« State water quality criteria
• Clean Water Act water quality criteria
• Safe Drinking Water Act maximum concentration limits and health
advisories
• Sediment contamination criteria
• Aquatic toxicology data
• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) exposure levels
• Human toxicology:
- International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
- NIOSH.
These data are available through local offices of relevanJ.Fe^"^ "fL
agencies; computer information data bases; and numerous EPA, NIOSH, and
OSHA publications.
2.5 LEVEL OF APPLICATION OF CHARACTERIZATION PROCESS
The data collection and analysis process described throughout this
section focuses on the important information and analytical considerations
that form the basis of the decisionmaking process described in subsequent
sections. To this end, the process and information parameters have been
described in detail.
This data collection and analysis process can be conducted at any level
of detail depending on the amount of time considered feasible given the
existing spilf situation. The process described previously can be conducted
on a relatively cursory level, so long as these important questions are
considered in the analysis:
• What is the present spill situation?
2-36
-------
• What chemicals are involved?
• How harmful are the chemicals and what will happen to these
chemicals in the environment?
• Where are the chemicals and their transformation products going?
• What/who will be affected by the spread of the chemicals?
• What levels of exposure will occur? What impacts will result?
2-37
-------
-------
SECTION 3
DETERMINATION OF RESPONSE NEEDS
Once the spill characterization data have been collected and analyzed
and exposure and impacts have been evaluated, the response decision process
begins. The first step in the decision process is to assess the need for
response. If a response is necessary, then the objectives of the response
can be established. These objectives set the framework for identifying
response options and for selecting an appropriate remedy.
Figure 3-1 .illustrates the overall decision process and identifies
those areas addressed in this section. Section 3.1 focuses on the general
assessment of response needs. Section 3.2 addresses the establishment of
response objectives. Section 3.3 addresses the establishment of immediate
response objectives.
3.1 ASSESSMENT OF NEED FOR RESPONSE
The major question examined in assessing response needs is whether the
identified impacts of the spill are significant and, if so, whether they
warrant a response. In some situations, particularly small volume spills
of relatively low-toxicity materials, no response may be needed as long as
short-term and long-term impacts on public health and the environment are
minimal. In other situations, an immediate response may be necessary to •
stabilize or to rapidly clean up (partially or fully) a worsening or highly
toxic spill.
The need for response is assessed by judging the significance of the
impacts identified in Section 2. This assessment should incorporate an
evaluation of what damages may occur (short- or long-term) and their poten-
tial for harm. In general, the assessment should consider the stability of
the situation, volume and toxicity of the substances involved, and potential
for transformation and long-term effects. With the exception of stability,
these factors were addressed in analyzing impacts in Section 2.4.
In evaluating the need for immediate action, the following questions
regarding the situation stability and magnitude and immediacy of the harm
need to be assessed:
• Are spilled sinking substances moving either along the water column
to bottom materials or along the bottom of the water body?
3-1
-------
FIGURE 3-1. SEQUENCE OF RESPONSE EVENTS
Characterize Spill and
Impacts
Identify and Select
Immediate Response
Alternatives
Develop and Evaluate
Response Alternatives
Select Preferred
Response Alternative
—i___,
I Implement Response L*-
3-2
-------
If yes, should the movement be controlled or halted to prevent
downstream contamination or to facilitate cleanup?
• Is one area of contaminated bottom materials more harmful than
other areas:
- As an area of high chemical concentration?
- As an area of more highly toxic substances?
- As an existing source of environmental or human health impacts?
Together, these questions consider the "seriousness" of the situation
relative to human health (a judgment of magnitude of harm) and the stability
(rate of worsening of conditions) of the situation, both or either of which
can indicate the need for immediate protective measures.
From these analyses, it can be determined whether a cleanup response
to the spill is needed or whether no response is necessary (no action).
If a need for response is indicated, the analysis can determine whether an
immediate response is necessary in conjunction with or in place of a clean-
up response.
3.2 ESTABLISHMENT OF RESPONSE OBJECTIVES
Response objectives should be formulated to establish a framework for
evaluating, selecting, and implementing a response. The response objectives
are the guidelines for the level of cleanup and the phasing of components
of the action. As such, response objectives involve identifying priorities
for cleanup and the criteria governing the response.
3.2.1 Priorities
Once the spill situation is characterized, the impacts are identified
and the need for response is established, cleanup priorities can be identi-
fied. These priorities establish what must be protected in the response
in order to prevent adverse impacts to public health or the environment,
property as a result of the spill or in order to minimize adverse impacts
that may result from a response action. This involves consideration of
shortterm and long-term contaminant movement, transformation, and concentra-
tion; anticipation of decisionmaking time frame and the timeframe of response
(i.e., urgency of response); and location of nearby receptors and sensitive
environmental or commercial areas. All of these factors are identified in
the data collection and evaluation activities and are summarized in the
impacts evaluation step in Section 2.
Cleanup priorities are established by ranking the identified impacts.
This ranking is based on a judgment of the magnitude of the impacts relative
to one another. For example, at a given site, the protection of a drinking
3-3
-------
water Intake may have to be evaluated against the protection of a drinking
water source, a recreational area, or a sensitive waterfowl breeding ground.
Decisions on the relative importance of these areas and on priorities for
protecting the areas will depend upon the likelihood of damage, the pro-
gression of the zone of contamination, and the magnitude of the impact
(population affected, recreational value, etc.). Short-term impacts must
be balanced against long-term impacts. However, the protection of human
health will generally warrant the highest priority.
3.2.2 Response Criteria
Once priorities have been established, projected levels of cleanup
must be considered; that is, the extent to which contaminants are to^be
removed, contained, and/or treated. This decision involves establishing
acceptable levels of residual contamination remaining in the environment.
Ideally, all contaminants should be separated from the environment
either by removal, chemical transformation, or isolation, thereby leaving
no contaminants in the environment. In practice, this may not be feasible
or cost-effective because of the volumes of sediment and water involved.
Cleanup criteria should focus on reducing contaminant levels in the
environment to protect human health and aquatic and terrestrial life, The
criteria should be consistent with the designated uses of the water body
under consideration. For example, cleanup levels for an isolated water
body with little environmental, human, or commercial value may allow tor
higher levels of residual contamination than a water body used for drinking
water or for commercial fisheries.
Regulatory standards for sediment contamination levels are the most
appropriate cleanup criteria. However, few standards have been developed.
In general, water quality standards will provide a guide for establishing
appropriate cleanup levels. These standards establish water concentration
limits for numerous chemicals based on human ingestion of drinking water
and fish. These standards provide an acceptable guide in situations of
spills of substances that sink because the initial effects of a spill and a
major long-term effect of contaminated sediments are contamination of the
water column.
Water quality standards, established by the states, consist of water
quality criteria and designated uses of the water body. Under the Clean
Water Act, states are required to adopt water quality criteria sufficient
to protect the designated use. The Federal government offers guidance to
the states in developing water quality criteria through the publication
of National ambient water quality criteria for 65 classes of priority pol-
lutants (45 CFR 79318, November 28, 1980; 48 CFR 51400, November 8, 1983;
49 CFR 4551, February 7, 1974). A compilation of State water quality
standards (October 1984) is available from the Criteria and Standards
Division of the Office of Water Regulations, and Standards of USEPA.
3-4
-------
Water quality standards do not exist for all substances. In such
circumstances, other criteria, advisories, and guidance (as described in
Section 2.4) should be considered. Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs)
promulgated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, may serve as guidelines in
establishing cleanup objectives (48 CFR 45502; October 5, 1983; 49 CFR 24330
June 12, 1984). MCLs are enforceable standards promulgated by the EPA '
Office of Drinking Water (ODW). ODW makes additional nonenforceable guide-
lines for other contaminants in drinking water available. These suggested-
no-adverse-response-levels (SNARLs) are health advisories that incorporate
a safety margin to protect the most sensitive members of the general human
population from adverse toxicological effects.
Other relevant Federal programs/requirements for setting cleanup
criteria include: (1) Clean Water Act Section 301 and 403(c) criteria for
ocean discharge and Section 404 criteria for the disposal of dredged or
fill material; (2) Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act criteria
for ocean dumping of waste; (3) Toxic Substances Control Act, Section 6 PGB
requirements for disposal; and (4) Department of Transportation hazardous
materials transport rules.
3.3 ESTABLISHMENT'OF OBJECTIVES FOR IMMEDIATE RESPONSE
An immediate response may be necessary to stabilize a rapidly changing
contamination situation or to protect resources that are immediately threat-
ened. As shown in Figure 3-1, a separate decisionmaking process is needed
for immediate responses. An immediate response may involve limited or
temporary measures, such as shutting off a drinking water intake or setting
up a containment barrier to provide initial protection prior to a full
response to be identified later; alternatively, it may involve a full
response that is implemented in a compressed timeframe. In either case
once the need for an immediate response is established, priorities of
response and cleanup or control criteria should be established.
3.3.1 Priorities
Priorities for an immediate response are established in a manner
similar to that for a less urgent response, as described in Section 3.2.1
However, development of priorities focuses on the question of what aspects
of the situation most immediately needs attention and what, if anything
can wait for a later response. This involves an assessment of what is '
immediately impacted or what will shortly become severely impacted by the
spilled substances and a judgment regarding the relative magnitudes of
these impacts.
Immediate response priorities are then established"by ranking these
impacts, as described in Section 3.2.1.
3-5
-------
3.3.2 Response Criteria
In an immediate response action, response criteria that set the frame-
work for the response should be established. This process draws on the
priorities established for the response to provide the focus. Further,
this analysis must consider the rate of contaminant movement, technological
limitations or capabilities in controlling the movement, and priority of
receptor protection.
An example of this analysis is as follows. A given site situation
involves the rapid movement of highly toxic spilled sinking substances
along a river bottom; a recreational area (including fishing) is already
affected and a drinking water intake is located a short distance downstream.
If the water body and the spill conditions are such that the prevention of
further contaminant movement is not feasible, then response criteria may
include: (1) Prevent contamination of drinking water, and (2) Limit further
human exposure at the recreational area. Response measures may include,
but are not limited to, shutting off the drinking water intake and tempo-
rarily closing the recreational area.
Where appropriate, specific cleanup levels may be established. This
would be appropriate where an immediate removal of contaminated sediments
or pooled contaminants is conducted. The cleanup levels can be final
levels, or interim levels if subsequent response actions are to be con-
ducted. Cleanup criteria and their specification are described in Section
3.2.2.
3-6
-------
SECTION 4
SELECTION OF RESPONSE MEASURES
The selection of response measures for a sinkers spill incident
involves the detailed evaluation and screening of available response
^^r6?^ The faluation and screening process is conducted using site-
specific information gathered during the earlier site characterization
If «vi*'l M characterization data are used to determine the applicability
™^r I « resP°nse techniques and their relative potential performance
and VIM Jf Conditions. Figure 4-1 presents the selection process
and its relationship to the overall response process.
rfl.M technl2ue* Bailable for response at sinker spill sites fall
within one of the following six response categories:
• Containment
* Removal
• Treatment of removed materials
• Disposal (treated and untreated removed materials)
• In-place (in situ) treatment and isolation
« No action.
The overall selection process involves four steps that entail various
types of analyses and evaluations of these response categories and their
respective response techniques.
The four steps are:
• Screening response categories
• Screening response techniques
* Developing response alternatives
• Evaluating alternatives and selecting the preferred alternative.
rpcmnn *?* ^ the selection Process is to identify one or more
response categories that are applicable at the spill site. This is
4-1
-------
FIGURE 4-1. SEQUENCE OF RESPONSE EVENTS
Define Immediate
Response Objectives
4-2
-------
accomplished through a cursory screening process using information on site
characteristics and on limitations of response techniques. Figure 4-2
to" fnrraf8 ?°W "Sp°nse cat*g°ries can be (and sometimes must be) combined
to form treatment or response "trains" to meet response objectives. For
example, if site conditions permit the use of removal techniques? ibis
category must either be followed directly by the disposal category or if
the excavated material requires treatment, it must be followed by the'
-
=?=?
of the first step is
The second step is to screen techniques within each applicable
response category identified in Step 1, with the purpose or eliminating
those techniques that are not applicable under existing site condition!
=35,^
4.1 SCREENING OF RESPONSE CATEGORIES
The selection of a response for a particular sinker spill site beeins
^
category consists of various types ofVedging and^xSvatio^equipment
4-3
-------
FIGURE 4-2. ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE CATEGORIES AND RESPONSE
TRAIN USED IN OVERALL SINKER SPILL RESPONSE SELECTION
PROCESS
Treatment
Established
Need for •
Response
Removal*
-^ Disposal
Containment*
In Situ
Treatment
and
Isolation*
.Response objectives
are met
Response is complete
•Where no response category is applicable at the
site of interest, then not responding ("No Action")
is the sole option.
4-4
-------
that are suitable for different material and water conditions. The treatment
category consists of a variety of treatment techniques that are used f^r
different types of contaminated materials (liquid and solid).
The screening of these categories requires site-specific data gathered
during the spill characterization effort and knowledge of what site char-
acteristics limit the applicability of each category? Using site-specific
data and information on the limitations of each Response category, those
categories that are not applicable under existing site conditions are
screened out or eliminated from further consideration. There may be situa-
tions where all five "action" response categories (removal, containment!
^gg« treat ment' and disposal) are not applicable under existing site
conditions; i.e., no action is possible. In such cases, the only Ltion is
to not respond at all, and the "no action" response category is selected.
A distinction should be recognized between a "no action possible"
I °T Wl)ere "n° aCti°n is best'" A d^ision that "no action
fn ! n°^ r^f t0 the ±SSUe °f cateS°ry applicability and, there-
fore, would not be made during Step 1. A decision involving "no action is
durin/T 6Valuatlon of "no acti°*" al°ng with "action" alternatives
mi^?\ ?Ue£ S»epS- ^ example °f a situ*tion where the decision
might be made that no action is best" would be where the only applicable
Ic^-TT I A&gl7^S removal» but a11 re*°val techniques would resuspend
the h±rd1h bighJVriC "ferial, thus creating a greater hazard ?han
™!n A t ?? fxisted Previously. In such a case, a decision to not
respond at all, i.e., "no action is best," may be appropriate.
Screening Process
response Categories proceeds in a series of substeps.
i nr , n matrlX that ±S st™ctured to facilitate this screen-
ing process and is referenced in the following discussion. This response
category screening process applies to all types of surface water bodies
except open waters (an ocean or sea setting); i.e., it applies to coastal
waters bays, rivers, streams, and tidal-influenced waters. In the case of
?J£; ^ KP!n Waters» dispersion and dilution would probably minimize
impacts to bottom materials or the response would focus on material suspended
ip,« /* " C01T' Th±S handbook does not address techniques used tQPended
respond to contaminants within the water column.
3 1S a" examPle completed worksheet to be used as an aid for
is orovd ,d°rmen^ngTdeCiSl0nS made during Step l' A blank worksheet
i«r£ J ? in Appendix I. By completing this form as each substep is
carried out clear documentation is made for later reference regarding
decisions and conclusions drawn during Step 1.
hofh TJe/irS,t subsfceP requires that the spill site be classified as one or
site ?n SuLt ,Srnt^°8' Jhe information requlwd to characterize a
site in Substep 1 includes whether the spilled material is mobile or
4-5
-------
TABLE 4-1. DECISION MATRIX FOR SCREENING RESPONSE CATEGORIES
Sice Scenario
Preferred
Response
Site Conditions Limiting Applicability
of Removal and Ancillary Categories
1. Contaaininco are
relatively
stationary
Removal (a) Highly toxic if sediments distrubed and dispersion
occurs, even on small scale (hazardous to either water
body and/or water safety) ^
(b) Treatment required but means of treatment unavailable
(c) Means of disposing removed material unavailable
(d) Means of disposing treatment residuals unavailable
(e) Volume of,sediments and/or water too large for
treatment
(f) Volune of sediments and/or water too large for
disposal
(g) Wave height >7 ft and depth >65 ft
(h) Site inaccessible to all removal equipment
2, Contaainanti Containment (a) High water velocity or low water volume limits use
are oobile and Removal of temporary containment techniques
(b) Site inaccessible to temporary containment equipment .
(c) Treatment required but means of treatment unavailable
Cd) Means of disposing removed material unavailable
(e) Means of disposing treatment residuals unavailable
(f) Volime of,sediments and/or water too large for
treatment
(g) Volume of sediments and/or water too large for
disposal
(h) Wave height >7 ft and depth >65 ft
(i) Site inaccessible to all removal equipment
FOOTHOTES;
Chemical characteristics of spilled material will affect feasibility of treatment techniques.
Rewsval equipment is available that is applicable at depths greater than 65 ft, therefore, removal
tnplcnentation delay is applicable in situations where it is anticipated that wave height will subside
Co lesi than 7 ft.
Tccmtacnt and/or disposal of excessively large quantities of material may incur infeasible costs.
4-6
-------
Other Response
Categories
Site Conditions Limiting Applicabiity
of Other Categories
Comments
(a) Delay Removal
(b) In Situ
(c) In Situ
(d) In Situ
(e) In Situ
(f) Partial Removal4
and/or In Situ ,
(g) Partial Removal
and/or In Situ
(h) In Situ
(a) Removal
(b) Removal
(c) In Situ
(d) jn Situ
(e) In Situ
,(£) Partial Removal
and/or In Situ .
(g) Partial Removal
and/or In Situ
(h) Delay Removal
(i) In Situ
i. (a) Limiting conditions may persist
ii. (b,c,d,e,g,i) Many techniques uproven;
applicability of techniques depends
on chemical nature of contaminants,
and sediment characteistics; use
of covers and caps limited by high
water velocities or low water
volume; site inaccessible to In-Situ
equipment
iii. (f,h) Inability to mitigate hazard with
only partial removal of contaminated
material; (see ii, above, for
conditions limiting In Situ)
i. (a) When wave height subsides
removal can be implemented
ii. (b,c,d,e,g,i) In Situ techniques
other than covers and caps are
still developmental; mostly
untested and unproven
iii. (f,h) Partial removal must be
followed by Disposal or
Treatment and Disposal and
limiting conditions on
these categories must also
be considered (see ii, above,
for comments on In Situ)
(a,b) [see row 1, column C, a through h]
(c,d,e,i) [see ii, above]
(f,g) [see iii, above]
(h) [see iii, above]
(c,d,e,i) [see ii, above]
(f,g)°[see iii, above]
(h) [see iii, above]
Partial removal of contaminant "hot spots" may be applicable if its implementation meets response objectives.
pitsrdikes,rafdrberms^mP°rary COntainmenF techniques including covers, caps, ditches, trenches, dikes, curtains
6?srrelat"veirslo;?" rem°Val "^ '"^^ COnCainraent. ™? be -PPlicable if rate at which material is moving
4-7
-------
FIGURE 4-3. EXAMPLE WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE CATEGORIES
I. Select the site scenario that characterizes the existing site
conditions (check one or both):
Contaminants are relatively stationary.
y Contaminants are mobile.
II. As identified in Table 4-1, Column B, the preferred response category,
or "train" of categories, is as follows:
(1)
(2)
C--GffTi
ilf>t Mce/t
1
(3)
(4)
III. Applicability of the preferred response category:
Ilia. Is containment necessary for implementation of removal
(circle one)?
/Yes)(go to IHb) No (go to IIIc)
Illb. Is containment applicable (circle one)?
(Yes\go to IIIc) No (go to IVa & d)
IIIc. Is immediate and total removal physically applicable
(circle one)? ^_^
Yes (go to Hid) f No $gO to IVa, b & c)
Hid. Does removed material require treatment? (circle one)?.
Yes (go to Hie) No (go to Hlf)
Hie. Is treatment applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to Illf) No (go to IVd)
(continued)
4-8
-------
FIGURE 4-3. (continued)
Illf. Is disposal of removed material or treatment residuals
necessary (circle one)?
Yes (go to IHg) No (go to Illh)
Illg. Is disposal applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to Illh) No (go to IVa & d)
Illh. The preferred response category is applicable at the site. The
reasons for its applicability are as follows:
IV. Other Response Categories:
IVa. Summarize the reasons why the preferred response category is
not applicable at the site.
IVb.
Is immediate partial removal applicable (circle one)?
^YesJ(go to IVbl) No (go t IVc)
IVbl. Does partially removed material require treatment?
(circle one)?
/Yes/go to IVb2) No (go to IVb3)
IVb2. Is treatment applicable (circle one)?
Aes^(go to IVb3) No (go to IVd)
IVb3. Is disposal necessary (circle one)?
^Yes)(go to IVb4) No (go to V)
IVb4. Is disposal applicable (circle one)?
^-\
Yes ygo to V) No (go to IVd)
(continued)
4-9
-------
FIGURE 4-3. (continued)
IVc. Can removal be temporarily delayed (circle one)?
Yes (go to Hid) ^No}go to Ivd>
IVd. Is in situ response applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to V) /No^(go to IVe)
IVe. "No action" should be considered.
' (go to V)
V. Based on existing site conditions, the following other response catego-
ries are applicable at the site:
o Partial removal (accompanied by treatment and/or disposal)
o Removal implementation delay
o In situ, treatment/isolation
o No action possible
(go to VI)
VI. Summary:
Via. The following response categories are applicable at the site:
o Containment «r
o Removal
o Treatment
o Disposal
o In situ treatment/isolation
o No action
Vlb. Comments:
i£L
'M
on
e. Of
are*
**'(
e.4#
f>m
4-10
-------
stationary. The second substep refers to Table 4-1, Column B, and identifies
the preferred response category that corresponds to the appropriate site
scenario. As indicated in Column B, the preferred response category for
any site scenario involves removal of all contaminated material. In any
situation, when removal of contaminated materials is applicable under the
existing conditions and the established objectives can be met, the removal
of the contaminants and the contaminated material is the preferred response.
With the removal category being the preferred response, the third sub-
step determines the applicability of the removal category. This determina-
tion is based on both physical and chemical site conditions that limit
removal, and conditions affecting the applicability of the removal cate-
gory's ancillary response categories, namely containment, treatment, and
disposal. In any situation where removal is considered, one or more of
these three ancillary categories will also be necessary to complete the
site response. For this reason, the applicability of these categories will
affect the applicability of removal.
Substep 3 involves two phases of analysis. In the first phase, the
user refers to Table 4-1, Column C, for information regarding limiting site
conditions with respect to the preferred removal category. When the removal
category is still applicable in light of the limiting conditions identified
in Column C, then the user must move to the second phase of the decision
process, which involves reviewing the applicability of the ancillary response
categories that may be necessary. Where ancillary responses are necessary,
and none are applicable, then removal will also not be possible and must be
eliminated from further consideration. The limiting conditions for applica-
tion of these ancillary categories are given in Table 4-1, Column C.
As an example of this two-phased substep, removal is identified as
being applicable at a given site. However, no treatment or disposal facili-
ty exists that will accept the removed material, nor can any be constructed
on site. In such a situation, the removal category is determined to be
inapplicable. Another example is a case where site conditions are conducive
to removal and there is one disposal facility that will accept the material
if it is first treated to attain a specific contaminant level; if there is
no treatment technique available that will meet the specified contaminant
levels, then the removal category must again be identified as inapplicable.
A final example involves a situation where bottom materials are highly
mobile. In such a case, containment would be necessary to control contami-
nant movement and to remove contaminants. If conditions are such that con-
tainment cannot be accomplished, then removal also cannot be accomplished.
The overall decision process to determine the applicability of the
removal response category is illustrated in Figure 4-4. If removal is
applicable at a site, then the user moves directly on to Step 2 (described
in Section 4.2). Where removal is not applicable, the user continues to
Substep 4 of Step 1. In Substep 4, the user refers to Table 4-1, Columns D
and E, which identify other potential response categories and corresponding
limiting site conditions for each site scenario. Comments regarding the
other response categories are given in Table 4-1, Column F. In cases where
4-11
-------
FIGURE 4-4. DECISION PROCESS TO DETERMINE APPLICABILITY OF
REMOVAL RESPONSE CATEGORY
No
1
N3
Yes ' Yes
in IA r.uhiT ... — ^> Is Containment Necessary and ^ |- Containmari
Is Hemoval Applicable? *> Required Prior to Removal? ^ is uomamnw.
iN° XT
/v"
s
Is Treatment Required? ^^
y \°
XSStt .s Disposal Applicable?
/
Yes / No
/
Preferred Response
V
No V*
\
Preferred Response
\
Jr Yes No ^
Preferred No Action Possible
•Response
t Applicable?
No
-------
one or more of the other response categories are applicable at the site,
the user moves to Step 2 (Section 4.2). As stated earlier, in a situation
where no action-oriented category is applicable, implying that no response
is possible under the existing site conditions, then the "no action" cate-
gory is the sole option and the response selection process is complete
without undertaking Steps 2, 3, and 4.
4.1.2 Alternatives to the Removal Response Category
The response categories consist of a variety of techniques that are
applicable in different situations; however, certain site characteristics
may limit their applicability. The site-related limiting conditions that
affect applicability fall within these factor groups:
• Water conditions
- Wave height
- Depth to bottom
Water velocity
- Volume of water
* Site accessibility
• Volume of material
• Availability of treatment and/or disposal facility
• Chemical characteristics of material
Compatibility with sealant, grout, etc.
Treatability
• Physical nature of bottom materials
• State of development (proven applicability).
Table 4-1, presented previously, describes these factors in more detail
in terms of the site-specific limiting conditions for each of the four site
scenarios. In cases where limiting site conditions for the removal category
and its ancillary categories are identified, other response categories are
then considered. Table 4-1 identifies other response categories that may
apply for each site condition that limits the use of the removal response.
These other responses include in situ treatment and isolation techniques,
partial removal, and implementation delay.
The most important factor to consider in determining the applicability
of in situ treatment and isolation techniques is whether previous applica-
tions have been successful. Most of the available in situ techniques
described in this handbook are currently being developed and have not
4-13
-------
been implemented at sinker spill sites. Their effectiveness is not proven
and they are infrequently selected for such sites. The techniques that
fall within this category include many of the sealants, grouts, sorbents,
gels, and chemical and biological treatment techniques. Appendix E provides
further detail on the in situ category.
Partial removal is considered to be an alternative to total removal in
cases where all site conditions are conducive for removal, but where the
volume of material to be removed, treated, and disposed, or removed and
disposed is so large that costs would prohibit implementation of total
removal. In cases such as these, it may be possible to remove only those
areas with high contaminant concentrations ("hot spots") and still meet
established response objectives; additional measures, such as in situ tech-
niques, may be necessary to treat or to control remaining contaminants.
The issue of whether partial removal will meet previously established
response objectives enters into the decision process at this point. The
modification of response objectives may be considered at this step in the
response selection process; however, it is recommended that the decision to
modify not be made until specific response alternatives have been developed
(Step 3) and evaluated (Step 4), at which time the specific limitations of
the alternatives have been thoroughly investigated.
Implementation delay is an alternative to the removal response when
site conditions that preclude implementation of removal are only temporary,
such as the case' where a severe storm is disturbing the site area or
receding of tides may improve access. Once adverse conditions have passed,
the response can be undertaken.
4.1.3 Process Summary
In summary, results of Step 1 in the response selection process will
be the identification of one or more of the six response categories that
are applicable under existing site conditions. By closely examining the
site conditions and by using Table 4-1, certain response categories can be
screened out and eliminated from further consideration. The response
categories that are identified as applicable under all existing site-
specific conditions are those that will be developed and evaluated further
in the steps that follow.
4.2 SCREENING OF RESPONSE TECHNIQUES
In Step 2, the applicable response categories identified from the
screening conducted in Step 1 are examined in further detail. Step 2
involves the screening of the response techniques that constitute each
applicable response category. Response techniques include equipment,
materials, and methods that are available for either removing or for
4-14
-------
containing hazardous materials in the surface water body. The purpose of
Step 2 is to identify those techniques within each applicable category that
are applicable under the existing site conditions and to eliminate those
techniques that are not applicable.
The screening process in Step 2 uses a much larger spectrum of site-
and technique-specific data than Step 1. Table 4-2 lists the site-related
and technological factors that affect the applicability of each category of
response techniques. Some of the factors are the same as those used in
Step 1; however, the Step 2 screening process involves a much more detailed
examination of technological limitations and analysis of the limiting site
conditions.
For example, the transportability of a piece of removal equipment could
potentially be an important factor in deciding the equipment's applicability
at a particular site. If the site is not directly accessible, a piece of
equipment that cannot be easily transported would not be considered to be
applicable.
Table 4-2 lists the critical factors that affect the application of the
response techniques and is included here as a tool to be used in conjunction
with the more detailed information included in the appendices. Figure 4-5
is an example completed worksheet that is designed to facilitate documenta-
tion and accurate record keeping of the applicability of the various response
techniques. A blank worksheet is provided in Appendix I. Space is provided
on the worksheet for comments regarding reasons for the applicability or
inapplicability of each technique.
The techniques in each applicable response category are evaluated
separately. No consideration is given at this point as to how techniques in
different categories might work together. The evaluation process involves
the comparison of techniques within a given category in terms of the
criteria listed in Table 4-2. Detailed descriptions of individual tech-
niques, with respect to these criteria, are given in Appendices A through
E. The relative importance of the individual criteria in Step 2 analysis
will depend on site-specific characteristics.
In addition to the techniques within the categories listed in Table
4-2, the "no action" response still exists as an option. It may not have
been possible during Step 1 to determine whether an applicable response for
a site existed. During Step 2, when detailed technical information regard-
ing each technique is examined, the question of whether a response can be
made at a site can be better answered.
The result of Step 2 is the identification of one or more groups of
techniques that are applicable under existing site conditions. These
techniques are then combined into comprehensive alternatives during Step 3.
4-15
-------
TABLE 4-2. TECHNOLOGY SCREENING CRITERIA
FOR ACTION RESPONSE CATEGORIES
Response Category
Site-Related and Technological Factors Affecting
Technology Application
I, Containment
Techniques
II, Removal
Techniques
Depth of water
Water velocity
Water volume
Bottom currents
Availability of equipment
Performance
- effectiveness
- useful life
Reliability
- operation and maintenance
- demonstrated performance
Waste compatibility
Time availability
Space (area) availability
Safety
Volume of material
Depth of water
Width of channel
Precision obtainable
Rate of production
Turbidity/Resuspension
Availability
Transportability
Slurry solids content
Auxiliary facilities required
Performance
- effectiveness
- useful life
Reliability
— operation and maintenance
- demonstrated performance
Safety
Urgency with which response must be made
Vessel draft
Hindrance to traffic
Method of discharge
Maximum wave height tolerance
(continued)
4-16
-------
TABLE 4-2. (continued)
Response Category
Site-Related and Technological Factors Affecting
Technology Application
III. Treatment
Techniques
for Removed
Materials
IV. Disposal
Techniques
V. In Situ
Treatment
and Isolation
Techniques
Ability to operate near structures
Ability to operate in open water
Ability to dredge consolidated sediments
Susceptibility to debris damage
•Suitability for liquid or solid removal
Treatment system mobility
Land area to construct facility
Groundwater protection requirements
Pretesting requirements for system optimization
Suitability for chemical constituents
(e.g., treatability)
Solids concentration
•Treatment component availability
•Operation and maintenance requirements
Availability of appropriate treatment facilities
'Availability of nearby treatment facilities
Safety
Land area to construct facility
Regulatory restrictions (storage, transport,
disposal) for on-site and off-site facilities
Regulatory design restrictions
Volume of materials
•Suitability for chemical constituents
Availability of nearby disposal facilities
Availability of appropriate disposal facilities
Safety
Sediment type
Waste compatability
Durability/strength
Permeability
Benthos sensitivity
Reactivity with water
Performance
- effectiveness
- useful life
Reliability
- operation and maintenance
- demonstrated performance
(continued)
4-17
-------
Sediments
- Land disposal
- Open water disposal
Water
- Discharge to surface water
- Land application
- Deep well injection
Treatment residuals
- Land disposal
- Incineration
- Land application
- Deep well injection
FIGURE 4-5. (continued)
Treatment Techniques for Removed Material
Sediment/water separation
- Settling basins
- Hydraulic classifiers
- Spiral classifiers
- Cyclones
- Filters
Sediment dewatering
- High-rate gravity settlers
- Centrifuges
- Belt press filters
- Vacuum filters
- Pressure filters
Water treatment
- Adsorption
- Ultrafiltration
— Reverse osmosis
- Ion exchange
- Biological treatment
- Precipitation
- Wet air oxidation
- Ozonation
- Ultraviolet radiation
- Discharge to publicly owned
treatment works
Sediment treatment
- Contaminant immobilization
- Contaminant treatment
Disposal Techniques
(continued)
4-20
-------
Figure 4-5. (continued)
In Situ Treatment and Isolation Techniques
Treatment
- Sorption
- Chemical treatment
- Biological treatment
Isolation
- Capping
- Covering
- Fixation
4-21
-------
4.3 DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES
In Steps 1 and 2, a determination is made as to which response cate-
gories are applicable and which techniques within those categories are
applicable under existing site conditions. The result of Steps 1 and 2
consists of one or more groups of techniques, depending on the number of
applicable categories, which can potentially be used at the site. In
Step 3, these applicable techniques are used to develop response alterna-
tives.
Alternatives development is the formation of compatible and applicable
combinations of response techniques, each of which contributes to meeting
established response objectives. An alternative consists of one or more
techniques from one or more response categories. The purpose of Step 3
is to develop several alternatives, all of which substantially meet the
established response objectives. The development of each alternative
involves combining applicable categories and techniques; however, the
objective of this effort is to derive only those combinations that will
meet site response objectives. In other words, the objective of Step 3
is not to develop as many alternatives as are possible, but rather to
develop only those alternatives that can potentially achieve the objectives
established earlier in the spill response process (see Section 3).
4.3.1 Combination of Response Categories
There are seven possible approaches, or combinations of response
categories, that define the general alternatives that can be derived. These
are:
• Removal - Disposal
• Removal - Treatment - Disposal
• In Situ Treatment/Isolation
• Containment - In Situ Treatment/Isolation
• Containment - Removal - Disposal
• Containment - Removal - Treatment - Disposal
• No Action.
For a particular site situation, the applicability of one or more of
these approaches will depend on the determination made in Step 1 regarding
the applicability of the available categories. For example, if removal,
treatment, and disposal were identified in Step 1 as the only applicable
4-22
-------
categories, then at this point in Step 3, only the following three approaches
would be identified for use in alternatives development:
e Removal - Disposal
• Removal - Treatment - Disposal
• No Action.
The "no action" approach will remain an alternative throughout the
selection process for any site situation because the possibility that "no
action may be the best response will remain until the detailed evaluation
is conducted in Step 4.
4*3.2 Combination of Techniques to Form Alternatives
Following the identification of potential approaches for the site the
next part of Step 3 involves the examination of applicable techniques with-
in the categories that constitute the identified approaches. The purpose
of this examination is to identify and combine those techniques that
together as one alternative, will substantially meet response objectives
It should be noted that the user is not obligated to use all of the
applicable techniques identified in Step 2. There may be applicable tech-
niques that, when combined with.techniques from other categories, are
either unnecessary or do not aid in achieving response objectives. In
these types of situations, such techniques should not be included in the
alternatives.
Every alternative developed will consist of one or more techniques
depending on the general approach and response category involved. For '
example, if the removal-treatment-disposal approach were applicable at the
site, the alternatives representative of this approach would consist of at
least three techniques, i.e., one technique from each category. However
often more than one technique from one response category may be used in a
single alternative. This is frequently the case when treatment and disposal
are necessary as part of a response. For example, a hydraulic dredge might
be applicable at a site to remove contaminated sediments. Treatment tech-
niques would, in all likelihood, have to address both contaminated water
and contaminated sediments. In this situation, a response alternative
might involve a settling basin for the purpose of separating the water and
the sediments that are removed by the dredge, followed by filtration to
ensure solid/liquid separation. Water treatment might consist of carbon
adsorption. Sediment treatment would involve a different technique, such as
centrifugation of sediment removed from the settling basin. Disposal tech-
niques would also differ for the water and the sediments. Treated water
might be discharged to a nearby surface water body whereas the used carbon
would be disposed of at an appropriate off-site landfill. The treated
sediments, on the other hand, might be disposed of in an on-site landfill
As an alternative example, in a situation where removal is not applicable
4-23
-------
but in situ response applies, there might be a. single, applicable in situ
technTquTTisolation or treatment) that would meet .all established response
objectives.
The decisionmaking in Step 3 involves examining techniques in terms of
how they complement one another, their compatibility, and, most importantly,
whether the techniques, together as alternatives, will meet the previously
established response objectives. The result of Step 3 is one or more
alternatives that can meet response objectives. Figure 4-6 is an example
completed worksheet to be used as a tool during Step 3 to clearly present
the potential alternatives. A blank worksheet is provided in Appendix I.
The specific techniques proposed for each alternative should be listed under
the appropriate category heading. As explained earlier in this section,
there may be more than one technique required for any one alternative within
a single category. Therefore, in completing the worksheet shown in Figure
4-6, there may be several techniques listed under "Treatment" for Alternative
A or there may be more than one disposal technique necessary and so listed
in the "Disposal" column. The worksheet provides a clear and consistent
way of presenting the potential alternatives for a particular site.
The number of potential alternatives that result from Step 3 depends
on the site conditions and the established response objectives. In some
cases, it may not be possible to develop an alternative in Step 3 that will
meet response objectives. The "-no action" approach is still a viable
alternative at this point in any site situation. However, modification of
existing objectives should be considered prior to making a decision to take
no action. In situations where all combinations of techniques have been
explored and developed and the decision is made that "no action is possible
given the existing response objectives," then modification of the objectives
should be considered. Re-establishing objectives requires an in-depth
re-evaluation of response needs and the potential effects on human health^
and the environment of such a modification as compared to the effects of no
action." Only after this re-evaluation is conducted, and it is found that
some type of action is better than no action, should objectives be modified
and less effective response alternatives be evaluated. This will require
repeating Steps 2 and ,3 based on the new objectives.
The issue of "no action is best" may also arise at this point in the
selection process. If there are no alternatives that will meet the response
oblectives and modification of the objectives will make no significant
difference (e.g., implementation of all existing and applicable alternatives
will create a greater hazard than the hazard that existed prior to a
response), then the "no action" alternative should be selected. In such a
situation, the selection process would be complete at the end of Step J,
without having carried out Step 4.
Step 3 is complete when either all applicable alternatives that meet
the final response objectives have been developed or the decision is made
to take no action at all. In cases where alternatives that meet response
objectives are developed, these alternatives then undergo the detailed
evaluation described in Section 4.4.
4-24
-------
SECTION 5
DETERMINATION OF RESPONSE COMPLETION
The selected response to a spill of sinking hazardous substances is
implemented with the intention of accomplishing the response objectives.
However, the extent to which the objectives have been met can be difficult
to judge because of a lack of information on the status of the situation.
Although the response implementation may superficially appear to be complete
additional response effort may be warranted. A final response-related
activity is needed to make a determination of the "completeness" of the
implemented response. This activity, as indicated in Figure 5-1, is intended
to determine: (1) whether the response effectively mitigated the problems,
and (2) whether further response actions are needed.
The effectiveness of the response is generally determined through the
monitoring of site conditions following the response and comparing these
conditions with pre-response conditions. This comparison provides the
basis for determining the extent to which response objectives have been
met. This process is discussed in Section 5.1.
The judgment of the need for further response action is based on the
determination of response effectiveness. When response objectives have
clearly been met, the response can be considered complete, as indicated in
Figure 5-1. However, if the objectives have not been met and further
response action is needed, the response selection and implementation process
must be repeated until objectives have been substantially met and no further
response action is needed. Only then is the response considered complete.
This process is discussed in Section 5.2.
5.1 ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSE EFFECTIVENESS
The assessment of the effectiveness of response measures that have
been implemented at a site requires the following:
• Pre-response site background data (collected earlier in the
response process, see Section 2)
• Response objectives (developed earlier in the response process
see Section 3)
• Post-response site data.
5-1
-------
FIGURE 5-1. SEQUENCE OF RESPONSE EVENTS
Characterize Spill and
Impacts
Need
Any
Response
No Response
Indicated
Need
Immediate
Response
1
Define Immediate
Response Objectives
Identify and Select
Immediate Response
Alternatives
Define Response
Objectives
Develop and Evaluate
Response Alternatives
Select Preferred
Response Alternative
Implement Response 1^
5-2
-------
Post-response site data remain to be collected at this point in the
process and are discussed in Section 5.1.1. These data are then compared
with pre-response (i.e., before cleanup) site data to determine what
improvements the response has accomplished. These post-response conditions
are then compared with the response objectives, which were essentially the
"desired effects" to be accomplished. These comparisons are discussed in
Section 5.1.2. .
5.1.1 Data Collection
The collection of post-response site data is accomplished using many
of the same data-collection techniques that are used to characterize a
spill and to determine response needs (see Sections 2 and 3). Monitoring
will generally be necessary in order to measure the effects of the response.
Monitoring techniques are discussed in detail in Section 2.3.2.1. Sampling
and analysis, direct instrument measurement, and remote sensing may all be
applicable to this purpose.
The technique used to initially characterize the contamination will
often be the most appropriate for monitoring the cleanup. However, the
sensitivity of the technique to relatively low concentrations that are
likely to remain following a response must be considered. For example,
visual observation of the presence :of elemental mercury or polychlorinated
biphenyl (PCS) oils may be used .for pre-response analysis in defining zones
of contamination, and sampling and analysis may be needed to monitor post-
response residual concentrations. After response measures have been applied
and time has passed at a spill site, any remaining problem most likely will
not be easily observed by sight. Therefore, the focus of post-response
data collection will be on sampling and remote sensing as the primary data
collection methods. These methods are designed to detect low concentrations
and trace movement of contaminants and are therefore more suitable for
effectiveness monitoring.
The selection of the appropriate monitoring techniques for a particular
site depends on the initial extent of contamination and the exposure and
impacts identified for the site area and its inhabitants. The more extensive
and complex the contamination problem was initially, the greater the variety
of monitoring data will be required to determine the response effectiveness.
A variety of parameters may need to be monitored for post-response
site data, including:
« Contaminant levels in the water body (near the original spill site
and downstream)
• Contaminant levels remaining in the bottom materials
• Contaminant concentrations remaining (for exposure of humans,
plants, animals)
5-3
-------
• Integrity of any containment measures applied
• Effectiveness of treatment processes in removing or destroying
chemicals of concern.
The specific parameter measurements required for evaluating response
effectiveness depends on the initial contamination problem and the selected
response measures.
In cases where both bottom materials and surface water were initially
contaminated, data collection for an effectiveness assessment would involve
both sediment sampling and surface water. Similarly, both sediments and
water should be sampled in cases where there was initially only sediment
contamination, but where removal, caused resuspension and subsequent surface
water contamination or where partial removal of contaminants was conducted.
5.1.2 Assessment of Meeting Response Objectives
The post—response site data, when compared with the pre-response data,
allow an assessment of the extent to which response objectives have been
met. Post-response data can be compared to: (1) the pre-contamination
situation to assess to what extent the site has been "restored"; (2) the
post-contamination, but pre-response -situation, to assess the extent of
contaminant removal; (3) regulatory or subjectively selected numerical
cleanup criteria; or (4) some combination of the three. The situation and
criteria used for the comparison is entirely dependent on what was used as
the basis for developing the original response objectives.
In some cases, particularly where numerical criteria are applied, the
assessment of meeting response objectives is relatively straightforward.
For example, for the response objective of "Remove contaminated bottom
materials to the deeper of: (1) a two-foot cut, or (2) contaminant concen-
trations not exceeding 50 ppm," monitoring can be conducted to determine
whether the criteria have absolutely been met. However, if zones remain
where the criteria have not been met, a judgment must be made as to whether
the criteria have substantially been met. Similarly, non-numerical objec-
tives and numerical objectives for which data are not available require
a further degree of judgment in deciding whether response objectives have
been met. These comparisons and judgments are integral to determining
whether further actions are needed.
5.2 .DETERMINATION OF NEED FOR FURTHER RESPONSE
If the post-response assessment reveals that the response objectives
have not been satisfactorily met and residual contamination continues to
pose a hazard, there is cause to consider the need for further response
action. This situation is similar to the recognition of the need for "any
5-4
-------
response", as occurred earlier in the response decisionmaking process (see
Figure 3-1 and Section 3). Should further response be necessary, the
response selection process should be repeated, as indicated in Figure 5-1.
This repeated process begins with redefining the response objectives,
which is conducted as described in Sections 3.2 and 3.3. The objectives
may remain identical to those objectives established for the already-
implemented responses, or the objectives may be modified because of changed
circumstances or because the original objectives have been found to be
overly stringent, unachievable, or impractical.
Based on available site data and redefined objectives, response
techniques and alternatives (including "no action") are screened, developed,
and selected, as described in Section 4. The selected alternative is
implemented and its effectiveness is monitored for meeting the redefined
objectives, as described in Section 5.1.
If the redefined response objectives have been met, the response may be
considered to be complete. If the redefined objectives have not been met,
the process described in Section 5.2 is repeated until the response is
judged to be complete (i.e., the objectives have been met).
5-5
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
CONTAINMENT TECHNIQUES
In responding to a spill or discharge of sinking substances, prompt
containment of the material is often of primary concern. Containment
measures can be implemented to minimize damage to the environment until a
permanent response is determined and implemented. In some cases, permanent
containment of contaminants is appropriate; this method is discussed in
Appendix E, .In jtitu Treatment and Isolation Techniques.
There are two reasons for applying containment techniques at a spill
site. The first reason is to protect adjacent areas that have not been
contaminated by the discharge. The second reason is to minimize the amount
of contaminated material and the corresponding response effort.
A number of containment techniques are suitable for temporary or short-
term use. These techniques (discussed in this appendix) include containment
curtains, trenches and pits, dikes and berms, temporary covers, pneumatic
barriers, floating breakwaters, and cofferdams.
A.I CONTAINMENT CURTAINS
A. 1.1 Description
In general, a containment curtain consists of a flexible skirt supported
by foam jacket floats. Ballast is provided using weights, chains, or a tube
filled with water. By reducing the flotation and increasing the weight of
the ballast, the curtain will sink. The curtain is then anchored to the
bottom of the water body to contain the spill. This type of containment
curtain has been custom-made by various manufacturers to contain spills of
sinking substances.
There are several ways of configuring containment curtains, depending
on the size and location of the spill. Figure A-l illustrates the most
common configurations. One configuration is a closed system, which may be
a full circle, an ellipse, or open-ended and attached to shore, as shown.
Another configuration is an open system, which is often used in situations
where the curtain must be moved frequently, such as in rivers with heavy
boat traffic (JBF Scientific 1978).
A-l
-------
FIGURE A-1. APPLICATIONS OF CONTAINMENT CURTAINS TO
CONTROL RESUSPENDED MATERIAL
Containment
Curtain (Open-
Configuration)
Contaminated
Contaminant
Contaminant '-.'(
Plume
Containment
Curtain
(Closed
Configuration)
Stream Flow
Non-Contaminated
Area to be Protected
Top View
Top of Stream Bank
Contaminant
Plume
Buoyant
Float
Stream
Bed
Section View
A-2
-------
Several variations of containment curtain systems are commercially
available. These include the use of different grades of permeable mesh
curtain that allow water to flow fully through the curtain while retaining
the spilled substance, preventing the curtain from flailing or liftinc
around the edges. s
Containment curtains are deployed directly into the water from shipping
containers by pulling one end away from the container using a small boa?
Once in the water, the curtain is moved to the deployment position by towing
^J f ,3 ^°at* Curtains tow easllv at 2 to 3 knots and track well
behind the tow boat through normal maneuvering. Curtains over 2000 feet
long have been towed in this manner (Hand et al. 1978).
A. 1.2 Applications
Containment curtains are used to contain and control spills or dis-
charges of materials into a water body and to control resuspension of
sediments during dredging operations. They are best suited to application
in quiescent waters, such as low-current, near-shore areas of rivers and
harbors. However, containment curtain systems have been applied effectively
S f^l^l4 WindS' 6-f°0t ^ ^ in — depths up to
Containment curtains (as well as other containment techniques) are
also best applied to spills that are relatively confined. If the spill has
already dispersed greatly to surrounding areas, the usefulness of the
containment curtain for protecting non-contaminated areas and for minimizing
tne amount of contaminated material is limited.
A. 1 . 3 Limitations^
Containment curtains cannot be effectively used in swift currents and
high wave action. The effectiveness of a containment curtain decreases as
the current velocity in the area increases, due to curtain flare that
causes resuspension of sediments. A practical upper limit for current
velocity is approximately 1.5 feet per second (Hand et al. 1978). In
waters with significant wave action, there is a tendency for near-surface
spilled materials to overtop the barrier.
A. 1.4 japecial Requirements /Considerations
Containment curtains must be deployed from a support vessel, which
can also be used for periodically repositioning the curtain. Costs associ-
ated with containment curtains are medium relative to other containment
techniques.
A-3
-------
A.2 TRENCHES
A.2.1 Description
Trenches are areas of sediment excavation in the bottom of a water
body. The configuration of a trench can vary from long and narrow (such
as a utility trench), as shown in Figure A-2, to short and wide (such as a
pit). Trenches can be excavated with conventional digging and dredging
equipment (described in Appendix B, Removal Techniques).
Trenches contain sinking contaminants and sediments by: (1) increasing
the local cross-section of flow, thereby decreasing flow velocity and
encouraging settling, (2) providing a low-lying area that allows settling
to a level below the normal level of bed transport, and (3) providing a
storage volume for trapped substances. In effect, a containment trench is
a temporary in-stream settling basin.
Trenches are generally excavated downstream of a spill and perpendicular
to the direction of flow. However, some trenches are dug both upstream and
downstream of a spill, such as in areas of reversing tidal flow. In some
cases, such as harbors or shallow open waters, trenches are dug completely
around a spill (Hand et al. 1978). Trenches may be used to arrest movement
of a spill or a discharge in order to protect adjacent areas from becoming
contaminated; they may also be used to facilitate subsequent cleanup of the
site by minimizing the amount of contaminated material. Containment of
spills with trenches can also be used as a remedial action technique in
conjunction with treatment techniques, such as neutralization, precipitation,
or the application of cover materials (see Appendix E).
A.2.2 Applications
Trenches are best suited to use in rivers or other water bodies with
predictable currents. This is necessary in order to achieve proper placement
of the trenches to interrupt the transport of contaminated sediments.
Trenching is most readily accomplished in water bodies with relatively calm
currents, although some special equipment can operate in extreme sea
conditions (Banzoli et al. 1976). Generally, trenches can be excavated in
any type of sediment, although clays and silts provide better stability
than coarser sediments.
Two physical characteristics of the spilled substance or the contami-
nated sediments are important in evaluating the applicability of trenching:
specific gravity (substance must be a sinker) and particle size (which is
related to settling velocity). Relatively wide trenches are needed to
contain spilled substances and sediments with relatively low specific
gravity and/or small particle size. Conversely, narrow trenches may be
used for "heavy" substances and/or those with large particle size.
A-4
-------
FIGURE A-2. APPLICATION OF A SPILL CONTAINMENT TRENCH
TO CONTROL SINKING SUBSTANCES
Trench Across
Stream Bed
Contaminant
•; Plume \ . .•.••;...'. .-.'•
' .'•;•/.'. :. '•' T Contaminant/.' :
'. • • '-.'••'*'• Sediment -^
' •'. •'.'.•' •• •'.' • Deposition.
Non-Contaminated
Area to be
Protected
Stream Flow
Top View
• Top of Stream Bank
Contaminated
Area
Contaminant/
Sediment
Deposition
Section View
A-5
-------
Conventional dredging and its associated equipment can be used for
trench excavation (discussed in Appendix B). More specialized excavating
equipment may also be used, although its availability is limited. This
equipment includes underwater ploughs and submersible trenchers.
A number of underwater ploughs can be used for trenching and are
effective'for excavating trenches up to 10 feet deep. Generally, they are
suitable for use only in silty clays. .Underwater ploughs can also be used
to cover over trenches after a spill has been contained (Reynolds, Seamans,
and Van der Steen 1977).
Various types of submersible trenchers may also be used for excavating
operations. They include both manned and unmanned models. Submersible
trenchers offer a high degree of operational control and can be used in
very deep waters (up to 650 feet). Thus, they are able to operate in
extreme sea conditions. More sophisticated submersible trenchers employ a
mechanical/hydraulic dredging system, combining the action of cutterheads
and suction pumps to enable trencher operation in sediments of varying
characteristics. Some submersible trenchers can dig trenches up to 13 feet
deep with a trench width of 25 feet at the mud line and 13 feet at the
bottom (Banzoli et al. 1976).
A.2.3 Limitations
Trenching may be impractical in spill situations where one or more of
the following conditions exist:
• Hard bed materials (e.g., rock, hardpan, etc.).
» Soft or granular bed materials that tend to flow and collapse
when excavated.
• High water body velocity or currents where positioning and
maneuvering of equipment would be difficult or where little
settling would occur.
• High natural rates of sediment transport that may rapidly exhaust
the trench capacity with non-contaminated materials.
* Extensive area of contamination, requiring large lengths and
volumes of trench excavation.
A.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Resuspension of bottom materials can result from in-stream trenching,
and secondary containment methods may be warranted. Support equipment,
such as trucks and barges, may be needed for hauling excavated trench
A-6
-------
materials from the stream. Costs associated with containment trenches are
low relative to other containment techniques.
A. 3 DIKES
A.3.1 Description
Dikes, as applied to containment of spilled substances that sink, are
underwater embankments of materials placed on the bed of a water body
Dikes are generally constructed of earthen material, sand bags, or some
other material that can be mounded and that can maintain structural
integrity. Dikes can be installed using conventional excavation and earth-
moving equipment. Manual placement is possible in small-scale, shallow
applications. Specialized underwater ploughs or bulldozers can also be
used for trenching.
Dikes contain sinking contaminants and sediments in a manner similar
to that of containment trenches, i.e., effectively creating a temporary
in-stream settling basin. The effects of dikes on the water body and
sediment transport are: (1) raising the local water level upstream of the
dike, thereby increasing the cross-section of flow, decreasing flow velocitv
and encouraging settling; (2) providing a trapping, low-lying area (relative
to the top of the dike) upstream of the dike that allows settling of sinking
materials; and (3) providing a storage volume for trapped substances.
As a temporary control measure, dikes create the effect of a holding
pond or reservoir, which prevents flow downstream and also promotes the
settling of fine particles. Contaminated sediments can later be removed
from the restricted area or can be treated in place.
Dikes generally extend across a stream channel, perpendicular to the
direction of flow. Figure A-3 illustrates such a configuration. In some
cases, dikes are built parallel to a river or a stream bank to prevent
contaminated deposits along a river bank from entering the deeper river
channel and traveling downstream.
A.3.2 Applications
As a temporary containment measure, dikes are best suited for use in
drainage ditches or small streams with low flow and low volume. However
shallow, submerged dikes may also be used to temporarily prevent bottom '
spreading of a spill or to minimize erosional losses of cap material after a
capping operation. Dikes are also used to minimize erosion of contaminated
deposits along the banks of streams and rivers in order to minimize the
amount of contaminated material entering the river and spreading further.
A-7
-------
FIGURE A-3. APPLICATION OF A SPILL CONTAINMENT DIKE TO
CONTROL SINKING SUBSTANCES
Top View
Top of Stream Bank
Contaminated
Area
Contaminant
Plume
Dike Across
Stream Bed
Non-Contaminated
Area to be
Protected
L-*. Contaminant/
'. '.''Sediment.
• -Deposition
//////////
.ii.-v .-.•:-. -•- •-"-•• j!'-.'^': i*: V
Contaminant/
Sediment
Deposition
Dike
Section View
A-8
-------
.nlll
spill
Well/Uited to situations in which prompt containment of a
discharge is necessary because they can be constructed quickly
' ^ t0°1S' fr°nt-end 10a or dredging
As a permanent containment measure, dikes can be combined with
°ther methods for stabilizing contaminated
A. 3.3 Limitations
continuous dike of adequate structural integrity has been constructed.
e
A'3*4 Special Requirements/Considerations
dltes
A. 4 COFFERDAMS
A.4.1 Description
«u>,.nnn ? ^ arS barrlers that ar^ Placed in a stream to cut off a
section of the stream and to divert partial or full water flow t
pipe or an excavated channel to re-enter the stream channel at a
m^re of t^ollTi ^^ Stream di—ion can be u"J ?or o or
more 01 tne rollowing purposes:
* thrstreamSbed?m rel°Cation to allow extensive rehabilitation of
A-9
-------
• Hydraulic isolation of contaminants or sediments in order to:
- Facilitate treatment or removal of contaminants or sediments
- Eliminate exposure of the downstream water column to the
contaminants.
Cofferdams may be constructed of a variety of materials, including
soil, sheet piling, earth-filled sheet pile cells, and sand bags. Sheet-
pile cofferdams are generally constructed of black steel sheeting from
5 to 12 gauge in thickness and from 4 to 40 feet in length. They may be
single walled or cellular and earth-filled in sections. Single-wall,
sheet-pile cofferdams are most applicable for shallow water flows. For
depths greater than 5 feet, cellular cofferdams are recommended.
There are various configurations of stream diversion schemes using
cofferdam construction, depending on the desired effect. For example,
Figure A-4 illustrates full-stream flow diversion using two cofferdams and
a diversion channel in order to allow sediment dewatering and excavation
with conventional earth-moving equipment.
*
Another arrangement is shown in Figure A-5, which illustrates stream-
flow diversion for sediment excavation using a single cofferdam and taking
advantage of the proximity of the stream bank to the contaminated sediments.
A.4.2 Applications
Cofferdams are most easily constructed for flow containment or diver-
sion in shallow ports, streams, and rivers, or in water bodies with low-flow
velocities (less than 2 feet per second). Cofferdam construction may be
feasible for relatively wide and deep rivers (up to about 10 feet deep),
providing that the velocity of flow is not excessive (JRB 1982).
A.4.3 Limitations
Cofferdam construction is limited to water bodies with relatively low
volume and flow velocity, such as shallow ports, streams, and small rivers.
Where flow velocity exceeds 2 feet per second, cofferdam construction is
not recommended because of the difficulties in driving sheet piling and
placing and compacting soil embankments (JRB 1982).
A.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Cofferdams are most frequently used in stream diversion and in
dewatering of the working area. Some form of lining material (such as
pavement, rip rap, or piping) may be needed to protect diversion channels
A-10
-------
FIGURE A-4. STREAMFLOW DIVERSION FOR SEDIMENT EXCAVATION
USING TWO COFFERDAMS AND DIVERSION CHANNEL
Temporary Sheet Pile;
Remove After Construction of
Diversion Channel
Diversion
Channel
Temporary
Sheet-Pile
Riprap for
Outlet Protection
•^-^-^-^-^ - - ^fc^^UJSaP^tf^tfaifaS^^,^
ESSi JkUpstream Cofferdam'^
V*^^>
-------
FIGURE A-5. STREAMFLOW DIVERSION FOR SEDIMENT EXCAVATION
USING SINGLE COFFERDAM
Stream
Bank
Area of
Sediment
Dewatering
and
Excavation
Adapted from: JRB Associates, 1982
A-12
-------
from scour. Dewatering of the working area is generally accomplished by
continuous or periodic pumping. Pumping is also sometimes used to divert
flow around the working area.
The Environmental Emergency Response Unit of the EPA at Edison,
New Jersey, has available a mobile stream diversion unit for such operations,
which consists of submersible pumps, booster pumps, generators, a crane, and'
aluminum irrigation pipe with ancillary fittings. The system is capable
of pumping 5,600 gallons per minute for a distance of 1,000 feet over level
terrain. Additional capacity can be provided with supplemental pipine and
pumps (USEPA 1980).
A.5 PNEUMATIC BARRIERS
A.5.1 Description
A pneumatic barrier, or air barrier, is created by a curtain of rising
air bubbles that spread laterally in the water body. Artificially induced
water currents are generated by the air curtain that counter the normal
currents, thus confining suspended sediments or spilled substances within a
desired boundary. An illustration of a pneumatic barrier is shown in
Figure A-6. •
The barrier is deployed by laying a weighted perforated header pipe on
a river or harbor bottom in a configuration similar to that employed for
containment curtains (see Section A.I and Figure A-l). Compressed air is
transmitted from blowers or air compressors through a flexible feed line to
the header pipe. The air is forced through the header pipe and is released
to the water column through the perforations.
A.5.2 Applications
The conventional application of pneumatic barriers is control of
turbidity generated during dredging operations. Pneumatic barriers are
similarly applied in the removal of spilled substances and contaminated
sediments in order to contain suspended contaminants within a confined
area. Pneumatic barriers are also used at a spill site to prevent suspended
particles from moving downstream until another response can be implemented.
Because pneumatic barriers can be deployed quickly, they are particularly
suited to situations demanding immediate action.
Pneumatic barriers can be applied in water bodies that are fairly
quiescent. They are most efficient when used in deep waters because
shallow water demands a greater volume of air for effective operation.
A-l 3
-------
FIGURE A-6. CROSS-SECTION OF A PNEUMATIC BARRIER
APPLICATION
Water
Surface
[^-Turbulent Zone-*>|
^Blower or Air Compressor
Aboard Support Vessel
Air Bubbles
Area to
/""~ Protected
Rising Water Column
/ Suspended 't
/ Material
Compressed
Air Feed
Line
Perforated
Header
Pipe
Stream Bed
Adapted from: Seymour, 1976
A-14
-------
Pneumatic barriers are also well suited for use in waters with boat
traffic because their presence does not impede navigation.
A. 5.3 Limitations
Pneumatic barriers are not effective in water bodies with substantial
turbulence or current. The barrier is effective only if the current of the
water body and the wind do not overcome the forces created by the barrier.
Natural currents will affect the rising air plume by causing it to "lean,"
creating a flow pattern that will allow some of the suspended material to
escape the barrier. This problem can be overcome to some extent by in-
creasing the velocity of the rising air bubbles. However, for a given
nozzle, there is a critical velocity above which additional increases in air
volume have little effect on the artificially generated current. Pneumatic
barriers are not as efficient in shallow water because greater volumes of
air are necessary to maintain an effective curtain.
A.5.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Pneumatic barriers utilize air compressors or blowers, which require a
nominal supply of energy (electricity, fuel oil, gasoline, etc.) for
operation. In larger, open water bodies, the compressor or blower can be
operated from a support vessel. Costs associated with pneumatic barriers
are medium relative to other containment techniques.
A.6 FLOATING BREAKWATERS
A.6.1 Description
Floating breakwaters consists of flotation devices, obstacles for
reducing wave energy, and a ballast structure for stability. Floating
breakwaters are used to reduce wave height and energy to facilitate spill
response and reduce dispersion of spilled substances.
One such device is a tethered float breakwater, as illustrated in
Figure A-7. In this breakwater system, individual buoyant floats are
tethered to a submerged, off-the-bottom ballast (a heavier-than-water slab
structure). The ballast section provides the mass to submerge the floats
to the desired freeboard and also maintains float spacing. Wave energy is
attenuated through the drag produced during the rapid and vigorous oscilla-
tions of the buoyant floats. The tether length is selected to provide a
natural frequency of oscillation that is of the same order as the frequency
of the wave action. Mooring lines are used to maintain the breakwater
within the desired location limits (Seymour 1976; Essoglou et al. 1975).
A-15
-------
FIGURE A-7. TETHERED FLOAT BREAKWATER
r
1B^^^ ^- Mooring Lines -s. i^L
x Floats V
o o •-
0 0 V
0 O O
o o o
o o o
o o o
^>_ Floats
Area to be
Protected
— — Ballast
^^^ .Ancnor
Plan View
Water Surface
v
TTTT1"IT-
/ \Ballast\
/ — — Mooring Lines ^ \
to Anchors
Section View
Adapted from: Seymour, 1976
A-16
-------
Some of the major features of the tethered float breakwater are:
• The level of protection can be selected to meet specific site
requirements. Modular construction allows tailoring to meet
the specified transmitted wave height limit.
• Performance is predictable if the wave characteristics are known.
® Performance is independent of the mooring system and therefore is
independent of depth. The breakwater will give full protection
while floating free.
• The small total mass and volume of the breakwater and its modular
construction make it easily transportable (Seymour 1976).
Another type of floating breakwater is the sloping float breakwater.
This is also a transportable breakwater. It consists of a row of moored
flat slabs or panels whose mass distribution is such that, in still water,
each panel rests with one end on the bottom of the water body and with the
seaward end protruding above the surface. The device is ballasted by
flooding one end. For a transportable breakwater, the advantage of a
water-ballasted module is that much of the required mass is water. Install-
ation involves assembling the floating unballasted modules (nominally 90
feet by 28 feet), then admitting water to the shoreward end.of each float
by venting. Flooding continues until the lower end rests on the bottom and
the upper end settles to the level that produces the desired freeboard.
The controlling factor in reducing wave transmission is the inclination of
the breakwater in its at-rest position (Jones et al. 1979).
Floating breakwaters can be fabricated using readily available marine
and construction materials, such as buoys, anchors, cables, concrete slabs,
and steel plates.
A.6.2 Applications
Floating breakwaters are used to decrease erosion, control scour, and
reduce dispersion of spilled material caused by wave-induced bottom surge.
Floating breakwaters are used in open waters, such as oceans, bays, or lakes
where locally generated wind waves and ship waves occur. The tethered
breakwater system can be used in shallow or deep water since it is free-
floating and independent of depth; however, it is more economically used in
deep water.
Sloping float breakwaters are best applied to near-shore uses for
water depths on the order of 20 to 30 feet (Jones et al. 1979).
A-17
-------
A. 6.3 Limitations
Floating breakwaters are large in size and weight and are not readily
transported on land, although the use of modular arrangement can improve
the transportability of breakwaters. There are no depth limitations
associated with breakwaters, provided that the proper scale of depth-related
components (tethers, mooring lines, etc.) are provided.
A.6.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Support vessels must be used to tow the breakwater to the point of
use. Cranes and divers may be needed to properly position the breakwater.
Costs associated with floating breakwaters are high relative to other
containment techniques.
A.7 TEMPORARY COVERING AND CAPPING
Covering and capping involves the placement of protective materials
over contaminated materials to:- (1) reduce erosion and transport of contam-
inants, (2) reduce dissolution and migration of contaminants into the water
column, (3) alter the contaminants chemically or physically, or (4) provide
some combination of these effects. Covering and capping is normally used
as a permanent response, as described in Appendix E, In Situ Treatment and
Isolation Techniques. The methods described in Appendix E .can also be used
for temporary containment; the primary difference is that the covering and
capping materials are removed when they are used temporarily and are contam-
inated by contact with the contaminated bottom materials.
A. 8 SUMMARY
Temporary or short-term containment of contaminated sediments include
containment curtains, trenches, dikes, temporary covers, pneumatic barriers,
cofferdams, and floating breakwaters. A summary of the characteristics and
applications of these techniques is given in Table A-l.
A-18
-------
TABLE A-l. SUMMARY OF CONTAMINANT CONTAINMENT TECHNIQUES
VO
Technique
Containment
Curtains
Trenches
Applications
Control resuspension of
sediments during
dredging operations;
temporary containment
of spills or dis-
charges; use in
quiescent waters and
low-current, near-shore
areas of rivers and
harbors; use for rela-
tively confined spills
Temporary containment
of spills or dis-
charges; use in
conjunction with other
treatment techniques,
such as neutralization;
use primarily in calm
waters depending on
type of equipment used
for excavation
Limitations
Not effective in
swift currents
(greater than 1.5
feet/ second);
overtopping may
occur by wave
action
Not effective in
swift currents;
may not be
practical in
excessively hard
or soft bottom
materials
Secondary Impacts Ease of Implementation Relative Cost
Bone Storage and transport requires Medina
special attention; deployment
can be accomplished with
relative ease; varies from
relative ease with
conventional excavating
equipment to more difficult
with special submersible
trenchers and underwater
ploughs
Resuspension of Construction is accomplished Low
bottom materials with relative ease where depth
may result and current velocity are not
excessive
Dikes
Control resuspension of
sediments during
dredging operations;
temporary containment
of spills or discharges
use in conjunction with
other stabilization
techniques; use in
waters with low-flow
velocity and low
volume, such as small
streams and drainage
ditches
Impractical to
construct in swift
currents
Suspension of dike
materials may
result
Construction is accomplished
with relative ease, especially
through use of hand tools in
small water bodies
Low to
nediuB
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. (continued)
Cofferdams
Pneunatic Barriers
Floating Breakwaters
Used in conjunction
with stream diversion
to isolate contaminated
sediments from stream
flow; use in shallow
waters with low-flow
velocity
Control resuspension of
sediments during
dredging operations;
temporary containment
of suspended particles
from spills or dis-
charges; use in rela-
tively deep waters for
efficient operation;
use .in quiescent waters
such that current does
not overcome forces set
up by compressed air
Reduce erosion of
bottom sediment caused
by surface waves; use
in oceans, bays, and
lakes
Difficult or Resuspension of
impractical to bottom materials
construct in swift may result
currents
•
Hot effective in None
swift currents;
less effective in
shallow water
bodies
Cannot be used None
during severe
weather storms
More difficult than other
temporary containment
measure*
Construction is more difficult
than other temporary contain-
ment measures
Transport and deployment can
be accomplished with relative
ease
Medium
Medium
High
Temporary Covering
and Capping
Control transport or
dissolution pending
other response
Covering and
capping materials
may become contam-
inated by contact
with contaminants,
increasing the
ultimate cleanup
effort
Suspension of
covering and
capping materials
and resuspension
of bottom
materials may
result
Readily implemented with
granular material applied by
dumping; special materials
(membrane, cement, etc.)
require special techniques and
equipment
Low to
high
-------
APPENDIX B
CONTAMINATED MATERIAL REMOVAL TECHNIQUES
The process by which bottom sediments are removed from bodies of water
. is commonly known as dredging. This process has been used for many years
to widen or deepen harbors and navigable rivers. In recent years, dredging
has also been employed in the removal of sediments that have been contami-
nated through discharges of hazardous and harmful substances. Other
techniques have been developed for removal of contaminated sediments.
This appendix discusses the equipment and techniques that may be used
in the removal of contaminated sediments. Three types of dredging equipment
are discussed: mechanical, hydraulic, and pneumatic.
All of the equipment that is placed on site in order to accomplish the
removal of sediments make up what is referred to as the dredge plant. In
addition to the equipment and the technologies related to the dredge plant,
there are also many predredging operations that must be performed before
successful dredging can begin. These operations consist of a variety of
tasks that are conducted prior to, and in preparation for, the actual
dredging of sediments. Predredging operations can include equipment mobili-
zation and demobilization, stream diversion, cofferdam construction, and
removal of weeds and bottom debris. Cofferdam construction and stream
diversion are discussed in Section B.4.
Divers frequently can be used in predredging operations for monitoring
removal of bottom materials and for operation of hand-held dredges. The
use of divers in contaminated waters may pose hazards for that necessitate
special precautions. Most divers are hesitant to enter water bodies that
have been contaminated with hazardous substances. Experiences in these
environments have often resulted in injuries, primarily chemical burns, to
divers and/or surface support personnel. Little information is available
on low-level exposure to chemicals that divers or surface support personnel
may receive in these environments. Only acute or immediate effects have
been reported. Chronic, long-term toxicity has not been investigated.
This is potentially a serious problem that is now being addressed by several
government agencies (McLellan 1982).
Diving equipment problems also occur in chemically contaminated water
environments, primarily due to petroleum products. Divers frequently enter
these environments, resulting in deterioration and failure of equipment.
Equipment deterioration has been responsible for fatalities and for incidents
B-l
-------
of diver exposure to contaminants (McLellan 1982). Special equipment and
procedures all under development for protecting response team divers.
B.I MECHANICAL DREDGES
Mechanical dredges are equipment used to remove bottom sediment through
the direct application of mechanical force to dislodge the material. This
physical removal of bottom sediment is usually performed by a bucket that
scoops up the material and carries it to the surface. The material is then
usually placed in a barge, scow, truck, or impoundment for treatment or
disposal.
Mechanical dredges include clamshell, dragline, dipper, and bucket
ladder dredges, as well as conventional excavation equipment, such as back-
hoes and loaders. The mechanical dredges can either be vessel-mounted for
offshore use or track-mounted and land-based. The main advantage to mechan-
ical dredges is that they can remove sediments at nearly in situ densities,
i.e., the water content of sediments is not increased through the dredging
process. Removing sediment at the maximum possible solids content thus
reduces the scale of facilities necessary for dredged material transport,
treatment, and disposal.
Compared to other types of dredges, mechanical dredges generate higher
resuspension of bottom materials, particularly in fine-grained sediments,
and also exhibit lower production rates, especially in consolidated material,
B.I.I Clamshell Dredges
B.I.1.1 Description
Clamshell (or grab) dredges are crane-operated dredges that are usually
mounted on flat-bottomed barges or pontoons. They may also be mounted on
other sea-going vessels or track-mounted and land-based. Most are equipped
with a single crane, but multiple crane configurations are not uncommon.
Removal is performed with large, hinged buckets ranging in capacity from
1 to 13 cubic yards. Buckets are lowered in an open position on a control
cable to the bottom surface and sediment is scooped up as the bucket closes
and its two halves come together. Clamshell dredges operate at 20 to 30
cycles per hour, depending on working depth and sediment characteristics
(Hand et al. 1978).
Standard clamshell buckets are open at the top and allow considerable
loss of sediment by spillage and leakage once the bucket breaks the water
surface. The Port and Harbor Institute of Japan and the Corps of Engineers
Waterways Experiment Station have each developed watertight buckets in which
B-2
-------
the top is enclosed so that the dredged material is contained within the
bucket (Hand et al. 1978).
There are approximately 200 clamshell dredges in use nationwide, making
them one of the most commonly used dredges in the United States (Hand et al.
1978). In addition, clamshell excavators are common in conventional excava-
tion work.
B.I.1.2 Applications
Clamshell dredges can be used to excavate at i.n situ densities in all
types of material with the exception of highly consolidated sediments and
solid rock and can excavate to depths of 100 feet or more. These dredges
afford close control of position and depth and are therefore well suited to
work in confined areas and surrounding vulnerable structures.
As with other types of mechanical dredges, clamshells are generally
used for relatively small-scale operations (up to a few hundred thousand
cubic yards).
Clamshell dredges are also used in predredging operations for removal
of potentially destructive bottom debris, such as stumps, logs, rubbish, and
rocks.
B.I.1.3 Limitations
The major disadvantages of using clamshell and other mechanical dredges
are the relatively low rate of production and the relatively high degree of
sediment resuspension these dredges produce compared to other dredges.
Sediment resuspension occurs as the bucket impacts and pulls free from the
bottom and also as hoisting drag forces act to wash away part of the load.
Clamshells generally excavate a heaped load of material, and as the bucket
clears the water surface, additional losses may occur through rapid drainage
of entrapped water and slumping of the material above the rim of the bucket.
Concentrations of suspended solids in the vicinity of clamshell dredging
may be as great as 500 milligrams per liter, compared with background levels,
which do not generally exceed 50 milligrams per liter (Barnard 1978).
Watertight buckets have been shown to reduce resuspension of sediments
by as much as 50 percent (Barnard 1978). Disadvantages of watertight
buckets are that the rubber gaskets used to create the watertight seal may
not stand up to continuous use in a full-scale dredging operation and may
present compatibility problems with spilled chemicals in certain spill
situations.
B-3
-------
B.I.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Clamshell dredges can be land-based or mounted on a support vessel, in
which case the vessel must be dedicated to the dredging operation. Support
vessels or vehicles (barge or truck) must also be available to accept the
sediment as it is being dredged and later transport it to the disposal or
treatment area. The resuspension of bottom materials may also warrant the
use of containment measures, such as curtains or pneumatic barriers, described
in Appendix A. Costs associated with clamshell dredging are low relative to
other removal techniques.
B.I.2 Draglines
B.I.2.1 Description
Draglines employ the same basic equipment as clamshell dredges and have
many of the same applications and limitations. Dragline buckets excavate
material as the buckets are pulled by a drag cable toward the crane. Drag-
lines are operated by the same type of crane as clamshell dredges and can
be similarly mounted on sea-going vessels or can be operated from land. A
2.5-cubic-yard bucket will excavate approximately 300 cubic yards of loosely
compacted material per hour (Church 1981).
Draglines are commonly used in general earthwork applications and are
widely available in the United States.
B.I.2.2 Applications
Draglines can be used in the same instances as clamshell dredges (see
Section B.I.1.2) with slightly less control of depth and position. However,
dragline dredges generally offer a longer reach than clamshell dredges
operated by the same crane (Merritt 1976). They are generally used for
operations of up to several hundred thousand cubic yards of sediments.
B.I.2.3 Limitations
Draglines generate resuspension of sediment similar to that of clam-
shell dredges (see Section B.I.1.3). It is not possible to develop a
watertight bucket because of the dragline operating characteristics.
Draglines also provide relatively low rates of sediment removal.
B-4
-------
B.I.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The special requirements and considerations of draglines are the same
as those described for clamshell dredges (see Section B.I.1.4). Costs
associated with dragline dredging are low relative to other removal
techniques.
B.I.3 Conventional Earth Excavation Equipment
B.I.3.1 Description
Backhoes, power shovels, and front-end loaders are sometimes used to
remove bottom sediments in certain restricted situations? Ml threenieces
mft;rfrrvperate in roughiy the same manner;a ^^ ^OPS UP
trans oita^ion eXCaVated and transfers the material to a vehicle for
Such excavation equipment is widely available and usually mounted
shovels
B.I.3.2 Applications
Conventional earth excavation equipment can be used on a limited scale
to remove sediments in shallow waterways. Backhoes are normally used for
trench and other subsurface excavation and are capable of ^aching^ feet
or more below the level of the machine (Merritt 1976; Church 1981). Power
as°I± SYSS17 T^0 10ad r°Ck lnt° haUllng UnltS and do ~t ha"
as xong or a reach as backhoes.
Loaders are normally used to excavate loose or soft materials in a
"i ^^ °f °Peration a few ft above and below grade.
in shallow water may be practical if sediments are sufficiently
loose or soft. Loaders are useful in removing sediments from dewatering
materilir bodies/^r%^a^-mounting of equipment allows mobility
materials. Specially fabricated wide tracks (called "low-earth-
pressure tracks) provide added support and traction under such conditions.
B.I. 3. 3 Limitations
conr eartVxcavati°* equipment is greatly limited in removing
contaminated sediments from water bodies. Their reach in both the lateral
and vertical directions is restricted by the length of the boom to which
B-5
-------
the excavation bucket is attached. Therefore, the equipment must be in
close proximity to the material being dredged and, in most cases, this is
not a practical restriction. Also, because the load bearing capacity of
submerged sediments and soils surrounding water bodies is frequently low,
it is often difficult or impossible for conventional equipment to maneuver
under such conditions. Conventional equipment also provides relatively low
rates of sediment removal.
B.I.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Stream diversion and dewatering of the work area are generally needed
for conventional earth excavation equipment to reach and maneuver in bottom
materials. Stream diversion is discussed under Section B.4, Cofferdams.
Other requirements and considerations of conventional earth excavation
equipment are the same as those described for clamshell dredges (see Section
B 1 1.4). Costs associated with removal of bottom materials by conventional
earth excavation equipment are low relative to other removal techniques.
B.I.4 Dipper Dredges
B.I.4.1 Description
Dipper dredges are capable of exerting great mechanical effort and are
used in subaqueous excavation of soft rock and dense sedimentary deposits,
such as clay and glacial till. Excavation is accomplished by the use of a
bucket attached to a long boom, which is forcibly thrust into the "Jterial
to be removed. Dipper dredges are commonly mounted on flat-bottomed barges
or other vessels. Vertical columns called spuds are anchored into the
bottom sediments to hold the dredge in position. The swing of the boom-
limits the lateral range of motion from this fixed position. The dredge
vessel is repositioned when dredging within this range is completed.
Vertical control is restricted to the depth of the "bite" of the excavating
bucket (Hand et al. 1978).
Dipper Bucket capacity is 8 to 12 cubic yards and a production rate
of between 30 to 60 cycles per hour is usually achieved. There are about
20 dipper dredges being used nationwide (Hand et al. 1978).
B.I.4.2 Applications
Dipper dredges are capable of exerting great force and are well-suited
to excavation of soft rock and highly consolidated sediments. They can
achieve good lateral and vertical control and are often used in confined
areas where control of position and depth is required to avoid damaging or
B-6
-------
undermining marine structures. Dipper dredges are inherently better adapted
for working in horizontal rather than vertical planes. They have a working
depth of up to 50 feet and are applicable to volumes of up to several
hundred thousand cubic yards (Hand et al. 1978).
B.I.4.3 Limitations
The violent mechanical dredging action of the dipper dredge causes
considerable turbidity through sediment disturbance during digging and a
significant loss of the material from the bucket during the hoisting process,
This results in even greater resuspension of sediment than with clamshell
dredges and, therefore, dipper dredges are expected to be of limited use in
the removal of spilled hazardous materials sinking to the bottom of water
courses (Hand et al. 1978). Dipper dredges also provide relatively low
rates of sediment removal.
B.I.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Special requirements and considerations of dipper dredges are the same
as those described for clamshell dredges (see Section B.I.1.4). Costs
associated with dipper dredging are low relatively to other removal
techniques.
B.I.5 Bucket Ladder Dredges
B.I.5.1 Description
The dredging action of bucket ladder dredges is provided by an inclined
submersible ladder that supports a continuous chain of buckets that rotate
around pivots at each end of the ladder. As the buckets rotate around the
bottom of the ladder, they scoop up sediment, which is then transported up
the ladder and dumped into a storage area as the buckets round the top
pivot. Most bucket dredges are mounted on pontoons and are not self-
propelled. Bucket ladder dredges can store dredged material on board and
can also load barges for transport. Only four of these dredges, all for
mining operations, are known to be operating in the United States (Hand
et al. 1978).
Production rates are generally higher for bucket ladder dredges than
for other mechanical dredges. Bucket volumes range between 0.1 and 1.3
cubic yards and several hundred cubic yards per hour can be excavated under
good conditions (calm water, loose sediment, etc.) (Hand et al. 1978).
B-7
-------
B.I.5.2 Applications
Bucket ladder dredges are most commonly used aboard in mining opera-
tions, such as sand and gravel production. They are capable of handling
many different kinds of material, including highly consolidated sediments.
Bucket ladder dredges can handle larger operations than other types
of mechanical dredges. Their normal operating depth is approximately 60
feet and some dredges are capable of reaching depths of up to 100 feet
(Hand et al. 1978).
B.I.5.3 Limitations
Bucket ladder dredges generate a high degree of resuspension by the
continuous mechanical agitation of sediments and bucket leakage. Bucket
dredges depend on a great deal of support equipment (tow boats and barges)
and are held in place by a complicated configuration of mooring lines,
potentially causing obstruction to navigation routes. However, the most
limiting factor in using bucket ladder dredges for the removal of contami-
nated sediments is that they are relatively unavailable in the United States
at the present time (Hand et al. 1978).
B.I.5.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Bucket ladder dredges require a great deal of support equipment for
proper operation. They are not self-propelled and must be towed into
position. These dredges also require a complicated system of mooring lines
to hold them in place and barges are needed to hold and remove the dredged
material. Resuspension of bottom materials may also warrant the use of
containment measures, such as curtains or pneumatic barriers, described in
Appendix B. Costs associated with bucket ladder dredging are medium
relative to other removal techniques.
B.2 HYDRAULIC DREDGES
Hydraulic dredges are usually barge-mounted systems that use centri-
fugal pumps to remove and to transport sediment in liquid slurry form.
Pumps may be either barge-mounted or submersible. The suction end of the
dredge is mounted on a moveable ladder that may be lowered or raised to a
specific dredging depth. Often a cutterhead is fitted to the suction end
of the dredge to assist in dislodging bottom materials. Slurries of 10 to
20 percent solids by weight are common in standard hydraulic dredge plants.
These slurries may be pumped many thousands of feet through floating or
B-8
-------
pontoon-supported pipeline to a dredged material treatment/storage area.
The major disadvantage of hydraulic dredges has been the relatively large
flow rates associated with pumping at low solids concentrations and the
resulting need for large areas of land to serve as settling/dewatering
areas for dredged material (see Appendix C). Recent development of hydrau-
lic dredges has emphasized the capability of removing sediments at near
in situ solids concentrations, minimizing the water content of the pumped
slurry. Lowering the water content for a given volume of sediment reduces
the land requirement for sediment dewatering (Hand et al. 1978).
Hydraulic dredges generally exhibit higher production rates and lower
resuspension than mechanical dredges. They are also capable of removing
liquid contaminants. However, they are susceptible to damage by debris and
clogging with weeds; thus, they require more extensive pre-dredging work
than mechanical dredges.
This section describes the following hydraulic dredging systems;
portable dredges, hand-held dredges, plain suction dredges, cutterhead
dredges, dustpan dredges, and hopper dredges.
B.2.1 Portable Hydraulic Dredges
B.2.1.1 Description
Portable hydraulic dredges are defined herein as dredge vessels that
can be moved easily over existing roadways without major dismantling. The
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station has prepared a
"Survey of Portable Hydraulic Dredges" (Clark 1983), which is a compilation
of models of portable dredges that are available in the United States and
their characteristics, including ratings of "portability." Conventional
cutterheads, horizontal cutters, bucket wheels, chain cutters, vertical
cutters, and dustpans are available on portable dredges, and dredging
capabilities range from 10 to 50 feet. Vessel draft is generally less than
5 feet (many less than 2 feet). Production rates average between 50 to 500
cubic yards per hour depending on model, size, and site conditions (Clark
19,83).
Portable hydraulic dredges come in a wide range of sizes. The average
dredge is approximately 10 feet wide and from 25 to 50 feet long and can
weigh from 6 to 25 tons (Clark 1983). One very small unit designed to pump
industrial, ponds is 7 1/2 feet wide, 18 to 24 feet long, and weighs only
4,500 pounds.
Methods of launching portable dredges vary and include amphibious/self-
launching, launching by crane, launching from transport trailers, and
launching at boat ramps from transport trailers. Most portable dredges are
positioned and tracked using cable-and-winch arrangement anchored on land.
B-9
-------
weight is drawn in through the dredge head and is transported up the suction
line to be discharged into a scow or through a pipeline for treatment. The
production rate is dependent upon the pump size, pump horsepower, and type
of material being dredged. During normal working conditions, dredging is
performed at 1,000 to 10,000 cubic yards per hour, depending on discharge
velocity and pipe diameter (Hand et al. 1978).
Plain suction dredges are normally pulled along a straight line fixed
by a cable-and-winch arrangement anchored on land or on the bottom of the
water body. The dredge vessel moves along the line of the cable and the
cable is repositioned to establish a new line as dredging progresses.
There is no capability of lateral manipulation beyond the positioning and
movement of the dredge vessel. Vertical control of sediment removal is
maintained by raising and lowering the suction pipe and dredge head
supporting ladder using a cable-and-winch arrangement. Vessel draft is
on the order of 5 to 6 feet (Hand et al. 1978).
There are approximately 20 plain suction dredges in operation nation-
wide, all located on interior waterways (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.3.2 Applications
Plain suction dredges are most effective in the removal of relatively
free-flowing sediments, -such as sands, gravels, and unconsolidated material.
They are commonly used for sand mining, beach restoration, general river
channel maintenance, and scow unloading. They can be used in relatively
shallow waters and are best suited to relatively calm inland waterways
(Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.3.3 Limitations
Hard and cohesive materials, such as clays or firm native bottom soils,
are not readily removed by plain suction, as no mechanical dislodging de-
vices are employed. These dredges cannot generally be employed in rough
waters (i.e., .waves greater than 3 feet). The anchoring cables and pipe-
lines can cause obstructions to river traffic. The suction line is also
subject to blockage or damage by underwater debris.
t • • f
B.2.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
As with all hydraulic dredging methods, the dredged slurry must be
pumped through a pipeline to a dewatering or other treatment facility (see
Appendix C). Resuspension of bottom materials may also warrant the use of
containment measures, such as curtains or pneumatic barriers, described in
B-12
-------
Appendix A. Costs associated with plain suction dredging are medium
relative to other removal techniques.
B.2.4 Cutterhead Dredges
B.2.4.1 Description
The configuration and principle of operation of the cutterhead dredge
are similar to those of the plain suction dredge; however, a mechanical
device is added to dislodge material. The device, called the cutterhead,
is located at the intake of the suction pipe and rotates to dislodge sedi-
ment, allowing sediment to be removed by suction through the suction pipe.
Slurries of 10 to 20 percent solids by weight are typically achieved
depending upon the material being dredged. Production rates vary according
to pump size and can be as large as 2,500 cubic yards per hours. Cutter-
head dredges range from 50 to 225 feet in length and can weigh up to 350
tons. Vessel draft is between 3 and 5 feet (Hand et al. 1978).
Cutterhead dredges move in a pattern different from other hydraulic
dredges by alternately anchoring on one of two spuds. The anchored spud is
used as a pivot and the vessel is drawn along an anchored cable, swinging
the cutterhead in a short horizontal arc about the spud. Repeatedly swing-
ing the cutterhead in arcs while alternating anchored spuds results in
partially overlapping cuts, which form a wide effective cut through the
area being dredged.
Cutterhead dredges are among the most popular in the world for mainten-
ance dredging because of their versatility and ability to make uniform cuts.
They are also the most commonly used maintenance dredge in the United
States and approximately 300 are in use nationwide (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.4.2 ' Applications
Cutterhead dredges are highly efficient in removing all types of
materials, including very hard and cohesive sediments. They are capable of
reaching materials up to 50 feet below the water surface. Cutterhead
dredges are best used in calmer waters, but because of their large size and
self-propulsion, they are better able to operate in rough waters than the
smaller portable dredges or plain suction dredges (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.4.3 Limitations
Cutterhead dredges are not capable of removing bottom sediments at
depths greater than 50 feet below the water surface because of the length
B-13
-------
of the dredge ladder that supports the cutterhead. The dredge vessel cannot
operate in water depths of less than 5 feet (Hand et al. 1978).
The cutterhead and suction line are susceptible to debris damage,
which can hinder the removal of bottom materials. In addition, infestations
of aquatic weeds may obstruct dredging and cause further delays due to both
reduced cutterhead mobility and dredge pump clogging.
The cutting and grinding action of the cutterhead presents a potential
problem with resuspension of sediment. A properly designed cutterhead will
efficiently cut and guide the bottom material toward the suction, although
the cutting action and the turbulence associated with the rotation of the
cutterhead can resuspend a portion of the bottom material (Raymond 1983).
B.2.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The dredging site must be cleared of debris and weeds prior to com-
mencement of dredging in order to prevent malfunction of the cutterhead.
This may require the use of cranes, clamshells, or divers.
As with all hydraulic dredging methods, the dredged slurry must be
pumped through a pipeline to a dewatering or other treatment facility (see
Appendix C). Resuspension of bottom materials may also warrant the use of
containment measures, such as curtains or pneumatic barriers, described in
Appendix A. Costs associated with cutterhead dredging are medium relative
to other removal techniques.
B.2.5 Dustpan Dredges
B.2.5.1 Description
Dustpan dredges are similar in configuration and operation to plain
suction dredges. The sediment collection head, called a "dustpan", is a
widely flared head containing high-pressure water jets that loosen and
agitate sediments; the sediments are then captured in the dustpan as the
dredge is winched forward into the bottom materials. This high-pressure
jetting slightly improves efficiency (in terms of slurry density) and allows
cohesive sediments to be dredged (Hand et al. 1978).
The collected sediments are conveyed by suction into the suction pipe.
Slurries of 10 to 20 percent solids by weight are typically achieved.
Production rates range between 500 to 15,000 cubic yards per hour, depend-
ing on the discharge pipe diameter and the discharge velocity. Vessel
draft varies between 5 to 14 feet (Hand et al. 1978).
B-14
-------
There are about 10 dustpan dredges in the United States, all owned by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. They are used primarily for channel
maintenance in interior waterways (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.5.2 Applications
Dustpan dredges are best suited for dredging free-flowing granular
bottom material, but will also dredge cohesive sediments. They are used
primarily in calmer interior waterways with depths up to 50 feet. The
vessels can operate in waters deeper than 14 feet, and some can be operated
in shallow waters (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.5.3 Limitations
Dustpan dredges are not capable of removing sediment at depths greater
than 50 feet below the water surface because of the length of the dredge
ladder that supports the dustpan. The dredge vessel cannot operate in
water depths of less than 5 feet (Hand et al. 1978).
The jetting action of the dustpan dredge will cause resuspension of
bottom materials-comparable to the cutterhead dredge (Raymond 1983). The
dustpan head is also susceptible to clogging and damage by bottom debris.
B.2.5.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The dredging site should be cleared of underwater debris to prevent
blockages within the dredge head, pump, and pipeline. As with all hydraulic
dredging methods, the dredged slurry must be pumped through a pipeline to a
dewatering or other treatment facility (see Appendix C). Resuspension of
bottom materials may also warrant the use of containment measures, such as
curtains or pneumatic barriers, described in Appendix A. Costs associated
with removal of bottom materials by dustpan dredges are medium relative to
other removal techniques.
B.2.6 Hopper Dredges
B.2.6.1 Description
Hopper dredges differ from other hydraulic dredges primarily in the
type of vessel used and the methods of attachment and operation of the
dredge head. Hopper dredge vessels are normally large, self-propelled, sea-
going vessels, rather than barges. Vessel drafts range from 12 to 31 feet.
B-15
-------
The vessels can operate in waves up to 7 feet. Hopper dredges are posi-
tioned and moved by the propeller/rudder navigating equipment of the host
vessel and can travel at speeds up to 8 miles per hour while dredging.
Production rates normally range between 500 to 2,000 cubic yards per hour
(Hand et al. 1978).
Suction pipes are hinged on either side of the vessel and extend
downward toward the stern of the vessel. Dredge heads, attached at the
ends of the suction pipes, drag along the bed of the area being dredged as
the vessel moves forward; the head is sometimes called a "trailing" head
for this reason. Dredging is accomplished by the vessel making progressive
passes over the project area.
Dredged material is transported up the suction pipe and is discharged
for storage into a hopper portion of the vessel. Coarse-grained material
settles to the bottom of the hopper. Water and fine-grained sediment is
normally allowed to overflow the hopper into the water body; overflow
would usually not be acceptable in the removal of contaminated sediments.
Once fully loaded, the vessel moves to an unloading area where the hopper
is emptied by opening bottom doors or by pumping the contents to a treatment
or disposal area. There are 15 oceangoing, trailing, suction hopper dredges
operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and there are several privately
owned hopper dredges in the United States. These dredges are located
primarily on coastal waters and in the Great Lakes region (Hand et al.. 1978).
B.2.6.2 Applications
Hopper dredges are intended for large-scale maintenance dredging of
deep, rough-water shipping channels, and are normally most efficient in
excavating loose, non-cohesive materials. Bottom materials can be dredged
to depths of 62 feet. Hopper dredges are capable of operating in rough,
open waters, in relatively high, currents, in and ar.ound marine shipping
traffic, and in adverse weather conditions (Hand et al. 1978).
B.2.6.3 Limitations
Hopper dredges cause resuspension of bottom materials into the water
column; this is primarily caused by hopper overflow in the near-surface
water and by draghead agitation in near-bottom water. Hopper dredges cannot
be used in inland shallow waters because of the large vessel size and draft.
Because conventional hopper dredge operating methods (hopper overflow and
open-water disposal of dredged material) are not normally acceptable for
hazardous materials, continuous or periodic removal of dredged material
must be accomplished by frequent trips to an unloading area, pumping to a
treatment facility, or pumping to transport vessels.
B-16
-------
B.2.6.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Hopper dredges are self-contained vessels and, under normal operating
conditions, require no support equipment. However, support equipment, such
as hauling vessels, transport pipelines, and pump-out dredges, may be need-
ed for containing and transporting contaminated materials to a dewatering
or other treatment facility (see Appendix C). The resuspension of bottom
materials may also warrant the use of containment measures, such as curtains
or pneumatic barriers, described in Appendix A. Costs associated with
removal of bottom materials by hopper dredges are high relative to other
removal techniques.
B.3 PNEUMATIC DREDGES
Pneumatic dredges are a special category of hydraulic dredge that use
compressed air and/or hydrostatic pressure instead of centrifugal force to
draw sediments to the collection head and through the transport piping.
Pneumatic dredges are commonly barge-mounted. Dredged material is normally
discharged to hopper barges or scows.
Pneumatic dredges generally-produce slurries of higher solids concen-
tration than -hydraulic dredges and cause less resuspension of bottom
materials. They are capable of dredging both solids and liquids.
B.3.1 Airlift Dredges
B.3.1.1 Description
Airlift dredges use compressed air to dislodge and transport sediments.
Compressed air is introduced into the bottom of an open vertical pipe that
is usually supported and controlled by a barge-mounted crane. As the air
is released, it expands and rises, creating upward currents that carry both
water and sediment up the pipe. The applied air pressure must be sufficient
to overcome water pressure at operating depths. Higher air pressures and
flow rates result in higher transport capacity. Air can also be introduced
through a special transport head that can be vibrated or rotated to dislodge
more cohesive sediments. Lateral control of the dredge is achieved by
swinging the boom of the crane in a manner similar to mechanical dredging.
Vertical control is achieved by raising and lowering the open end of the
vertical transport pipe and by varying the pressure of the air released at
the end of the pipe (Hand et al. 1978).
Dredged material is usually discharged from the airlift pipe (which
includes elbows or flexible pipe for changes in direction) into a hopper
barge or scow. The material is then transported in the barge or by
B-17
-------
pumping through a pipeline to a treatment or disposal area. Slurries of 25
percent solids can typically be achieved with airlift dredges (d'Angremond
et al. 1978).
Airlift dredges are usually operated from barges with drafts between
3 and 6 feet, although other vessels can be used. Barges are normally not
well suited for rough, open waters. Airlift dredges are not widely used in
the United States.
B.3.1.2 Applications
Airlift dredges are used primarily in underwater mining of sand and
gravel and are well-suited to deep dredging applications for excavating
loose granular materials, primarily sand. Any depth for which sufficient
pipe and air pressure can be provided can be dredged by this method.
B.3.1.3 Limitations
Airlift dredges cannot dredge cohesive bottom materials because the
agitation of the released air is the primary means of dislodging the
material.
B.3.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Airlift dredges require barges, pipelines, and/or pump-out capabilities
for containing and transporting contaminated materials to a dewatering or
other treatment facility (see Appendix C). The resuspension of bottom
materials may also warrant the use of containment measures such as curtains
or pneumatic barriers, described in Appendix A. Costs associated with
airlift dredging are medium relative to other removal techniques.
B.3.2 Pneuma Dredges
B.3.2.1 Description
The "Pneuma" (trade name) dredging system consists of a pneumatic pump
that is lowered by a barge-mounted crane to contact the sediments being
dredged. The pump is driven by an air compressor and operates by positive
displacement. The body of the pump contains three cylindrical vessels,
each with an intake opening on the bottom and an air port and discharge
outlet on top. The air ports can be opened to the atmosphere through air
hoses and valves. The cylinders are filled with sediment and water when
B-18
-------
the intake opening is open and water pressure causes bottom materials to
flow into the vessels. The ;opening is closed when the vessel is filled.
The vessel is emptied by the application of compressed air to force the
contents into a discharge line. Using this process, the Pneuma system can
dredge bottom materials at near in situ densities with a minimum intake of
water (Richardson et al. 1982; Toa Harbor Works undated). Pneuma dredges
are capable of discharging directly to disposal or treatment areas through
a discharge pipeline.
Pneuma dredges are normally suspended from a crane cable and pulled
into the sediments being dredged by a second cable. The dredging head is
scoop-shaped and produces relatively little sediment resuspension (i.e.,
only slightly greater than normal operating background levels). The dredge
head is fixed relative to the vessel so that lateral manipulation is limited
to the positioning and movement of the vessel. The dredge head can weigh
from 3 to 15 tons and the dredges may be as large as 12 feet by 12 feet,
but are readily dismantled and transported by truck or air (Richardson
et al. 1982).
Pneuma dredges have limited availability in the United States and are
available only through distributors authorized by the Japanese manufacturer.
B.3.2.2 Applications
Pneuma dredges do not contain devices for breaking up consolidated
material and are most applicable to loosely packed sediment. Shovel attach-
ments are available to aid in the penetration of sediments. Extremely deep
applications are possible, provided that sufficient discharge line, air
line, air pressure, and dredging control can be provided.
B.3.2.3 Limitations
Pneuma dredges cannot be effectively used in shallow water because of
their dependence on water depth for the differential pressure that induces
flow. Pipelines and cables may present temporary obstructions in navigable
water channels.
B.3.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Pneuma dredges require a great deal of support equipment, such as air
distributors and compressors, to control the cycling of the three pump
chambers and to provide pressure for emptying the chambers. Booster pumps
may be required for pipeline transport of dredged material to treatment and
disposal facilities. Costs associated with removal of bottom materials by
Pneuma dredges are high relative to other removal techniques.
B-19
-------
B.3.3 Oozer Dredges
B.3.3.1 Description
"Oozer" (trade name) dredges, developed in Japan, are pumps similar in
concept to the Pneuma. Ooozer dredges use negative (vacuum) pressure in
filling the chambers in addition to the pressure difference between water
pressure at the depth of operation and atmospheric pressure, which drives
the Pneuma dredge. This allows dredging in more shallow waterways (Barnard
1978).
The pump is usually mounted at the end of a ladder. The pump body
consists of two cylinders to which a vacuum is applied to increase the
differential pressure and induce the flow between the sediment and cylinders.
Discharge is accomplished by positive air pressure, similar to the Pneuma
dredge (see Section B.3.2). Sediment thickness detectors, underwater
television cameras, and a turbidimeter are attached near the suction mouth
for monitoring turbidity. Suspended oil can be collected by an attached
hood and cutters can be attached for dislodging hard soils (Barnard 1978;
Toyo Construction Co. undated).
Oozer dredges are capable of pumping slurries of 30 to 70 percent
solids (near in situ densities) at rates of 500 to 800 cubic yards per
hour, while keeping resuspension of sediments low (Barnard 1978). Dredged
material is normally discharged to a hopper barge or a scow.
Oozer dredges have no capability of lateral manipulation beyond the
positioning and movement of the dredge vessel. Vertical control of sediment
removal is maintained by raising and lowering the suction pipe and the
dredge head supporting the ladder using a cable-and-winch arrangement.
Oozer dredges are manufactured in Japan and have limited availability
in the United States through authorized distributors.
B.3.3.2 Applications
Oozer dredges are designed for effective suction of soft sediments
from riverbeds or harbor bottoms. The use of vacuum pressure allows Oozer
dredges to dredge in shallower waters than the Pneuma system.
B.3.3.3 Limitations
Oozer dredges are capable of only modest production rates compared to
hydraulic dredges. They also require cables for movement and anchoring,
which can obstruct navigation traffic. Availability of the Oozer dredge is
B-20
-------
extremely limited and its use in rapid response situations may not be
practical because of the logistics of mobilization.
B.3.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Oozer dredges generally require the support of hopper barges for
discharge of dredged material and transport to a treatment or disposal
facility. Costs associated with removal of bottom materials by Oozer
dredges are high relative to other removal techniques.
B.4 SUMMARY
Table B-l provides a summary of information presented" in this appendix
for each of the dredges. This summary can be used to compare and screen
dredges for specific applications.
B-21
-------
I
TABLE B-l. SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATED MATERIAL REMOVAL TECHNIQUES
w
to
Technique
MECHANICAL
DREDGES
Clamshell
Dragline
Conven-
tional
Excavation
Equipment
Dipper.
Application*
Snail voluaea of
sediments; confined
areas and near
structures; removal
of hot ton debris;
nonconsol idated
sediments; interior
waterways, harbors
Snail volumes of
sediments; confined
areas; non-
consolidated
sediments, harbors,
and interior
waterways
Snail volumes of
sediments in shallow
or dewatered areas
Small volumes of
sediments; up to
highly consolidated
Limitations
Low production rates;
cannot excavate highly
conaolidated sediments
or solid rock
Low production rates;
cannot excavate highly
consolidated sediments
or solid rock
Restricted capacities
and reach; 1 united to
very shallow water
depths
Low production rates
Secondary
lap acts
Considerable
resuspension
of sediments
Considerable
resuspension
of sediments
Considerable
resuspension
of sediments
Considerable
resuspension
of sediments
Availability/
Transportability
Dredge head can be
moved over existing
roads as-is and
mounted on
conventional crane;
widely available
Dredge head can be
moved over existing
roads as-is and
mounted on
conventional crane;
widely available
Can be moved over
existing roads;
widely available
Hot easily trans-
ported over roads;
limited availability
Vesiel
Length/Draft
(Feet)
Depends on
support
vessel
Depends on
support
vessel
Highly
variable
Depends on
support
vessel
HaxiuB
Depth of
Production Use Relative
(ydVhr) (Feet) Cost
30-600
100 Low
60-700 100 Low
Up to 600 30 Low
30-600 SO Low
sediments, confined
areas; harbors and
interior waterways
Bucket Small volumes of
Ladder sediments; up to
highly consolidated
sediments; interior
waterways
Low production rates
Considerable Not easily trans-
resuspension ported over roads;
of sediments very limited
availability
100/5
300
60 Medium
(continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. (continued)
NJ
Co
Technique
HYDRAULIC
DREDGES
Portable
Hydraulic
Hand-held
Hydraulic
Plain
Suction
Applications
Moderate volumes of
sediments; lakes and
inland rivers; very
shallow depths
Small volumes of
solids or liquids in
calm waters; for
precision dredging
Large volumes of
free- flowing
sediments and
Limitations
Limited to waves of
less than one foot;
depending on model,
have low production
rates and limited
depth
Operated from above
water units only in
shallow waters; under-
water units require
diver operation
Dredged material is
80-901 water; cannot
operate in rough, open
Secondary
Impacts
Moderate
resuspension
of sediments
Moderate
resuspension
of sediments
Moderate
resuspension
of sediments
Availability/
Transportability
Readily moved over
existing roads, may
require some
disassembling; widely
available
Easily moved over
existing roads; can
be assembled using
commonly available
equipment
Transport in
navigable waters
only; only 20 in use
Maximum
Vessel Depth of
Length/Draft Production Use Relative
(Feet) (ydj/hr) (Feet) Cost
25-50/2-5 50-1850 50 Low
N/A 10-250 1000 Low
100/5-6 25-10,000 60 Medium
Cutterhead
Dustpan
liquids; shallow
waters and interior
waterways
Large volumes of
solids and liquids;
up to very hard and
cohesive sediments;
calm waters
Large volumes of
free-flowing
sediments and
liquids; calm,
interior waterways
waters; susceptible to
debris damage; can
cause traffic
disruption
Dredged material is
80-90* water; cannot
operate in rough, open
waters; susceptible to
debris damage and weed
clogging
Dredged material is
80-90* water; cannot
operate in rough,'open
waters; susceptible to
debris damage
in the United States
Moderate Transport in
resuspension navigable waters
"of sediments only; wide
availability
50-250/3-14 25-10,000
50
Medium
Moderate
resuspension
of sediments
Transport in
navigable waters
only; only about 10
in use in the United
States
100/5-14
25-10,000
60
Medium
(continued)
N/A - Not Applicable
-------
TABLE B-l. (continued)
to
Technique
Hopper
PNEUMATIC
DREDGES
Airlift
Pneuma
Oozer .
Applications
Solids and liquids
in deep harbors;
rough, open water;
high currents;
adverse weather; in
and around shipping
traffic
Deep dredging of
loose sediment and
liquids; for use in
interior waters
Nonconsolidated
solids and liquids in
interior waterways
Soft sediments and
liquids from river
beds or harbor
Limitations
Hot for highly
consolidated sediments
Not for consolidated
sediments; dredged
material is 75Z water
Not for consolidated
sediments; not for
shallow waters; may
cause obstruction to
water traffic
Modest production
rates; may cause
obstruction to traffic
Secondary
Impacts
Moderate
resuspension
of sediments;
normal oper-
ation in-
volves large
overflow of
dredged
material
Reauspension
of sediment
is low
Resuspension
of sediment
is low
Resuspension
of sediment
is low
Vessel
Availability/ tength/Draft Production
Transportability (Feet) (yd /hr)
Can be moved only in 200+/12-31 500-2,000
deep waters; only
about 20 in use in
the United States
Dfedge head can be 100/3-6 60-390
moved over existing
roads; not widely
available in the
United States
Dredge head can be 100/5-6 60-390
moved over existing
roads; not widely
available in the
United States
Dredge head can be 120/7 500-800
moved over existing
roads; not widely
Haxinu*
Depth of
Use Relative
(Feet) Coat
65 High
Hone Medium
150 High
None High
bottoms; relatively
shallow depths
available in the
United States
-------
APPENDIX C
TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR REMOVED CONTAMINATED MATERIALS
This appendix addresses methods and equipment used for treatment of
contaminated bottom materials that have been removed from water bodies.
Figure C-l shows the major activities that are typically undertaken in
treating contaminated bottom materials and indicates the subsections under
which each of these activities is addressed. The major steps in sediment
treatment include:
e Sediment/water separation - separates the solids from the dredged
material slurry and results in a contaminated water stream and a
concentrated slurry, either of which may require further treatment
(Section C.I).
• Sediment dewatering - further concentrates solids by removing, water
in order to facilitate subsequent treatment, handling, and disposal
(Section C.2).
e Solids treatment - degrades, immobilizes, extracts, or encapsulates
contaminated solids in order to make them acceptable for final
disposal (Section C.3).
« Water treatment - degrades or removes dissolved or suspended con-
taminants to produce an effluent suitable for disposal (Section C.4),
The methods used to treat contaminated bottom materials have been
adapted from methods used in a variety of industries. However, experience
in treating contaminated sediments with these methods has been limited and
performance must be evalauated on a case-by-case basis. This appendix pre-
sents an overview of potentially applicable treatment techniques. It is
intended to assist in the selection of treatment techniques and is not
intended for use as a source of design information. Also, when combining
treatment techniques in series to accomplish desired treatment, care should
be exercised to assure hydraulic (pressure and flow) compatability of the
techniques.
C.I SEDIMENT/WATER SEPARATION
This section describes equipment and methods used to separate solids
from dredge slurries. The objective of sediment/water separation is to
C-l
-------
FIGURE C-1. TYPICAL SEQUENCE OF STEPS FOR TREATMENT
OF REMOVED CONTAMINATED BOTTOM MATERIALS
Slurry of Removed
Contaminated Bottom
Materials
(Appendix B)
Concentrated
Sediments'
Slurry
Sediment/Water
Separation
(Section C.1)
Sediments
Dewatering
(Section C.2)
Contaminated
Water
Contaminated
Water
Water
Treatment
(Section C.3)
Contaminated
Sediments
Sediments
Treatment
(Section C.4)
Treated Water
to Disposal
(Appendix D)
Treated Sediments
to Disposal
(Appendix D)
C-2
-------
attain two distinct waste streams: a liquid waste stream that can be sub-
sequently treated for removal of dissolved and fine suspended contaminants
and a concentrated slurry of solids and minimal liquid that can be dewatered
and treated.
Sediment/water separation techniques can also be used to selectively
remove a relatively narrow range of grain sizes from a slurry, effectively
separating one sediment grain size from another. Classification of sediments
according to grain size may be undertaken for one of two reasons: 1) economy
of space and equipment use, and 2) concentration of contaminants into a
relatively small mass of sediments. More efficient use can be made of
equipment and land area by taking advantage of the differences in settling
velocity of different sized particles. For example, where limited land
space is available, sand and gravel may be removed in settling basins, and
high-rate gravity settlers could be used to remove fine-grained particles.
There is also evidence to suggest that classification by grain size
can be useful in managing contaminated sediments because of the apparent
tendency of contaminants to adsorb preferentially onto fine-grained sediments
such as clay and organic matter. The separation of sediments by grain size
and level of contamination could prove to be extremely beneficial to the
overall management (treatment, transport, and disposal) of contaminated
dredged material. Sediments exhibiting low-level contamination may be
disposed of in sanitary landfills or returned to the water body, whereas
highly contaminated sediments must be disposed of in hazardous waste
landfills, incinerated, or treated to render them non-hazardous.
Sediment/water separation techniques consist of settling basins,
conventional clarifiers, high-rate clarifiers, hydraulic classifiers,
granular media filters, and hydrocyclones. An overview of each is presented
in the following sections.
C.I.I Impoundment Settling Basins
C.I.1.1 Description
A settling basin is an impoundment, basin, or other container that
provides conditions to allow suspended particles to settle by gravity, or
sedimentation. A slurry of dredged material is introduced at one end of
the basin and settling of solids occurs as the slurry slowly flows across the
length of the basin. The flow resulting at the opposite end of the basin
has a greatly reduced solids content. Particles settle according to their
settling velocity, which varies according to a particle's diameter and
specific gravity.
In practice, settling basins are designed to retain particles of a
selected diameter and larger in order to limit settling basins to practical
sizes. The basin surface area, detention time, and rate at which the
C-3
-------
dredged material is delivered to the basin are factors that determine the
degree of solids removal that can be achieved.
Settled solids accumulate on the bottom of settling basins where they
are temporarily stored. As the volume of accumulated solids increases, the
effective size of the basin decreases, reducing the basin's effectiveness or
efficiency. Accumulated solids must be periodically or continuously removed
by scrapers or dredges in order for the basin to perform as intended.
Impoundment basins are most commonly used in dredging applications.
An impoundment basin is an earthen impoundment or diked area that is lined
in a manner that is appropriate for protecting underlying groundwater. The
overflow rate in the basin is controlled by an adjustable weir. Bulkheads
that separate a single basin into compartments or smaller individual basins,
can be used to allow continuous sediment/water separation while accumulated
solids are being removed from the individual basins.
C.I.1.2 Applications
Impoundment basins are used to remove particles in the size range of
gravel down to fine silt (10 to 29 microns) (Mallory and Nawrocki 1974).
They are also used to provide temporary storage of material and to classify
sediment particles according to gtain size. This can be accomplished by
providing multiple separation basins connected in series, each of which is
designed to retain sediments of .successively smaller grain sizes in the
downstream direction of flow.
Impoundment basins are particularly well suited for large-scale dredging
operations, provided there is adequate land space available for their
cons truction.
C.I.1.3 Limitations
Flocculants must be used to achieve removal of particles less than 30
microns in size and no removal can be achieved for particles less than 10
microns. Impoundment basins are not suitable at locations where insufficient
land space is available for their construction or where adequate measures
cannot be taken to protect groundwater (e.g., high water table).
C.I.1.4 Special Requirements/Consideration
Influent to an impoundment basin is introduced to the system through a
"scalping" box, with widely spaced inclined screen bars to remove large
debris. The slurry can also be fed through a rock box, which can be designed
with a submerged outlet to permit skimming and removal of floating materials
C-4
-------
and to decrease the velocity of the slurry before it enters the basin
(Mallory and Nawrocki 1974).
Flocculants are required to remove particles less than 30 microns in
diameter. Chemical feed pumps, mixing equipment, and storage tanks are
required to support flocculation.
Accumulated solids are usually removed using secondary dredges or
mechanical scrapers. Small hydraulic dredges, clamshell dredges, and
dragline dredges are commonly used for this purpose (see Appendix B).
Adequate land space must be available for construction of impoundment
basins and appropriate permits must be obtained for their construction.
Measures must also be taken to protect underlying groundwater. The extent
of these measures is determined on a site-specific basis and should comply
with the intent of RCRA regulations governing the design and operation of
impoundments (40 CFR Part 264.221-222). This requires that the impoundment
be lined in such a way that contaminants will not leach into the underlying
soils or groundwater. Compliance with the intent of RCRA may require use
of a double liner system and a leak detection system to detect migration of
contaminants to the space between the liners.
C.I.2 Conventional Clarifiers
C.I.2.1 Description
Conventional clarifiers are settling basins that are commonly used in
the treatment of domestic sewage and industrial wastewater. Pre-fabricated
clarifiers can be made of steel or fiberglass, and large concrete clarifiers
are normally cast in place. Typically, a flow with relatively high suspended
solids is introduced at one end of the clarifier, solids settle along the
length of flow, and a flow with relatively low suspended solids leaves the
clarifier through trough-type overflow weirs* Some clarifiers introduce
inflow at the center of a cylindrical basin, and flow occurs radically
outward to overflow weirs around the perimeter of the basin. Clarifiers
are typically equipped with built-in solids collection and removal mechanisms
that continuously remove accumulated solids, allowing continuous operation
of the clarifier. Many clarifiers are equipped with separate zones for
chemical mixing and precipitation, flocculation, and settling (DeRenzo 1978).
Clarifiers are able to remove particles down to 10 to 20 microns
(Mallory and Nawrocki 1974) in diameter with the use of flocculants. They
are also able to produce a thickened sludge with a solids concentration of
about 4 to 12 percent (Metcalf and Eddy 1979).
C-5
-------
C.I.2.2 Applications
Conventional clarifiers are best suited to small- to moderate-scale
cleanup operations, but can be applied to large-scale operations where
construction of earthen impoundment basins will not adequately protect
groundwater.
C.I.2.3 Limitations
Clarifiers are not capable of removing solids with a diameter of less
than about 10 to 20 microns. They are not suitable for locations with severe
space limitations.
C.I.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Chemical conditioning, including chemical feed pumps, mixing equipment
and storage tanks, are required to remove particles smaller than 10 microns.
Clarifiers with capacities greater than 0.1 mgd must be disassembled for
transport to a cleanup site.
C.I.3 High-Rate Clarifiers
C.I.3.1 Description
High-rate clarifiers use multiple "stacked" plates, tubes, or trays to
increase the effective settling surface area of the clarifier and decrease
the actual surface area needed to effect settling. High-rate clarifiers
allow a higher flow rate per unit of actual surface area (loading rate)
than do conventional clarifiers, thus the name "high-rate" clarifiers. The
trays, plates, or tubes also induce optimum hydraulic characteristics for
sedimentation by guiding the flow, reducing short circuiting, and promoting
better velocity distribution.
High-rate clarifiers are able to handle between 2 and 10 times the
loading rate of conventional clarifiers and therefore require limited land
use (Jones, Williams, and Moore 1978). Package units capable of handling
1,000 to 2,000 gpm are available and are easily transported by truck or
barge*
C-6
-------
C.I.3.2 Applications
High-rate clarifiers are best suited to small- to moderate-scale cleanup
operations and to large-scale operations where construction of earthen
impoundments will not adequately protect groundwater. High-rate clarifiers
are particularly applicable to cleanup operations where land use is limited.
C.I.3.4 Limitations
High-rate clarifiers are not suitable for removal of particles larger
than 0.1 inch or less than 10 microns. Use of high-rate clarifiers has not
been demonstrated for applications in sediment/water separation; they are
generally used in applications with lower solids concentrations (Mallory and
Nawrocki 1974). There is also the possibility that cohesive sediments may
clog the channels, tubes, or plates (Jones, Williams and Moore 1978).
C.I.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
High-rate clarifiers require prescreening to remove debris. Chemical
conditioning is required to remove particles of 30 microns or smaller and,
for these applications, chemical feed pumps, mixing equipment, and storage
tanks are required.
C.I.4 Hydraulic Classifiers
C.I.2.1 Description
Hydraulic classifiers are commonly used to separate sand and gravel
from slurries and classify them according to grain size. These units
consist of elevated rectangular tanks with V-shaped bottom hoppers that
collect various particle sizes along the length of the tank. Slurry is
introduced into the feed end of the tank. As the slurry flows to the
opposite end, solids settle to the bottom. Because of differences in
settling rates of different grain sizes, each hopper collects a progressively
smaller range of grain size along the tank length. Motor-driven vanes are
used to sense the level of solids and activate discharge valves as the
solids accumulate in each hopper. Manually adjusted splitter gates below
the discharge valves can be used to selectively direct each range of grain
size to subsequent handling and treatment (Eagle 1981; Mallory and Nawrocki
1974).
Classifying tanks normally have widths of 8 to 12 feet and lengths of
20 to 48 feet. The solids-handling capabilities are generally limited to
C-7
-------
250 to 300 tons per hour. The heaviest loading generally occurs at the
inflow end of the tank where the larger particles drop out (Mallory and
Nawrocki 1974).
For conditions of high flow or high solids concentration, several
classifiers may be required. A single classifier with dimensions of 48 feet
by 12 feet can typically handle the following flow rates depending upon
material grain size: 8000 gpm for 100 mesh material (149 microns); 4200 gpm
for 150 mesh (105 microns), and 2150 gpm for 200 mesh (74 microns).
C.1.4.2 Applications
Hydraulic classifiers are used to remove sand and gravel size particles
(approximately 74 to 149 microns) from slurries and for classifying the re-
moved materials according to particle size. They are well suited to appli-
cations where separation of sand and gravel is desired to allow different
handling, treatment, and disposal methods for the separated fractions.
C.I.4.3 Limitations
Hydraulic classifiers are not suitable for removing particles larger
than about 0.1 inch (fine gravel) or smaller than 74 microns (fine sand)
(Mallory and Nawrocki 1974). They have a low solids handling capacity and
are not well suited for handling large volume of high solids concentrations.
They are not capable of producing sharp size classification. Screens also
tend to dissipate the energy and reduce the velocity of the inflowing slurry
(Mallory and Nawrocki 1974).
C.I.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Before hydraulic scalping and classifying can be used, it is necessary
to remove particles greater than about 0.1 inch in diameter. Bar screens and
vibrating screens are generally used for this purpose.
Spiral classifiers are frequently used together with hydraulic classi-
fiers. The spiral classifier consists of one or two long rotating screws
mounted on an incline within a rectangularly shaped tube and is used pri-
marily to wash any adhering clay or silt from sand and gravel fractions
(Mallory and Nawrocki 1974). Portable systems that incorporate hydraulic
and spiral classifiers are available.
Where multiple hydraulic classifiers are needed, splitter tanks can be
used to distribute the flow to the units and cross flumes to collect the
solids from the regular flumes. This permits use of a smaller number of
large capacity spiral classifiers.
C-8
-------
C.I.5 Granular Media Filters
C.I.5.1 Description
Filtration is a physical process whereby suspended solids are removed
from suspension by forcing the fluid through a permeable medium. Granular
media filtration is typically used for treating liquid waste streams. The
filter media consist of a bed of one or more sizes of granular particles
(typically sand or sand with anthracite coal). The bed is contained within
a basin and is supported by an underdrain system that allows the filtered
liquid to be drawn off while the filter media remains in place. As water
laden with suspended solids passes through the bed of filter media, the
particles become trapped on top of and within the bed. This reduces the
filtration rate and, in order to prevent plugging, the filter is back-
flushed at high velocity to dislodge the particles. The backwash water
contains high concentrations of solids and requires further treatment
(DeRenzo 1978).
Granular media filters are usually operated at a throughput rate of 2
to 6 gpm per square foot of filter media.
Filtration equipment is relatively simple, readily available in a wide
range of sizes, and easy to operate and control.
C.I.5.2 Applications
Granular media filters are most applicable to liquid streams containing
less than 100 to 200 mg/1 suspended solids. They are normally used after
the use of other techniques that remove settleable solids and for treatment
of drinking water. The suspended solids concentration of the filtered
effluent depends a great deal on particle size distribution, but typically,
granular media filters are capable of producing a filtered liquid with
suspended solids concentrations as low as 1 to 10 mg/1.
Because of its small space requirements and relatively simple operation,
filtration is well suited to mobile treatment systems as well as on-site
construction. There is extensive experience with the operation of granular
media filters at hazardous waste sites.
C.I.5.3 Limitations
Granular media filtration is not well suited for treating liquid waste
streams with suspended solids levels in excess of about 200 mg/1. It is also
not suitable for treating colloidal size particles unless they can first be
C-9
-------
flocculated. Because granular media filters must be backwashed to remove
accumulated solids, they cannot be used continuously. Treatment either
must be interrupted or multiple filters must be used to maintain continuous
treatment.
C.1.5.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Settling, or sedimentation, is commonly used to reduce suspended solids
levels prior to filtration. Suspended solids concentrations greater than
about 200 mg/1 may result in excessively frequent backwashing of the
filter media. Backwash water is generally 1 to 4 percent of the original
volume of contaminated water filtered (DeRenzo 1978). The backwash may
contain high concentrations of contaminants and require subsequent treatment.
In some cases, flocculants can be used to increase the effective particle
size of colloids and to improve the effectiveness of filtration.
C.I.6 Hydrocyclones
C.I.4.1 Description
The hydrocyclone, or simply cyclone, consists of a cylindrical/conical
shell with a tangential inlet for feed and outlets for the separated streams.
Cyclones contain no moving parts. The process stream is fed to the unit
with sufficient velocity to create a "vortex" action that forces the slurry
into a spiral and, as the rapidly rotating liquid spins about the axis of
the cone, it is forced to spiral inward and then out through a centrally
located overflow outlet. Larger and heavier particles of solids are forced
outward against the wall of the cone by centrifugal force within the vortex.
The solids spiral around the wall of the cyclone and exit through the apex
at the bottom of the cone. Smaller particles remain suspended in the
liquid as it spirals inward and is discharged (Dorr-Oliver undated).
.Cyclones are available in a wide range of sizes. Units are available
that can handle flows of only a few gallons per minute and large cyclones
can handle flows of 2000 to 7000 gpm depending upon slurry composition
(Dorr-Oliver undated; Krebs Engineers undated). However* cyclones do not
"scale up" as many other equipment items do. Smaller, lower-capacity
cyclones are capable of removing smaller solids from slurries. In order to
remove small particles from slurries with high flow rates, multiple cyclones
can be used in parallel. Banks of multiple cyclones, manufactured as a
single unit with a single feed pipe, are commercially available. A high
degree of particle size separation can also be achieved by employing a bank
of cyclones in series, with decreasing cyclone size and particle size
removal in the direction of flow.
C-10
-------
C.I.6.2 Applications
Cyclones are designed to separate and classify solids in the size
range of 2,000 microns to 10 microns (Dorr-Oliver undated; Krebs Engineers
undated). Cyclones are most applicable to situations where space is limited.
They are most appropriately used to remove smaller size particles from
slurries and where a sharp separation by particle size is needed.
C.I.6.3 Limitations
Cyclones are generally not effective for slurries with a solids concen-
tration of greater then 30 percent or for handling particle sizes larger
than about 0.1 inch. They are not suitable for separating solids from
viscous slurries (Krebs Engineers undated). Cyclones are highly vulnerable
to clogging by oversize particles, and a high degree of prescreening (or
the use of progressively smaller cyclones in series) may be needed to avert
clogging. The performance of cyclones is highly dependent on flow rate and
is sensitive to variations in flow rate.
C.I.6.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Feed to cyclones must be regulated and prescreened to remove particles
that are larger than those that the cyclone is designed to handle (based on
the diameter of the cyclone). Although a bank of cyclones can separate and
classify solids over a broad range of grain sizes and flow rates, each
individual cyclone is capable of handling only limited variability in flow
rate and grain size. Therefore, the system must be carefully designed for
a particular application. However, many cyclones are able to handle changes
in flow rate, solids concentration, and grain size through adjustment and
changes of parts. Cyclone liners, which are prone to wear as a result of
abrasion by the materials being separated, require periodic replacement.
C.I.7 Summary
Sediment/water separation techniques and information pertinent to
their evaluation and selection are summarized in Table C-l.
C-ll
-------
TABLE C-l. SUMMARY OF SEDIMENT/WATER SEPARATION TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
o
I
to
Impoundment Used to remove particles down
Basin to a grain size of 20 to 30
microns without flocculants,
and down to 10 microns with
flocculants.
Provide temporary storage of
dredged material.
Allow classification of •
sediments by grain size.
Conventional Used to remove particles down
Clarifier and • to a grain size of 20 to 30
Sedimentation microns without flocculants,
and down to 10 microns with
flocculants.
Provide temporary storage of
dredged material.
Able to be barge mounted or
installed on land where
groundwater cannot be ade-
quately protected by an
impoundment basin.
High-Rate Used to remove particles down
Clarifier to a grain size of 20 to 30
microns without flocculants
and down to 10 microns with
flocculants.
Requires large land
areas.
Requires long set-up
time.
Removal of settled
solids by secondary
dredging is labor
intensive.
Requires large land
areas unless barge
mounted.
Potential for groundwater
contamination.
Potential for localized odor
and air emissions.
High
Potential for localized odor
and air emissions.
Low to
Medium
Not demonstrated for
sediment/water separ-
ation, but this appli-
cation is similar to
conventional applications.
Potential for localize odor and
air pollution problems.
Low to
Medium
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-l. (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
High-Rate .
Clarifier
(continued)
Hydraulic
Classifier
n
i
UJ
Cyclones
Filtration
Able to be barge-mounted,
installed in areas where
groundwater cannot be
adequately protected by
impoundment basins.
Used to remove particles from
slurries in size range of 74
to 149 microns (fine sand to
coarse sand). '
Classify particle according
to grain size.
Used to separate and classify
solids in size range of 2,000
microns or more down to 10
microns or less.
Used to remove suspended
solids down to low levels
(1 to 10 mg/1) required for
effluent discharge.
Hydraulic.throughput is
limited to about 250 to
300 tph regardless of
size.
Not capable of producing
a sharp size distinction.
Requires use of large
land area for large scale
dredging or where solids
concentrations are high.
Not suitable for dredged
slurries with solids
concentrations greater
than 10 to 20 percent.
Not cost-effective for
treating waste streams
with suspended solids
concentrations 200 mg/1.
Not effective for
colloidal sized
particles.
No significant impacts.
Medium
No significant impacts,
No significant impacts
provided backwash is properly
treated.
Medium
High
-------
G.2 SEDIMENTS DEWATERING
Dewatering is used to reduce the moisture content of sediments for one
of the following reasons:
o Dewatered sediments are more easily handled
o Dewatering is normally required prior to incineration to reduce fuel
requirements
o Dewatering is required prior to land disposal
o The cost of transporting sediments to ultimate disposal is markedly
reduced by reducing the volume and weight of material.
Commonly used methods for dewatering sludges, which may also be used
for sediments, include: dewatering lagoons, filtration, centrifugation,
and gravity thickening.
The selection of the most appropriate dewatering method depends on the
volume of sediments, land space available, grain-size distribution of the
sediments, and the degree of dewatering required.
C.2.1 Dewatering Lagoons
C.2.1.1 Description
Dewatering lagoons use a gravity or vacuum-assisted underdrainage
system to remove water from sediments. The lagoons are lined with clay or
other appropriate liner material to prevent migration of contaminants into
the underlying soils and groundwater. The underdrainage system can be
designed and operated using one of the following approaches:
o Gravity: Water infiltrates by gravity through a permeable under-
drainage layer to a perforated collector pipe network (Haliburton
1978). The underdrainage layer consists of a well-graded sand,
fine uniform sand, or fabric filter placed over a permeable and
free-draining gravel layer (Haliburton 1978; Mallory and Nawrocki
1974).
o Vacuum Pumping: Wells or well points are sunk into the sediments
and water is pumped from the wells under a vacuum head (Mallory and
Nawrocki 1974).
o Vacuum-Assisted: A permeable media filter plate set above an
aggregate filled support plenum drains to a sump. A relatively small
vacuum pump is connected to draw a vacuum from the sump (USEPA 1982).
C-14
-------
Electro-osmosis: A direct current electrical potential is applied
in the soil by means of electrodes. This electrical potential
induces the flow of water in the pores of the fine-grained sediment
toward the negative pole, or cathode. A line of wells or wellpoints
can be installed to intercept and remove the water (Mallory and
Nawrocki 1974).
C.2.1.2 Applications
Dewatering lagoons are capable of dewatering sediments of any grain-
size. They also provide temporary storage for dredged materials.
Dewatering lagoons employing a gravity underdrainage system are capable
of achieving a solids content of up to 40 percent after 10 to 15 days (based
on municipal sludge, under favorable conditions). These systems have the
advantage of very low operating costs. Vacuum-assisted and vacuum pumping
dewatering systems can dewater sediments at a much more rapid rate and are
capable of dewatering finer grained sediments than gravity dewatering.
Vacuum-assisted systems increase the dewatering rate by about 50 percent
(with a vacuum of 8 psi or less) (Haliburton 1978).
Electro-osmosis is applicable primarily to dewatering very fine-grained
sediments (2 to 10 microns). The process is theoretically independent of
the cross-sectional area of the pore structure of the filter media and
therefore can dewater very fine grained sediments without clogging (Mallorv
and Nawrocki 1974).
C.2.1.3 Limitations
Requirements for large land areas and long periods of time for con-
struction or mobilization may preclude the use of dewatering lagoons under
situations where space and/or time are limiting factors.
Gravity drainage systems are the most prone to clogging, particularly
if the underdrainage system is not properly designed. Vacuum pumping
systems require a higher degree of maintenance and are considerably more
costly to operate than gravity systems. Electro-osmosis is very costly and
requires continuous monitoring and therefore has limited application.
C.2.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Provisions must be taken to protect underlying groundwater supplies
through installation of a liner system. The design of this system will need
to be determined on a case-by-case basis depending upon such factors as how
C-15
-------
long the lagoon will be in use and the mobility of the contaminants. In
some cases lagoons may need to be constructed above ground to avoid contact
with a high groundwater table. Decay of organic matter in dewatering lagoons
can result in localized odor and air pollution problems.
C.2.2 Centrifugation
C.2.2.1 Description
Centrifugal dewatering uses the force developed by fast rotation of a
cylindrical drum or bowl to separate solids and liquids by density differ-
ences under the influence of centrifugal force. Dewatering is usually
accomplished using a solid bowl or basket centrifuge.
The solid-bowl centrifuge consists of a long rotating horizontal
cylindrical bowl that is tapered at one end. The bowl contains a screw-type
conveyor or scroll that also rotates, but at a slower speed. The material
to be dewatered is fed continuously to the bowl through a feed pipe and the
solids settle on the bowl wall. The rotating conveyor moves the material
toward the tapered end where additional solids concentration occurs. The
dewatered material is then discharged (USEPA 1982; Metcalf and Eddy 1979).
In an imperforate basket centrifuge, the feed material is introduced
into a vertically mounted spinning bowl and forms a cake on the bowl wall
as the unit rotates. The liquid is displaced over a baffle or weir at the
top of the unit. When the solids holding capacity of the machine has been
reached, the bowl decelerates and a scraper is positioned in the bowl to
help remove the accumulated solids (USEPA 1982; Metcalf and Eddy 1979).
C.2.2.2 Applications
Centrifugation can be used to dewater sediments ranging in size from
fine gravel to silt. Effectiveness of Centrifugation depends upon the
particle sizes and shapes and the solids concentration. For dewatering of
municipal wastewater sludges (for which extensive information is available),
dewatered sludges with a solids content of about 15 to 35 percent are
achievable with the solid bowl centrifuge (USEPA 1979). Using the basket
centrifuge, solids concentrations of 10 to 25 percent are generally
achievable.
The basket centrifuge is not affected by grit to the extent that
filtration methods or the basket centrifuge are. Also the basket centrifuge
is excellent for hard-to-dewater sludges. The solid bowl centrifuge is
easier to install, requires a smaller land area and has a higher hydraulic
throughput (USEPA 1982).
C-16
-------
Centrifuges are relatively compact and are well suited to areas with
space limitations.
C.2.2.3 Limitations
Centrifuges are not as effective as filtration or dewatering beds and
high energy costs associated with their operation at least partially offset
their low capital cost. The major limitations of the basket centrifuge
include a lower dewatering efficiency and its batch (i.e., discontinuous)
operation. It also has a high ratio of capital cost to capacity. The
major limitation of the solid bowl centrifuge is that the scroll is highly
subject to abrasion. This results in the need for degritting the effluent
and may result in high maintenance costs associated with maintaining the
scroll (USEPA 1982). Since centrifugation relies on settling of particles
according to density, the process tends to classify the solids, settling
the heavier particles first. Dewatering processes that rely on filtration,
on the other hand, achieve a more even distribution of solid capture. It
is possible for a buildup of fines to occur in the effluent from centri-
fugation, particularly if the centrifuge is operating improperly due to
inadequate conditioning or due to a malfunction (USEPA 1982).
C.2.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The operation of centrifuges is simple, clean, and relatively inexpen-
sive. Chemical conditioning is required for effective dewatering and
therefore chemical storage, mixing, and feeding equipment is needed.
Centrifuges, particularly the basket centrifuge, require special structural
support. Provisions may also be needed for noise control, particularly
with the solid bowl centrifuge. Solid bowl centrifuges generally require
use of a prescreening step to avoid excess wear on .the scroll.
C.2.3 Filtration
C.2.3.1 Description
Filtration is a physical process whereby fluid is forced through a
permeable medium and dewatered solids are retained. Three types of filters
are commonly used for dewatering: belt press filtration, vacuum filtration,
and pressure filtration.
Belt filter presses employ single or double moving belts to continuously
dewater sludges. The belt press filtration process includes three stages:
chemical conditioning of the feed; gravity drainage to a nonfluid consis-
tency, and dewatering. A flocculant is added prior to feeding the slurry
C-17
-------
to the belt press. Free water drains from the conditioned sludge and the
sludge enters a two-belt contact zone where an upper belt is gently set on
the forming sludge cake. The belts, with the captured cake between them,
pass over rollers of decreasing diameter. This subjects the material .to
continuously increasing pressures and shear forces. Progressively, more
water is expelled throughout the roller section to the end where the de-
watered material is discharged. A scraper blade is often employed for each
belt at the discharge point to remove the caked material from the belts
(USEPA 1982).
A vacuum filter consists basically of a horizontal cylindrical drum
that rotates partially submerged in a vat of material to be dewatered. The
drum is covered with a continuous belt of fabric or wire mesh. A vacuum is
applied to the inside of the drum. The vacuum causes liquid in the vat to
be forced through the filter medium leaving wet solids adhering to the outer
surface. As the drum continues to rotate, it passes from the cake-forming
zone to a drying zone and finally to a cake discharge zone, where the sludge
cake is removed from the media (USEPA 1982; Metcalf and Eddy 1979).
Pressure filtration is used to describe a category of filters in which
rigid individual filtration chambers are operated in parallel under rela-
tively high pressure. The filter press, the most commonly used pressure
filtration device, consists of a series of plates recessed on both sides,
'that are supported face-to-face in a vertical position on a frame with a
fixed and movable head. A filter cloth is hung or fitted over each plate.
Material to be dewatered is pumped into the space between the plates and
sufficient pressure is applied and sustained to force the liquid through
the filter cloth and plate outlet parts. The plates are then separated and
the dewatered material is removed.
Diaphragm filters are specially designed filter presses. Instead of
the conventional plate-and-frame unit in which constant pumping pressure is
used to force the filtrate through the cloth, diaphragm filters combine an
initial pumping followed by a squeezing cycle that can reduce the cost and
process time.
C.2.3.2 Applications
Filtration can be used to dewater fine-grained sediments over a wide
range of solids concentrations. Effectiveness depends on the type of
filter, the grain sizes, and the solids concentration in the influent.
Information on the use of filtration methods for dewatering sediments is
limited and it is difficult to predict their effectiveness for these
applications. For dewatering of municipal wastewater treatment sludges,
where considerable performance information is available, typical ranges of
solids concentrations in the dewatered material are as follow (USEPA 1979;
USEPA 1982; Metcalf and Eddy 1979):
• Belt press filtration - 15 to 45 percent
C-18
-------
• Vacuum rotary filtration - 12 to 40 percent
• Pressure filtration - 30 to 50 percent.
Data are also available on the performance of filtration methods in
dewatering coal slurries. Manufacturers data indicate that the belt press
and filter press are able to produce a filter cake of up to 70 to 80 per-
cent solids (Green 1981). Tests conducted by Rexnord, Inc. demonstrated
that high-density dredged materials can also be dewatered to a high solids
concentration of 70 percent using belt press filtration (Erickson and Hurst
1983). Research has shown that the most important factor in determining
the effectiveness of vacuum filtration dewatering of sediments is the
specific resistance of the dredged material. The lowest specific resistance
occurs at a silt/clay content ranging between 60 and 70 percent and increases
as the silt/clay content increases or decreases (Long and Arana 1978).
Although pressure filtration has traditionally been considered the most
effective of the filtration methods for dewatering, recent improvements in
belt press filtration has also made this method highly effective. Belt
filtration is less costly and energy-intensive than pressure filtration and
operating and maintenance requirements are typically simpler and less labor-
intensive (USEPA 1982). Vacuum filtration has the advantage of a higher
hydraulic throughput than the other two methods. Performance is also less
dependent on optimal chemical conditioning (USEPA 1982).
C.2.3.3 Limitations
Use of filtration methods requires a considerably higher degree of
maintenance and operator supervision than other methods described in this
section.
The major limitation of the use of belt filtration is that the process
performance is very sensitive to incoming feed characteristics and chemical
conditioning. Slurries must be prescreened more carefully than with other
filtration methods to remove large objects and fibrous material that can
quickly deteriorate the belt. Also, a large amount of wash water can be
generated in cleaning the belts (USEPA 1982).
Vacuum filtration is more energy-intensive and less effective in
dewatering than is the belt press filter. Another limitation on the use of
vacuum filtration is that the incoming feed must have a solids content of
at least 3 percent in order to achieve adequate cake formation (USEPA
1982).
The major limitations on the use of filter presses are that they are
costly to operate and require more space than the other filtration methods.
Filter presses also require high dosages of conditioning chemicals.
Replacement of the filter media on a filter press is both costly and time
consuming (USEPA 1982).
C-19
-------
C.2.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Effective use of filtration methods for dewatering invariably requires
chemical conditioning; therefore, feed pumps, mixing equipment and chemical
storage tanks are required. Waste streams must be prescreened and degritted
to remove abrasive particles that can tear the filter media. Maintenance
requirements associated with filters are significant. The filter cloth or
belts must be periodically replaced and it is necessary to periodically wash
the filter media to remove accumulated solids and prevent filter blinding.
Although filtration methods are capable of producing a filter cake with a
high solids content, the dewatered material may require further treatment
before being acceptable for off-site disposal.
C.2.4 Gravity Thickening
C.2.4.1 Description
Gravity thickening is accomplished in a tank similar in design to a
conventional sedimentation tank or clarifier. The material to be thickened
is fed to a center well and the solids settle on the bottom of the tank.
Water overflows the tank and solids are raked to the center of the tank and
withdrawn by gravity discharge or pumping.
Gravity thickeners can be used to concentrate dredge material slurries
of any grain size and at nearly any flow rate. They can generally produce
a solids concentration ranging from about 2 to 15 percent (USEPA 1982;
Metcalf and Eddy 1979). The thickened material is then dewatered using
other methods described in this section; use of the gravity thickener
reduces the hydraulic load to other dewatering processes.
C.2.4.2 Applications
Gravity thickeners are best used in situations where the hydraulic
load to a primary dewatering process needs to be reduced because of availa-
bility of equipment and/or costs. The operation of gravity thickeners is
simple and maintenance requirements are minimal making them well suited to
locations where operator supervision cannot be provided continuously.
C.2.4.3 Limitations
The major limitation to the use of gravity thickeners is that they do
not produce fully dewatered material. Slurries with a solids concentration
in excess of 6 percent are usually not cost-effectively treated using
C-20
-------
gravity thickening methods. Gravity thickeners require use of a substantial
amount of land.. The requirement for large land areas may preclude use of
conventional gravity thickeners in some locations.
C.2.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Effective thickening of dredge slurries frequently requires the use of
flocculants and chemical storage tanks, feed pumps, and mixing equipment.
Gravity thickeners generally require large land areas. However, high-
rate gravity thickeners designed to provide up to 15 times the throughput
of a conventional thickener are available and can reduce land requirements
considerably (Dorr-Oliver undated).
C.2.5 Summary
Sediments dewatering techniques and information pertinent to their
evaluation and selection are summarized in Table C-2.
•C.3 WASTE WATER TREATMENT
Waste water and other liquids generated from the cleanup of contaminated
sediments or spills may require treatment to remove dissolved or colloidal
contaminants prior to disposal. These streams vary widely with respect to
volume and level and type contaminants. The types of liquid streams that
are typically encountered include the following:
• Overflow from dredged material settling basins
• Highly concentrated liquids from the recovery of spilled materials
® Effluent from solids dewatering (filtrate, centrate, etc.)
• Leachate from dewatering lagoons and impoundment basins
« Contaminated water from cleaning of equipment.
Because the streams are so diverse in volume and in type and concen-
tration of contaminants, a wide variety of treatment processes and systems
need to be considered. This section concentrates on techniques that have
the broadest applicability for on-site treatment; these techniques include
activated carbon adsorption, biological treatment, ion exchange, neutraliza-
tion, precipitation, flocculation, ultrafiltration, and ozonation/ultraviolet
C-21
-------
TABLE C-2. SUMMARY OF SOLIDS DEWATERING TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Dewatering
Lagoons
10
Solid Bowl
Centrifuge
Dewatering sediment of any
grain size to a solids
content of up to 40 percent
and up to 99 percent solids .
removal.
Generally used for large scale
dredging operations where
land space is available;
Thickening or dewatering
sediments; able to obtain
a dewatered sludge with 15
to 35 percent solid; solid
capture typically ranges from
from 90 to 98 percent.
Requires large land
areas.
Requires long set-up
time.
Labor coats associated
with removal of
dewatering sediments
are high.
Systems using gravity
drainage are prone to
clogging.
Systems using vacuums
require considerable
maintenance and super-
vision.
Systems based on electro-
osmosis are costly.'
Not as effective in
dewatering as filtra-
tion or lagoons.
Process may result in a
build up of fines in
effluent from centrifuge.
Potential for groundvater
contamination.
Potential for localized odor
and air pollution problems.
Low to
High
No significant secondary
impacts.
Medium
to High
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-2. (continued)
Technique
Solid Bowl
Centrifuge
(continued)
Basket
Centrifuge
Applications
Limitations
o
N>
W
Belt Press
Filtration
Vacuum Rotary
Filtration
Suitable for areas with space
limitations.
Thickening or dewatering
sediments; able to obtain a
dewatered sludge with 10 to
25% solids. Solids capture
ranges from 80 to 98%.
Suitable for areas with
space limitations.
Good for hard-to-dewater
sludges.
Used to dewater fine grained
sediments. Capable of
obtaining relatively dry
filter cake containing up to
45 to 70 percent solids, able
to achieve solids capture of
85 to 95%.
Generally best suited of
filtration methods for mobile
treatment systems.
Used to dewater fine grained
sediments capable of obtaining
a filter cake of up to 35 or
40% solids and a solids
capture rate of 88 to 95%.
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Scroll is subject to
abrasion.
Not as effective in
dewatering as solid bowl
centrifuge, filtration
or dewatering lagoons.
Process may result in a
build-up of fines in
effluent from centrifuge.
Units cannot be operated
continuously without
complex controls.
Performance is very
sensitive to incoming
feed characteristics and
chemical conditions.
Belts can deteriorate
quickly in presence of
abrasive material.
No significant secondary
impacts.
Medium
to High
Generates a substantial amount
of wash water that must
be treated.
Medium
Least effective of the
filtration methods for
dewatering.
Energy intensive.
Generates a wash water that
must be treated.
High
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-2. (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Coat
o
i
to
Vacuum Rotary
Filtration
(continued)
Pressure
Filtration
Gravity
Thickener
Able to operate at high
hydraulic throughput.
Used to dewater fine grained
sediments.
Capable of obtaining a
relatively dry filter cake
with a solids content up to
50 to 80Z. Also able to
achieve a high solids capture
rate of up to 98Z.
Thickening of sediment
slurries to produce a con-
centrate that can then be
dewatered using filtration
or dewatering lagoons. Able
to produce a thickened sludge
with a solids concentration
of 2 to 15Z.
Requires a relatively
large amount of space.
Costly and energy
intensive.
Replacement of filter
media is time consulting.
Least effective method
for dewatering sediment
slurries.
Requires use of a sub-
stantial amount of land.
Generates a wash water that
must subsequently be treated.
High
Potential for localized odor
and air pollution problems.
Low to
Medium
-------
radiation. This section also addresses discharge of contaminated water to
public sewerage systems for treatment by publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs).
C.3.1 Activated Carbon
C.3.1.1 Description
Treatment of liquids with activated carbon involves contacting a waste
stream with specially prepared carbon, usually by flow through a series of
packed bed reactors. The activated carbon adsorbs contaminants by a surface
attraction phenomenon in which organic and some inorganic molecules are
attracted to the internal pores of the carbon granules. Once the surfaces
are saturated with contaminants, the carbon is "spent" and must be either
replaced with virgin carbon or removed, thermally regenerated, and replaced.
ine time required to reach carbon exhaustion, or "breakthrough" of
contaminants, is a critical operating parameter.
C.3.1. 2 Applications
Activated carbon is suitable for treating a wide range of soluble
organics over a broad range of concentrations. As carbon adsorption is
essentially an electrical interaction phenomenon, the polarity of the waste
compounds largely determines the effectiveness of the adsorption process?
The solubility of the waste constituents are important in determining
rS^v ?? ?°tef ±ai*, J5* 16SS P°lar and S0luble a c°*P°™d is, the more
readily it is adsorbed (Conway and Ross 1980). A total organic carbon
concentration of one percent, or 10,000 ppm, is generally considered to be
the upper practical limit for treatment by activated carbon (DeRenzo
iy/
Although activated carbon adsorption is used primarily for treatment
of organics, some metals and inorganic species have shown excellent to good
sUve~r Mercurvntiai'^TheKie ^-T1^'' anti^^' ar^ic, <^nide, chromium,
silver, mercury, cobalt, chlorine, bromine, and iodine (DeRenzo 1978).
ac m Actlva
-------
C.3.1.3 Limitations
Activated carbon is generally not suitable for treating liquid streams
with contaminant concentrations in excess of one percent or suspended solids
concentrations of greater than 50 ppm; backwash requirements are excessive
at higher suspended solids concentrations. Treatment is also limited to
liquid streams with oil and grease concentrations of less than 10 rag/1.
The process is not effective for low molecular weight compounds.
C.3.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Cost-effective use of activated carbon requires pretreatment to remove
suspended solids and oil and grease. Filtration and gravity separation are
generally used for these purposes. Adjustment of pH may also be required in
order to reduce the level of dissolved inorganics, which can cause scaling
and loss of activity during thermal regeneration (DeRenzo 1978). In many
instances it is cost-effective to precede carbon adsorption with biological
treatment in order to reduce the organic load on the carbon, thereby reducing
carbon regeneration costs.
The most obvious maintenance consideration associated with activated
carbon treatment'is the regeneration of spent carbon'for reuse. Regeneration
must be performed for each column at the conclusion of its bed life so the
spent carbon may be restored as nearly as possible to its original condition
for reuse. The services of a commercial regeneration facility are practical
for small operations. Carbon columns must also periodically be backwashed
to remove accumulated suspended solids. Other operation and maintenance
requirements of activated carbon technology are minimal if appropriate
automatic controls have been installed.
C.3.2 Biological Treatment
C.3.2.1 Description
Treatment of wastewater by biological methods removes organic matter
through microbial oxidation. In the most conventional process, activated
sludge, wastewater flows into an aeration basin where it is mixed with
active acclimated microorganisms and is aerated for several hours. A
portion of the mass of microorganisms is recycled to the basin to maintain
an acceptable organic substrate-to-microorganism ratio; the remaining
biomass produced during aeration forms a sludge that is settled out in a
clarifier.
There are a number of variations of the activated sludge process.
These are summarized in Table C-3 (DeRenzo 1978; Metcalf and Eddy 1979).
C-26
-------
C.3.2.2 Applications
Many organic compounds are considered to be amenable to biological
treatment, although the relative ease of biodegradation varies widely. In
addition, recent advances in developing specialized microorganisms for
facilitating biodegradation of complex organics has broadened the applica-
tions for biological treatment. Specific applications of the activated
sludge process are summarized in Table C-3.
C.3.2.3 Limitations
Biological treatment is not suitable for treatment of high-strength
organic waste, aqueous waste streams with a suspended solids concentrations
in excess of one percent, and high oil and grease concentrations. It is
also not suitable for treatment of waste streams with high concentrations
of chlorinated compounds, inhibitory concentrations of other organics and
inorganics, or pH extremes (less than 6 or greater than 9). Biological
processes are also subject to failure from "shock loads" and initial
degradation may be inhibited or delayed if the microorganisms need to be
acclimated to the wastes.
C.3.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Influents to biological treatment processes must be pretreated to
remove constituents that are potentially toxic to microorganisms. Suspended
solids should generally not exceed 50 to 125 mg/1 and can be removed using
sedimentation. Toxic concentrations of metals must be removed by precipita-
tion and sedimentation. Skimming tanks or gravity separators are required
to reduce oil and grease levels to less than about 35 to 50 mg/1. Neutrali-
zation is required to maintain a pH of greater than 6 and less than 9
(Conway and Ross 1980).
C.3.3 Ion Exchange
C.3.3.1 Description
Ion exchange is a process that removes unwanted ions from wastewater
by transferring them to a solid resin material "in exchange" for an equiva-
lent number of innocuous ions stored in the ion exchanger material. The
ion exchanger has a limited capacity for storage of ions and eventually
becomes saturated. It is then washed with a strong regenerating solution
containing the innocuous ions, and these then replace the accumulated
undesirable ions, returning the exchange material to a usable condition
(Nalco Chemical Company 1979).
C-27
-------
TABLE C-3. SUMMARY OF BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
Process
Description
Application,
Conventional
(plug flow)
Completely
mixed
00
Step aeration
Extended
aeration
Wastewater and return sludge are mixed at the head
of the aeration tank; the so-called mixed liquor
flows through the tank in a plug-flow fashion
with some longitudinal mixing.
Used to equalize load variations and improve
distribution of dissolved oxygen; involves oper-
ating mechanical aerators in the aeration tank
to achieve almost instantaneous distribution of
untreated wastes throughout the tank.
Used to equalize influent organic loading along
the course of flow of the mixed liquor; involves
admitting influent wastewater at multiple
points along the aeration tank.
Used where there are low organic loadings and it
is desireable to minimize sludge residue; involves
longer aeration retention periods so that endo-
genous respiration of biomass is achieved.
Applicable to low-strength
wastes; subject to shock
loads.
More resistant to shock
loads than conventional
activated sludge.
Good applicability for a
wider range of waste-
types.
Requires low organic load
and long detention times;
low volume of sludge;
available as package plant.
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-3. (continued)
Process
Description
Application
Pure
oxygen
Rotating
biological
disc
n
to
10
Used where there are high organic and metal
concentrations to maintain a high dissolved
oxygen level and a high biomass concentration;
involves a closed staged aeration tank with
mechanical mixers receiving concurrent flow of
wastewater and oxygen gas.
Biological growth becomes attached to the surfaces
of disks and eventually forms a slime ;layer over
entire wetted surface; rotation of the disk al-
ternatively contacts the biomass with the organic
material in the wastewater and then with the
atmosphere for adsorption of oxygen.
Suitable for high-strength
wastes; low sludge volume;
reduced aeration tank
volume.
Can handle large flow
variations and high organic
shock loads; modular
construction provides
flexibility to meet in-
creases or decreased
treatment needs.
Sources: Conway and Ross 1980; Metcalf and Eddy 1979; DeRenzo 1978.
-------
C.3.3.2 Applications
Ion exchange can be used to remove or concentrate the following groups
of contaminants that may be found in s^ill situations (DeRenzo 1978):
• Inorganics:
- All metallic elements when present as soluble species, either
cationic or anionic
- Anions such as halides, sulfate, nitrate, cyanides, etc.
• Organics (water soluble and ionic):
- Acids, such as carboxylics, sulfonics, and some phenols, at a pH
sufficiently alkaline
- Amines when the solution acidity is sufficient to form the
corresponding acid salt.
The upper practical limit of exchangeable ions is about 2500 to 4000
mg/1 (DeRenzo 1978). Ion exchange units are relatively compact and are
not energy intensive. The units can be put into and removed from operation
in little time and with little effort (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan 1981).
These features allow for convenient use of ion exchange systems in mobile
treatment systems.
C.3.3.3 Limitations
Ion exchange is not suitable for treatment of non-ionic compounds or
for the treatment of highly concentrated waste streams (>4000 mg/1) or
streams high in suspended solids or oxidants (DeRenzo 1978).
Certain organics, particularly aromatics that may be present in a
waste stream, can be irreversibly sorbed by resins, thereby decreasing
their capacity.
C.3.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Influent to ion exchange columns must be pretreated using filtration in
order to reduce suspended solids concentrations to less than 50 mg/1.
Oxidants must also be removed prior to ion exchange.
Although ion exchange columns can be operated either manually or auto-
matically, manual operation is better suited for hazardous waste site
applications because of the diversity of wastes encountered. In manual
operation, the operator can decide when to stop the service cycle and begin
the backwash cycle. However, this requires use of a skilled operator
familiar with the process (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan 1981).
C-30
-------
C.3.4 Neutralization
C.3.4.1 Description
Neutralization consists of adding acid or base to a liquid in order to
adjust its pH. The most common system for neutralizing acidic or basic
waste streams utilizes a multiple-compartment basin usually constructed of
concrete. This basin is lined with acid brick or is coated with a material
resistant to the expected environment. In order to reduce the required
volume of the neutralization basin, mixers are installed in each compartment
to provide more intimate contact between the waste and neutralizing reagents,
thus speeding up reaction time.
The choice of an acidic reagent for neutralization of an alkaline
wastewater is generally between sulfuric acid and hydrochloric acid.
Sulfuric acid is usually used due to its lower cost, although hydrochloric
acid produces soluble reaction end products (Conway and Ross 1980).
The selection of a caustic reagent is usually between sodium hydroxide
and various limes although ammonium hydroxide is also occasionally used
(Conway and Ross 1980).
C.3.4.2 Applications
Neutralization can be applied to any waste acid or alkaline liquid
stream that requires pH adjustment.
C.3.4.3 Limitations
There are no limitations on the use of neutralization when the process
is properly applied.
C.3.4.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Neutralization is a relatively simple treatment process that can be
accomplished using readily available equipment. Only storage and reaction
tanks with accessory agitators and delivery systems are required. Because
of the corrosivity of the wastes and treatment reagents, appropriate materi-
als of construction are needed to provide a reasonable service life for
equipment.
Neutralization of liquids has the potential of producing air emissions.
Acidification of streams containing certain salts, such as sulfide for
example, will produce toxic gases. Feed tanks should be totally enclosed
to prevent escape of acid fumes. Adequate mixing should be provided to
C-31
-------
disperse the heat of reaction if wastes being treated are concentrated.
The process should be controlled from a remote location if possible.
C.3.5 Precipitation
C.3.5.1 Description
Precipitation is a physiochemical process whereby some or all of a
substance in solution is transformed into a solid phase. It is based on
alteration of the chemical equilibrium relationships that affect the solu-
bility of inorganic compounds. Removal of metals as hydroxides or sulfides
is the most common precipitation application in wastewater treatment.
Generally, lime or sodium sulfide is added to the wastewater in a rapid
mixing tank along with flocculating agents (chemicals that aid in the
settling of precipitates). The wastewater flows to a flocculation chamber
in which adequate mixing and retention time are provided for agglomeration
of precipitate particles. Agglomerated particles are separated from the
liquid phase by settling in a sedimentation chamber and/or by other physical
processes such as filtration.
Precipitation is a well established technique and the operating para-
meters are well defined. The-process requires only chemical pumps, metering
devices, and mixing and settling tanks. The equipment is readily available
and easy to operate.
C.3.5.2 Applications
Precipitation is applicable to the removal of most metals from waste-
water including zinc, cadmium, chromium, copper, fluoride, lead, manganese,
and mercury. Also, certain anionic species, such as phosphate, sulfate,
and fluoride, can be removed by precipitation.
C.3.5.3 Limitations
Precipitation cannot reduce the concentration of a particular metal
below the solubility product. In some cases, organic compounds may form
organometallic complexes with metals, which could inhibit precipitation.
Cyanide and other ions in wastewater may also combine with metals, making
treatment by precipitation less efficient. Metals that are precipitated
as metal hydroxides and carbonates are stable only over a narrow pH range;
a metal reaches a minimum solubility at a specific pH, but further addition
of the precipitant causes the metal to become soluble again. The pH at
which minimum solubility occurs is different for each metal.
C-32
-------
C.3.5.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The performance and reliability of precipitation depends greatly on
the variability of the composition of the liquid being treated. The amount
of chemicals added is a function of the species of metals in solution and
their concentrations.
Precipitation is nonselective in that compounds other than those tar-
geted may also be removed. The process also generates a large volume of
sludge that must be disposed.
Precipitation poses minimal safety and health hazards to workers. The
entire system is operated at near ambient conditions, eliminating the danger
of high pressure/high temperature operation with other systems. While the
chemicals employed in precipitation are skin irritants, they can easily be
handled in a safe manner.
C.3.6 Flocculation
C.3.6.1 Description
Flocculation is a process in which small, unsettleable particles
suspended in a liquid are made to agglomerate into larger, more settleable
particles. The flocculation process entails the following steps (DeRenzo
1978):
o Mixing of a flocculating agent with water (often outside of the
wastewater system)
» Rapid mixing of the above mixture with the wastewater stream to
disperse the flocculating agent throughout the wastewater
• Slow and gentle mixing to allow for contact between small particles
and agglomeration into larger particles.
Once suspended particles have flocculated into larger particles, they
can usually be removed by sedimentation, provided that a sufficient density
difference exists between the suspended matter and the liquid.
Chemicals that are typically used in flocculation include alum, lime,
iron salts, and polyelectrolytes.
C-33
-------
C.3.6.2 Applications
Flocculation is applicable to any liquid where it is necessary to
agglomerate particles to form larger more settleable particles.
C.3.6.3 Limitations
There are no major limitations to the use of flocculants when they are
properly applied.
C.3.6.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Selection of the optimum flocculant and flocculant dosage must be made
on a case-by-case basis. A small number of flocculants that may be effective
is selected based on manufacturers' suggestions and jar tests are conducted
to determine suitability for treating a specific liquid. Test procedures
along with recommendations for potentially effective flocculants can be
obtained from manufacturers.
Operation and maintenance of flocculation equipment is relatively
simple, since only feed pumps, storage tanks, and feed lines are required.
C.3.7 Ultrafiltration
C.3.7.1 Description
Ultrafiltration is a membrane filtration process that separates high
molecular weight compounds and colloids from a liquid solution or suspension.
The process operates by applying a hydrostatic pressure, typically between
10 and 100 psig, to the upstream side of a supported membrane allowing the
large molecules and colloid particles to be retained by the membrane
(DeRenzo 1978). With advances in membrane technology, the membrane porosity
can be custom made for filtering specific molecular sizes. For example,
"tight" membranes can retain organic solutes of 500 to 1000 molecular weight
and allow passage of most inorganic salts. Conversely, "loose" membranes
can discriminate between molecules of 1,000,000 to 250,000 molecular weight
(DeRenzo 1978).
Mobile units can typically handle flows of 5,000 to 10,000 gpd. Up to
nine pressure vessels can be mounted on a trailer flatbed allowing treatment
of flows up to 60,000 gpd (Ghassemi 1981).
C-34
-------
C.3.7.2 Applications
Ultrafiltration is capable of segregating high molecular weight dis-
solved and colloidal species from a solution or suspension. The lower and
upper molecular weight cutoff limits are around 500 to 500,000, respectively
(Ghassemi, Yu and Quinlivan 1981). In terms of particle separation capa-
bility, ultrafiltration falls between reverse osmosis, which retains smaller
molecules, and conventional filtration. It is considered to be most appli-
cable for treating emulsified oils.
C.3.7.3 Limitations
The primary limitation of ultrafiltration is that it is not applicable
to wastes that contain suspended solids or low molecular weight dissolved
substances. As with all membrane processes, ultrafiltration units are
susceptible to fouling. When the ultrafiltration membrane fouls it is
simply taken out of service and cleaned by flushing with detergents or
water.
C.3.7.4 Special Requirements/Considerations -
Influent to ultrafiltration must be pretreated by granular media
filtration to remove suspended solids that can tear the membrane.
The concentrated residue contains high concentrations of toxic substances
and must be further treated and disposed.
C.3.8 Ozonation and Ultraviolet Radiation
C.3.8.1 Description
Ozonation in combination with ultraviolet (UV) radiation is a chemical
oxidation process in which UV light is used to enhance the oxidation
efficiency of ozone. Ozone (03) is a very strong oxidizing agent. However,
ozone is only slightly soluble in water and, because of its low solubility,
supplying ozone at a sufficiently fast rate to the reactor becomes a major
mass transfer problem in the treatment of high concentrations of contaminants,
especially those containing substances that are rapidly oxidizable with
ozone (for example, sulfides, nitrites, bacteria, phenols, and unsaturated
organics) (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan 1981).
C-35
-------
While the specific role of ultraviolet radiation in enhancing the
efficiency of ozonation is still under investigation, it is currently
hypothesized that the major effect of radiation is to bring about a photo-
decomposition of the substances undergoing oxidation (Ghassemi, Yu, and
Quinlivan 1981).
Since the optimization of the C>3/UV contact with the liquid and the
03 mass transfer are important parameters, the reactor is divided into
compartments (created by use of baffles) with cylindrical UV lights (similar
to commercial fluorescent lights) placed vertically at equal distances
along the flow path in each compartment. Ozone, which is generated on
site, is introduced as a gas into the reactor through diffusers that are
located at the bottom of each compartment. The excess ozone in the reactor
offgas is discharged to the atmosphere (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan 1981).
C.3.8.2 Applications
03/UV is applicable to the treatment of a broad range of difficult to
oxidize organics, organometallic complexes, and reduced inorganic substances,
The process is most cost-effectively used to oxidize non-biodegradable
compounds such as FCBs, kepone and other pesticides, and metal complexes of
cyanide.
C.3.8.3 Limitations
Although 03/UV can be used to oxidize a wide range of contaminants,
the process is cost-effective only for dilute solutions of difficult to
oxidize contaminants. The 03/UV process utilizes large amounts of ozone (8
parts of ozone is required to remove one part of TOC in wastewater). The
amount of ozone that can be generated on site in a mobile unit may be less
than that required for a specific application (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan
1981).
Given the state of the art of this process, pilot plant studies would
need to be conducted to determine optimum reactor design and operating
conditions for each application (Ghassemi, Yu, and Quinlivan 1981). This
would limit the usefulness of this process in situations where emergency
cleanup is needed.
C.3.8.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Liquids that are to be treated with 03/UV must be pretreated by granu-
lar media filtration to remove suspended solids. Also, in certain applica-
tions such as treatment of cyanides, pH adjustment is required to prevent
generation of toxic gases.
C-36
-------
About five percent of the ozone used in the process is released to the
atmosphere (Ghassemi 1981). This requires that the area be well ventilated.
A special permit may be required for release of ozone.
C.3.9 Discharge to Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
C.3.9.1 Description
Contaminated liquids can be discharged to local sewerage systems (or
publicly owned treatment works, POTW) in which considerable dilution occurs
and treatment is accomplished at a central facility. The owner/operator of
the treatment works may require pretreatment of liquids prior to discharge,
and a special discharge permit may be required.
C.3.9.2 Applications
Discharge to a POTW is applicable to treatment of low-level contaminated
liquids that can be treated at a facility without the facility violating
its operating permit conditions. Other factors that the POTW may consider
in determining whether to accept a specific discharge are whether the POTW
has sufficient hydraulic capacity and what additonal costs the POTW may
incur by accepting the discharge (e.g., increased monitoring costs or
process changes).
C.3.9.3 Limitations
Discharge to a POTW is not acceptable where it will result in violation
of operating permit conditions.
C.3.9.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
In general, treatability studies may be required to determine the
capability of the POTW for handling a particular wastestream and necessary
pretreatment requirements. Extensive pretreatment may be required prior to
discharge to the POTW.
C.3.10 Summary
Wastewater treatment techniques and information pertinent to their
evaluation and selection are summarized in Table C-4.
C-37
-------
TABLE C-4. SUMMARY OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
n
w
oo
Activated Removal of a broad range of
Carbon dissolved organics from
aqueous streams with TOC
concentrations of 10,000 ppm
or less, best suited for
compounds with low solubility
and polarity.
Also used to remove some
inorganic solutes.
Biological Degradation of oxidizable
Treatment organics present at non-
(aerobic) inhibitory levels.
Not cost-effective for
waste streams with TOCs
in excess of 1%.
Not suitable for treating
waste streams high in
suspended solids
(>50 ppm) or oil and
grease (>10 ppra).
Not" effective for low
molecular weight com-
pounds or highly
soluble compounds.
Not suitable for highly
concentrated waste
streams or streams
containing inhibitory
concentration of metals.
Not suitable for treat-
ment of aliphatics;
chlorinated polyaroinatics
• are degraded slowly.
Process is subject to
failure from shockloads.
Process initiation time
can be slow.
Process generates an "exhausted"
carbon that must regenerated.
Regeneration will usually be
be conducted off site where
adequate controls are taken to
avoid secondary impacts.
Backwash streams must be treated
to remove high concentration of
solids.
Medium
to High
Limited localized air emissions
may result.
Process generates a biomass
sludge which contains high con-
centrations of toxic compounds,
sludge must be dewatered and
treated.
Low to
Medium
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-4i (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Ion Exchange
Neutralization
Precipitation
O
GJ
lO
Flocculation
Ultra-
filtration
Removal of ions, both organic
and inorganic, at concentra-
tions up to 2500 to 5000 mg/1.
Adjustment of pH for acid
or alkaline waste streams.
Removal of dissolved metals
from waste streams; no
concentration limit.
Agglomeration of particles
into larger, more setteable
particles that are sub-
sequently settled by sedimen-
tation.
Separation of high molecular
weight dissolved or colloidal
species.
Not suitable for highly
concentrated waste
streams, or streams high
in suspended solids or
oxidants.
No significant limita-
tions when properly
applied.
Difficult to obtain
minimum solubility
of a metal due to such
factors as formation
of organometallic
complexes and the
tendency of each metal
to have its minimum
solubility at a different
pH.
No significant limita-
tions when properly
applied.
Membranes are prone to
fouling.
Process is not suitable
for suspended solids.
No significant impacts.
High
Potential for air pollution
problems.
Low to
High
Process generates a large volume Low to
of sludge that must be treated High
prior to disposal.
Process generates a large volume
of sludge that must be treated
prior to disposal.
Process generates a highly
concentrated wastestream that
requires subsequent treatment
or incineration.
Low
High
(continued)
-------
C.4.1.1 Cement-Based Solidification
Description—
This method involves mixing the material directly with Portland cement,
a common construction material. The material is incorporated into a rigid
matrix of hardened concrete. This method physically and che**cf *? ?J™*
contaminants (USEPA 1982b). The end product may be a monolithic solid or a
crumbly, soil-like consistency, depending upon the amount of cement added.
Mixing is accomplished using readily available equipment.
Applications—•
Most slurries and sludges can be mixed directly with cement so that
solids will be physically incorporated into the rigid matrix. Cement
solidification is most suitable for immobilizing metals because most multi-
valent cations are converted into insoluble hydroxides or carbonates at the
pH of the cement mixture. For this reason, Portland cemen^is often used
as a setting agent in other solidification processes described in this
section.
Limitations—
Although cement can physically incorporate a broad range of materials,
most materials are not chemically bound and are subject to leaching.
Metals, which can be immobilized by cement solidification by precipitation
as metal hydroxides or carbonates, are insoluble only over a narrow PH
ranee and are subject to solubilization and leaching in the presence of
even mildly acidic leaching solutions (e.g., rain). Portland cement alone
is also not effective in immobilizing organics.
Because of the tendency of waste constituents to leach, solidification
is not acceptable for disposal,without secondary containment, regardless of
whether the wastes are organic or inorganic. Certain wastes can cause
problems with the set, cure, and permanence of the cement waste solid
unless the wastes are pretreated. Some of these incompatible wastes are
(USEPA 1982b):
• Sodium salts of arsenate, borate, phosphate, iodate, and sulfide
• Salts of magnesium, tin, zinc, copper, and lead
• Organic matter
• Some silts and clays ,
• Coal or lignite.
C-42
-------
Special Requirements/Considerations—
Cement-based solidification processes use equipment and skills that
are commonplace and readily available. Most cement-solidified materials
are subject to leaching and, therefore, secondary containment is required.
Cement solidification increases the weight and volume of the original
material and therefore transportation costs can be expected to increase
accordingly.
C.4.1.2 Silicate-Based Processes
Description—
Silicate-based processes are a broad range of solidification/stabiliza-
tion methods that use a silicateous material together with lime, cement,
gypsum, and other setting agents. The basic reaction is between the soluble
silicates, such as fly ash or cement kiln dust, and water. The polyvalent
metal ions that act as initiators of silicate precipitation and/or gelation
come either from the waste solution, an added setting agent, or both. The
setting agent should have low solubility, and a large reserve capacity of
metallic ions so that it controls the reaction rate. Portland cement and
lime are most commonly used because of their good availability. However,
gypsum, calcium carbonate, and other compounds containing aluminum, iron!
magnesium, etc. are also suitable setting agents. The solid that is formed
in these processes varies from a moist, clay-like material to a hard, dry
solid similar in appearance to concrete (Granlund and Hayes undated).
Applications—
There are a number of commercially available processes that use sili-
cates, and each claims to be able to solidify different waste types. The
process is best known for stabilizing sludges containing heavy metal.
However, other manufacturers use proprietary processes and additives
that permit stabilization of wastes containing oils and solvents. The fea-
sibility of silicate-based stabilization for these waste types needs to be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
Silicate-based stabilization processes are suitable for stabilizing
large waste volumes because the materials used are inexpensive and are
readily available (with the exception of some additives) and the increase
in volume of the solidified materials is considerably less than when cement
is used alone.
Limitations—
The limitations of silicate-based processes in stabilizing materials
are not well known. One known limitation is that large amounts of water,
not chemically bound, remain in the matrix after solidification. In open
air, this liquid leaches until it comes to some equilibrium moisture content
C-43
-------
with the surrounding soil. Because of this water loss, the solidified
product is likely to require secondary containment.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
Most silicate-based processes use readily available equipment that is
easy to operate. The feasibility and effectiveness of using silicates for
stabilizing wastes other than inorganic sludges must be determined on a
case-by-ease basis. Generally, the services of a firm specializing in the
use of silicates is required since many companies claim to use proprietary
additives. The stabilized product is likely to require secondary containment
to prevent leaching of contaminants.
C.4.1.3 Surface Encapsulation
Description—
Surface encapsulation physically microencapsulates materials by sealing
them in an organic binder or resin. At least three surface encapsulation
methods are available. These methods are described below.
One process, developed by Environmental Protection Polymers, involves
the use of 1,2-polybutadiene and polyethylene (PE) to produce a microencap-
sulated waste block onto which a high density polyethylene (HDPE) jacket is
fused. The 1,2-polybutadiene is mixed with waste particulates which yields,
after solvent evaporation, free-flowing dry resin-coated particulates. The
resulting polymers are resistant to oxidative and hydrolytic degradation
and to permeation by water. The next step involves formation of a block of
the polybutadiene/waste mixture. Powdered, high-density PE is grafted
chemically onto the polymer backbone to provide a final matrix with ductile
qualities. Various combinations of the two resins (polybutadiene and PE)
permit tailoring of the matrix's mechanical properties without reduction of
system stability when exposed to severe chemical stress. In the final
step, a 1/4-inch thick HDPE jacket is mechanically and chemically locked to
the surface of the microencapsulated waste (Lubowitz and Wiles 1981).
Another encapsulation method developed by Environmental Protection
Polymers involves a much simpler approach. Contaminated soils or sludges
are loaded into a high-density polyuethylene overpack. A portable welding
apparatus is then used to spin-weld a lid onto the container thereby forming
a seam free encapsulate.
A third surface encapsulation method involves use of an organic binder
to seal a cement-solidified mass. United States Gypsum Company manufactures
a product called Envirostone Cement which is a special blend of high-grade
polymer-modified gypsum cement. Emulsifiers and ion exchange resins may be
added along with the gypsum cement which hydrates to form a freestanding
mass. A proprietary organic binder is used to seal the solidifed mass
(United States Gypsum Co. 1982). The process can be used to stabilize both
C-44
-------
organic and inorganic wastes. It has been shown to effectively immobilize
waste oil present at concentrations as high as 36 percent volume (Clark
Colombo, and Neilson 1982). The volume of waste is smaller than that
produced with cement solidification alone.
Applications—
Surface encapsulation is used to completely isolate waste constituents
from leaching solutions. Processes are available that can be used for most
waste types. Use of surface encapsulation is generally limited to highly
hazardous materials or to situations where the waste is to be disposed
without secondary containment.
Limitations—
Limitations of surface encapsulation processes for various waste types
and concentrations must be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
As compared to cement and silicate-based processes, surface encapsulation
is costly, energy intensive, and requires the use of skilled labor and
sophisticated equipment.
C.4.2 Chemical and Biological Treatment
Contaminants in solids can be treated by a variety of chemical and
biological methods. The most applicable methods, chemical oxidation/
reduction, solvent extraction, neutralization, dechlorination, and micro-
biological oxidation, are described in the following sections.
C.4.2.1 Chemical Oxidation/Reduction
Description—•.-
Chemical oxidation/reduction processes are based on a chemical reaction
in which electrons are transferred from one reactant to the other. Such
reactions can detoxify, precipitate, or solubilize metals, and decompose,
detoxify, or solubilize organics.
Chemical oxidation/reduction systems can be constructed using simple
equipment such as tanks or gas cylinders for storing the reagents, a reac-
tion tank which might include mixers to provide contact between the oxidiz-
ing agent and waste stream, and metering and monitoring instruments to
control the chemical reaction. Alternatively, it may be possible to carry
out the reaction within a structure similar to a dewatering lagoon (see
Section C.2). This would involve installation of a wellpoint or gravity
C-45
-------
drainage system to inject the chemicals into the site, force reaction of
the reagents with waste constituents, and pump the treated material to the
surface.
Oxidization is widely practiced in the wastewater treatment industry
using such oxidizing agents as ozone, sodium or calcium hypochlorite, and
hydrogen peroxide. Chemical reduction is not widely practiced, but it is
known that ferrous sulfate and certain catalyzed metal powders are effective
reducing agents (Sims et al. 1984; Repa et al. 1985).
Applications—
Both organic and inorganic wastes can be treated by chemical oxidation.
Examples of compounds that can be treated include cyanides, sulfur compounds,
lead, pesticides, phenolics, aldehydes, and aromatic hydrocarbons (Stoddard
et al. 1981). Compounds that may be chemically reduced include hexavalent
chromium and some chlorinated compounds.
Chemical oxidation and reduction have not been used in the treatment of
contaminated sediments. However, considerable research is being conducted
on the use of these methods to treat contaminated soils.
For treatment of contaminated sediments, the process would be most
applicable for treatment of dilute waste streams that have a sufficiently
high water content to provide good contact between the waste constituents
and the treatment reagents upon mixing. For sediments that have been
substantially dewatered, oxidation and reduction could be employed, provided
the sediments are sufficiently permeable to ensure contact between the
treatment reagents and the wastes.
Limitations—
The effectiveness of chemical oxidation and reduction is highly depend-
ent on the waste constituents and the nature of the waste being treated.
These processes are not effective for highly concentrated wastes or for
fine-grained sediments that have been substantially dewatered because it
would be difficult to ensure mixing of waste constituents with the treatment
reagents under these conditions. It is not known to what extent the proces-
ses can treat compounds that are strongly sorbed to the soil.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
The environmental concerns associated with chemical oxidation and
reduction reactions can be significant. There is the potential that the
products of oxidation/reduction reactions may be more toxic or more mobile
in the environment than the original contaminants. Many of the reagents
are toxic or hazardous and pose a risk to worker safety if not properly
handled. If the wastes are treated in an impoundment basin there is the
risk that treatment chemicals or any more soluble or toxic reaction products
may be released to the groundwater. However, this risk should be minimal
provided a liner system is properly installed and operated.
C-46
-------
Another possible problem with these treatment methods is that certain
reactions can result in the release of toxic gases. For example, there is
the possibility of emission of hydrogen cyandide gas during oxidation of
cyanide, if the reaction is allowed to become too acidic. Release of ozone
or chlorine gas can also result. Wastes treated by oxidation/reduction
processes are likely to require further treatment to immobilize or more
fully degrade -the contaminants.
C.4.2.2 Solvent Extraction
.Description—
Solvent extraction involves injecting or adding acids, bases, surfac-
tants, or other reagents that mobilize contaminants into solution by reason
of the contaminant's solubility in the reagent. The reaction can be carried
out in a tank or a dewatering lagoon. The waste stream is mixed with the
solvent, decontaminated materials are separated from the contaminated
solvent, and the contaminated solvent is treated to render it innocuous.
Applications—
Dilute solutions of acids and bases can be used to remove a wide
range of metal ions. Complexing and chelating agents can be used to form
stable metal-chelate complexes. A wide range of hydrophobic, nonsoluble
organics can be extracted using surfactants. Organics that can be treated
using surfactants include PCBs, pesticides, and aromatic and polynuclear
aromatic compounds.
Since effective extraction of contaminants requires that there be com-
plete mixing of reagents with the waste constituents, extraction methods
are best suited to slurries that can be easily mixed and to dewatered
sediments that are sufficiently permeable to ensure contact of reagents
with contaminants. Application of solvent extraction methods for sediments
has not been demonstrated but there exists considerable research data that
indicate that solvent extraction methods can be used for contaminated
soils.
Limitations—
Solvent extraction methods are not suitable for treating fine-grained
sediments that have been dewatered since it is difficult to ensure complete
mixing of treatment reagents with waste constituents. Acids and chelating
agents may not be effective in removing some metal complexes or metals that
are strongly sorbed to the soil. Other limitations on the use of solvent
extraction methods for treating sediments are not well known since these
methods have not been applied to sediments.
C-47
-------
Special Requirements/Considerations—
Carrying out solvent extraction in a dewatering lagoon poses the risk
of contaminating groundwater supplies if a liner system is not properly
installed and maintained. Use of acids or bases in extraction may result
in the release of toxic gases. For example, acidification of certain wastes
that contain sulfide could result in release of gases. Although weak acids
such as acetic acid would generally be used for extracting metals, these
reagents are corrosive and pose some risk to worker safety if not properly
handled.
C.4.2.3 Neutralization
Description—
The neutralization process is described in Section C.3.4.
Applications—
Neutralization methods can be applied to any acidic or alkaline waste
stream requiring a pH adjustment. In order to ensure complete mixing of
neutralizing reagents with waste components, neutralization is best suited
to slurries that-can be easily mixed or to dewatered sediments that are
sufficiently permeable to ensure complete contact of contaminants with neu-
tralizing reagents.
Limitations—
Neutralization is not effective for fine-grained sediments that have
been substantially dewatered since it would be difficult to ensure complete
mixing of wastes with treatment reagents.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
Carrying out neutralization reactions in an earthen impoundment poses
the risk of contaminating groundwater if a liner system is not properly
installed and maintained. Reagents used in neutralization are corrosive
and must be handled with appropriate precautions.
Neutralization of some wastes has the potential of producing air
emissions. Acidification of streams containing certain salts, such as
sulfides, will produce toxic gases. Adequate mixing should be provided to
disperse the heat of reaction if wastes being treated are concentrated.
C-48
-------
C.4.2.4 Chemical Dechlorination
Description—
Chemical dechlorination refers to a group of emerging technologies
that can be used to strip chlorine atoms from highly chlorinated toxic
compounds such as PCBs. One such process, developed by Acurex Corporation,
uses a sodium reagent in a nitrogen atmosphere to decompose PCB. PCB- or
pesticide-contaminated sediments must first be solvent washed to extract
the PCBs before entering the reactor. The solvent is later reclaimed for
reuse. This process has been tested on a laboratory scale for PCB-contami-
nated sediments. Portable units are available.
Several other companies, including Sunohio, Inc. and Goodyear Tire and
Rubber Company, have developed similar processes.
Applications—
i.\
Chemical declorination processes are suitable for treating PCBs,
dioxins, and chlorinated pesticides. Information on the process developed
by Sunohio indicates that it can economically treat wastes containing up to
6,000 ppm PCBs. This process has been shown to reduce PCB concentration
(in transformer oil) from 225 ppm to 1 ppm. (Stoddard et al. 1981).
Limitations—
The Sunohio and Acurex processes are not able to treat PCBs or other
chlorinated compounds directly. The waste constituents must first be
extracted using a solvent. These processes have not been demonstrated for
treatment of sediments.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
The solvents used to reclaim PCBs or other chlorinated compounds prior
to feeding them to the reactor can be reclaimed for reuse (NUS 1983).
The process itself poses some risks since it involves reactions with
metallic sodium reagents. Sodium can react violently with water, air, and
other substances. However, these reactions can be prevented by proper
process controls. Skilled operators are required to carry out chemical
dechlorination-*
C.4.2.5 Biological Treatment
Description—
The mechanism of biological treatment is described in Section C.3.2.
However, in instances where contaminated sediments, rather than aqueous
waste streams, are being treated, biodegradation would take place in an
C-49
-------
impoundment basin or reaction tank. Oxygen would be supplied by aeration
wells, diffusors, or in-line injection of oxygen or hydrogen peroxides.
Nutrients would be added to promote biological growth.
Applications—
The applicability of biological treatment for various waste types is
described in Section C.3.2. Because of the need to promote complete mixing
of nutrients and aeration of soils, biological treatment would be best
suited to slurries that can easily be mixed or to dewatered sediments that
are sufficiently permeable to ensure contact of nutrients and oxygen with
ndcroorganisims.
Limitations—
Biological treatment is not suitable for waste streams containing high
concentrations of metals and many chlorinated compounds.
It is also not suitable for treating fine-grained sediments that have
been substantially dewatered, since it would be difficult to ensure complete
oxygenation and mixing of nutrients.
Special Requirements/Considerations—
Carrying out biological treatment in an impoundment basin poses the
risk of contaminating groundwater if a liner system is not properly installed
and maintained. Biological treatment processes can be slow to initially
effect treatment unless the microorganisms are adapted to the specific
wastes. Neutralization may be required to adjust the pH to the range of 6
to 9 prior to biological treatment.
C.4.3 Summary
Techniques for treatment of solids and information pertinent to their
evaluation and selection are summarized in Table C-5.
C-50
-------
TABLE C-5. SUMMARY OF SOLIDS TREATMENT TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Cement-based
Solidification
n
Ui
Silicate-Based
Solidification
Surface
Encapsulation
Physical incorporation of
waste into the cement matrix
in order to facilitate
handling and/or minimize
leaching.
Chemical binding of heavy
metals and physical incor-
poration of various other
waste types (feasibility for
other waste types must be
determined on a case-by-case
basis). Facilitates handling
and/or minimizes leaching.
Highly contaminated
sediments.
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Waste constituents, both
organic and inorganic,
are subject to leaching.
A number of salts., and
some clays and silt, will
cause problems with the
set, cure, and permanence
of cement.
Cause large increases in
volume and weight.
Applications for wastes
other than heavy metals
are not well demon-
strated.
Tendency for some
leaching of waste
constituents.
Requires specialized
equipment and specially
trained equipment
operations.
Waste constituents will leach
into soils and groundwater if
there is no secondary
contaminent.
Waste constituents will leach
into soils & groundwater
if there is no secondary con-
tainment, although leaching is
not as significant as with
cement-based processes.
No significant impacts.
•Low to
Medium
Low to
Medium
High
Relatively costly.
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-5. (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Chemical
Oxidation/
Reduction
to Solvent
Extraction
Oxidation of cyanides,
phenols, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, various pesti-
cides.
Reduction of chromium.
Neutralization
Flushing of heavy metals using
acids, bases or chelates.
Flushing of hydrophobic
organics using surfactants.
Adjusting pH of acid or alka-
line waste streams.
May result in more
toxic or mobile degrada-
tion products.
Not suitable for fine
grained sediments that
have been dewatere'd.
Effectiveness is. very
waste- and site-specific.
Not demonstrated for
contaminated sediments.
Not suitable for fine-
grained sediments which
have been dewatered.
Effectiveness is very
waste- and site-specific.
Not demonstrated for
contaminated sediments.
Not suitable for fine
grained sediments that
have been dewatered.'
Not demonstrated for
contaminated sediments.
Potential for groundwater
contamination if reactions are
carried out in an impoundment.
Medium
to High
Potential for groundwater
contamination if reactions
are carried out in an
impoundment.
Medium
to High
Potential for groundwater
contamination if reactions
are carried out in an
impoundment.
Low to
to Medium
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-5. (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
n
Ui
OJ
Chemicals '
Dechlorination
Biological
Treatment
Degradation of difficult to
degrade chlorinated con-
taminants such as PCBs.
Degradation of a wide range of
organics present at non-
inhibitory levels.
Not fully demonstrated
for contaminated
sediment.
Not suitable for fine-
grained sediments that
have been dewatered.
Start-up time may be slow.
Not demonstrated for
contaminated sediments.
No significant impacts.
Potential for groundwater
contamination if reactions are
carried out in an impoundment.
Low to
High
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
CONTAMINATED MATERIAL DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
Removal and treatment of contaminated bottom materials from lakes,
streams, rivers, coastal waters, and estuaries can generate the following
wastes that require ultimate disposal:
• Contaminated or treated sediments (Appendices B and C)
• Effluents from liquid waste treatment (Appendix C)
• Residues (solids and sludges) from aqueous waste treatment and
incineration (Appendix C).
These wastes may be disposed of by various methods, but the selection
of a disposal method must consider whether the waste is a hazardous waste
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or a regulated
PCB-containing material under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
In general, the above three waste streams must be disposed of by strict
standards if: y °*-*• *•*-*-
1. They are ignitable, corrosive, reactive, and/or are toxic
according to a prescribed leaching test (see EP Toxicity in
Appendix G, Glossary) under RCRA (40 CFR, Parts 261-20 to
261.24), and/or
2. They contain any concentration of a RCRA-listed substance, and/or
3. They contain PCBs in excess of 50 ppm.
Of the criteria in Item 1, only EP toxicity is likely to apply to
contaminated sediments or to the effluents and residues generated by their
treatment or incineration. Environmental physical and chemical
conditions at the bottoms of water bodies would generally preclude sediments
from exhibiting any ignitable, corrosive, or reactive properties that con-
taminants may have exhibited prior to entering the water body. The contam-
inants most likely to cause EP toxicity in contaminated sediments are the
heavy metals: cadimum, chromium, lead, and mercury.
As suggested by Item 2 above, contaminated bottom materials or the ef-
fluents and residuals generated by their treatment could also fall under
the definition of a RCRA hazardous waste if they are known to result from a
cleanup of a spill of one or more of the materials listed under 40 CFR
D-l
-------
Part 261.30 to 261.33. It is important to note that any concentrations of
"listed" substances in the cleanup materials results in their classification
as RCRA hazardous wastes.
PCS concentrations in sediments, treatment effluents, or residuals
are regulated under TSCA. TSCA regulations require that substances
containing PCBs in concentrations exceeding 50 ppm be disposed at special
PCB disposal facilities approved by EPA. Under TSCA, intentional dilution
cannot be used to reduce to PCB concentrations below the threshold concen-
tration of 50 ppm.
This appendix describes disposal options in separate sections for
sediments, liquids, and residuals. Options are discussed primarily in
terms of an overview of regulatory requirements and standards stipulated
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Water
Act (CWA), the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA),
and other Federal regulations. These regulations affect and, in most
cases,' dictate the available methods of disposal for such materials.
D.I SEDIMENTS
Sediments that are removed in the course of a cleanup project can vary
'in composition and level of contamination. There are basically three
methods of disposal: landfilling, land treatment, and open water disposal.
However, open water disposal is not a legal option for hazardous or PCB-
contaminated sediments. Moreover, PCB-contaminated sediments may not be
placed in land treatment facilities; they can be placed only in EPA-approved
landfills. Landfilling may be used for any type of non-PCB containing
sediment disposal, but sediments containing hazardous wastes must be disposed
of in specially permitted landfills or land treatment facilities, which are
constructed and operated according to more rigid permit conditions than
those facilities limited to acceptance of only nonhazardous sediments.
Landfilling and land treatment of hazardous and nonhazardous sediments and
open water disposal of nonhazardous sediments are discussed in the following
sections.
D.I.I Landfilling
D.1.1.1 Description
A landfill is a waste disposal facility where waste materials are
placed in or on a controlled land area and are covered in the manner that
isolates them from the environment. A RCRA hazardous waste landfill must
be designed and operated according to the RCRA Landfill Facility Standards
under 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265 or according to the state hazardous waste
regulations in those states with authority to administer this part of the
D-2
-------
RCRA regulations. Nonhazardous waste landfills must be designed and
operated according to the regulations in the relevant state and/or local
government. These state and local regulations are generally based on
nn/riHiaAf0r S0l±d WaSte manag***nt, *••«* under sections
and 4004 of RCRA and under 40 CFR, Parts 241 and 257. Disposal
(partlc"larly in California) for both unhazardous and hazardous
6 Strinfent ±n °ertain States than Federal disposal regulations.
considered carefully when
The RCRA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 require new
hazardous waste landfills to have a double liner system, a l^ctatHSScSS
oftSo'8±haMea^ate reTal SySteDU The Double line; system may consist
of two synthetic liners and at least 5 feet of clay, or one synthetic liner
3^vL y yef,that Wil1 n0t bC Penetrated by waste leachate for "t le"ast
30 years, even if the synthetic liner fails (USEPA 1984). Requirements
s^tlr SS^J^S18 are ^ Stri<*ent> ^t vary'considerably
I I * G!nerally» these requirements allow for consideration of
f*atures
-------
liquids allowed in bulk wastes. The most severe limitation to the disposal
of nonhazardous sediments in existing landfills is the transportation
distances involved. Long transport distances may result in extremely high
ultimate disposal costs.
Limitations concerning hazardous waste landfills include those
listed above for nonhazardous waste landfills and several additional
limitations. Since mid-1986, hazardous waste landfills have not been allowed to
receive materials containing free liquid (liquid that can separate by
gravity or compression from the bulk of the material). Individual landfills
may have more stringent waste-acceptance restrictions. PCB-contaminated
materials exceeding 50 ppm cannot be accepted at hazardous waste landfills
that do not have EPA approval for PCBs.
It should also be noted that the option of constructing a dedicated
landfill for disposal of contaminated sediments should be considered only
under the most extreme circumstances, such as when hundreds of thousands of
tons of wastes are involved. For example, the construction of one four-acre
hazardous waste landfill would cost a minimum of $10 million, not including
post-closure maintenance and permitting costs. The minimum time to obtain
a. permit for a hazardous waste landfill is about 21/2 years.
D.I.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Special requirements and considerations differ significantly between
different states and depend on whether wastes are being landfilled at a new
landfill or at an existing landfill. For a new hazardous waste landfill, a
RCRA permit is required and the facility must also be designed to meet
requirements which are stricter than those applied to existing landfills
(see previous section).
RCRA requires all owners and operators of hazardous waste land disposal
facilities to establish a groundwater monitoring program. The groundwater
monitoring program must be capable of determining the facility's impact on
the quality of groundwater in the uppermost aquifer underlying the facility.
Many states now require similar monitoring at nonhazardous waste disposal
sites.
Since 1985, sludges and slurries meeting the definition of a hazardous
waste have been required to be treated (see Section C.2) to remove any free
liquid before landfilling. Other pretreatment requirements, such as neutrali-
zation and precipitation of metals, depend on specific landfill permit
requirements and state regulations.
D-4
-------
All hazardous wastes that are being transported for off-site disposal
must be properly manifested in accordance with 40 CFR Parts 262 and 263.
These same regulations also describe the requirements for labelling,
placarding, and packaging wastes according to Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulations.
D.1.2 Open Water Disposal
D, 1.2.1 Description
Open water disposal involves placement of materials into ocean,
estuary, river, or lake waters or wetlands, where the materials settle to
the bottom of the water body. Materials are normally dumped or pumped from
barges, scows, or hoppers into the water column. This type of disposal is
regulated under the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act and the
Clean Water Act.
D.I.2.2 Applications
The applicability of open water disposal for a particular dredged
material must be determined on a case-by-case basis. In general, ocean
disposal and disposal in inland waters is suitable only for noncontaminated
sediments, and for sediments with only trace levels of contaminants that
can be demonstrated to cause no harm to the receiving water body.
D.I.2.3 Limitations
Open water disposal of dredged materials is not applicable to contami-
nated sediments that will adversely impact the chemical, physical, or
biological integrity of the receiving water body. Because of the stringency
of testing requirements, the permitting process is costly and time-consuming,
particularly for a permit for ocean disposal or disposal in a wetland area.
Further, the presence of hazardous contaminants in dredged sediments could
cause regulatory authorities to deny an openwater disposal permit.
D.I.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Ocean disposal of dredged material is regulated by the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. This act requires
that a permit can be issued only after consideration of the environmental
effects of the proposed operation, the need for ocean dumping, alternatives
to ocean dumping, and the effect of the proposed action on aesthetic,
D-5
-------
recreational, and economic values. Furthermore, bioassays and bioaccumula-
tion studies must be conducted to determine whether contaminants will
adversly affect biota. A detailed environmental assessment is also required
(Peddicord 1980).
Disposal of dredged material in estuaries and inland waterways is
regulated mainly by the Clean Water Act. The criteria are similar to those
for ocean dumping in that issuance of a permit requires prior demonstration
that dumping will not adversely impact water quality and biota. Testing
requirements may typically include chemical comparison of the dredged
material with the disposal site sediments and possibly benthic bioassay and
bioaccuraulation studies (Peddicord 1980).
D.1.3 Land Treatment/Disposal
D.1.3.1 Description
Land treatment of wastes and solids is generally a biological treatment
technique used on both RCRA hazardous and nonhazardous organic wastes.
Land treatment reduces the waste volume through evaporation and transforms
contaminants into a less complex .organic and inorganic mixture suitable for
soil cultivation.
Land treatment may be used to dispose of dredged sediments or effluent
from treatment facilities. The wastes are spread or sprayed over land in a
controlled manner such that no runoff occurs, and all of the free liquids
in the wastes either infiltrate the ground surface or evaporate. Land
treatment is facilitated by microorganisms that are naturally occurring in
the soil and degrade wastes. The land application area is diked to prevent
erosion and runoff and to help keep the soil moist. Liquid or sludge is
applied by spraying or spreading on the land surface or injection below the
surface. Under proper conditions of aeration, moisture, and nutrient concen-
trations, and with correct application rates, bacteria degrade the wastes
to carbon dioxide and water. The soil also has a limited capacity to
immobilize organics by various chemical means (Morrison 1983). When only
nonhazardous liquids are involved, this technique is sometimes called
"spray irrigation".
Land treatment of hazardous wastes is stringently controlled by Federal
requirements and by equally (or more) stringent state regulations in those
states authorized to administer RCRA land disposal regulations. Land
treatment of nonhazardous wastes is regulated by the individual states;
Federal laws do not apply.
D-6
-------
D.I.3.2 Applications
Land treatment of relatively contaminant-free waste is best used in
arid climates to afford maximum evaporation. Biodegradable contaminants
can be present in the waste since treatment is accomplished by bacteria
within the soil.
Land treatment is best suited for wastes types that are amenable to
biodegradation. Waste oil and grease and certain pesticides and solvents
can be treated by land application. RCRA regulations (40 CFR Part 264)
allow application of any hazardous wastes that can effectively be degraded,
transformed, or immobilized. However, there are stringent requirements to
assure complete degradation of specific constituents and protection of the
underlying groundwater. There is no list of acceptable or unacceptable
wastes and suitability must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (Morrison
1983).
D.I.3.3 Limitations
Land treatment of hazardous wastes will probably not be permitted in
areas with a high water table since the regulations require a.minimum,
separation of three feet between the bottom of the treatment zone and the
seasonal high water table. Land treatment is also not well suited to
soils with high moisture content since this may impede oxygen transfer to
soil microorganisms (Morrison 1983). Land treatment cannot be accomplished
on frozen or snow-covered land and is, therefore, seasonally not appropriate
in some climates. In addition to the above limitations, land treatment of
hazardous and nonhazardous waste is subject to most of the same limitations
discussed for landfills under Section D.1.1. However, it is generally more
difficult to obtain a RCRA permit for a hazardous waste land treatment
facility than for a landfill.
D.I.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Land treatment of wastes from a hazardous waste spill cleanup must
comply with the intent of RCRA regulations (40 CFR Part 264). The regula-
tions require that the wastes be degraded, immobilized, or transformed in
the "treatment zone." Groundwater in the unsaturated zone beneath the
treatment zone must be monitored to ensure effectiveness of the method.
The regulations also require a "treatment demonstration" prior to operation
of a facility. The treatment demonstration will determine what wastes are
allowable and under what conditions. These conditions are specified in a
facility permit required prior to implementation.
D-7
-------
D.2 LIQUIDS
Wastewater that is removed in the course of a cleanup project can vary
in the presence and concentration of contaminants. Further, contaminated
wastewater may or may not have been treated prior to disposal (see Section
C.3). Three methods of wastewater disposal (direct discharge, land treat-
ment, and deep well injection) are described in the following sections.
D.2.1 Direct Discharge
D.2.1.1 Description
Direct discharge is the discharge of any material into "waters of the
United States," defined in 40 CFR, 122.3 as navigable waters, tributaries
to navigable waters, lakes, rivers, and streams that are used for recreation,
commercial fishing, and other interstate commerce.
The EPA regulates direct discharges through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Some states have been given the
authority to administer the NPDES program and may have more stringent
requirements than the Federal program. In general, any party responsible
for discharging from a point source must obtain a permit that specifies
discharge limitations in terms of quantity of flow, concentrations of
contaminants, and mass of contaminants. The contaminants chosen for each
applicant vary according to general industry and site-specific criteria.
D.2.1.2 Applications
Direct discharge of liquid is generally applicable to effluents from
treatment facilities and other waste streams that contain relatively low
concentrations of contaminants. Larger, high-flow water bodies generally
are able to receive higher discharge flows and contaminant concentrations
because of dilution.
D.2.1.3 Limitations
NPDES permit requirements may necessitate wastewater treatment to lower
contaminant concentrations prior to discharge. The NPDES permitting process
is generally lengthy and may be extended by the uncertainty of the discharge
compositions from hazardous materials cleanup projects.
D-8
-------
D.2.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
A request for a permit must generally be submitted a minimum of 180
days prior to the anticipated date of discharge. The permit regulations
require that extensive data be submitted as part of the application including
information on flow rates, quantitative waste characterization, location of
discharge, etc.
Furthermore, the applicant should expect monitoring to be a requirement
under the permit, regardless of the concentrations of contaminants in the
proposed discharge. The permit will also specify monitoring methods and
frequencies and procedures for installing and maintaining monitoring equip-
ment.
D.2.2 Deep Well Injection
D.2.2.1 Description
Deep well injection involves the subsurface placement of fluid through
a well that has been permitted by a state or EPA permit-issuing authority.
The well must be cased and cemented to prevent the movement of fluids into
or between underground sources of drinking water. Furthermore, the well
must be located so that the point of injection is at least one quarter of a
mile above or beneath the lower-most formation containing groundwater.
Other design criteria and standards that apply to deep well injection are
described in 40 CFR Parts 144 through 146.
D.2.2.2 Applications
The permit conditions for each deep well injection facility specify
the types of wastes that may be injected. Wastes accepted for deep well
injection are usually inorganic with low organic content. The wastes must
meet a relatively stringent suspended and settleable solids specification
to prevent clogging of the injection zone (Wuslich 1982).
D-9
-------
D.2.2.3 Limitations
The off-site disposal of hazardous liquid wastes at an existing deep
well site would not present major limitations other than the need to manifest
each shipment. Disposal of nonhazardous liquids by off-site deep well
injection would probably not be cost-effective. On-site disposal of wastes
by deep well injection will almost invariably be cost-prohibitive because
of the extensive testing required to design and locate a well that can be
demonstrated to have no adverse impact on drinking water and public health.
D.2.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Monitoring programs are required with deep injection wells in order to
detect migration of contaminants into drinking water aquifers. Injection
wells must be equipped with continuous recording devices for monitoring
injection pressure, flow rate, and volume. Waste streams to be injected
must be pretreated using granular media filtration and possibly ultrafiltration
to remove suspended solids greater than 1 micron in size. Persons intending
to dispose of wastes by deep well injection must apply for and obtain a
permit that complies with all applicable standards and criteria specified
in 40 CFR Parts 144-146.
D.3 SLUDGE AND SOLID TREATMENT RESIDUALS
Treatment residuals, as defined in this appendix, are sludges and solid
byproducts of treatment processes. Treatment residuals include but are
not limited to spent sorbents, precipitation/coagulation sludges, filter
media, scrubber sludges, and oil and grease. Three disposal methods (land-
filling, incineration, and land treatment) are described in the following
sections.
D.3.1 Landfilling
D.3.1.1 Description
The description of landfilling of sediments under Section D.1.1.1 also
applies to treatment residuals.
D-10
-------
.D.3.1.2 Applications
The applications of landfilling for sediment disposal under Section
D.1.1.2 also apply to treatment residuals. Treatment residuals that are
most appropriate for landfilling are spent sorbents, filter media, "fixed1
and solidified sludges, and other solid materials.
D.3.1.3 Limitations
The limitations of landfilling for sediment disposal under Section
D.I.1.3 also apply to treatment residuals.
D.3.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The special requirements and considerations of landfilling for sediment
disposal under Section D.I.1.4 also apply to treatment residuals.
0,3.2 Incineration
D.3.2.1 Description
Incineration is the process of reducing the volume and/or toxicity of
organic wastes by exposing them to high temperatures under controlled
conditions. The main products of incineration include carbon dioxide,
water, ash, and certain acids and oxides. The most commonly used inciner-
ators for solid and liquid wastes are rotary kiln, multiple-hearth, fluidized
bed, and high temperature fluid wall. Some incinerators are commercially
available in mobile systems that can be transported to a cleanup project
for on-site incineration of waste materials. Otherwise, off-site facilities
must be used.
D.3.2.2 Applications
The BTU content of the waste is an important factor in determining
suitability of a waste stream for incineration, and treatment residuals are
likely to have low BTU contents. In the hazardous waste incineration
industry, it is common to blend wastes with fuels to achieve an overall
heating value of 8,000 BTU/lb or more (Oppelt 1981). A commercial hazardous
waste facility may not accept a waste that has a BTU value unsuitable for
blending or direct use.
D-ll
-------
Depending upon the type of incinerator, state and Federal regulations for
incinerator facilities, and the facility's permit conditions, different
maximum air emissions concentrations may be set for chlorine, sulfur, metals,
and ash content. In addition, the facility must be able to achieve 99.99
percent destruction and removal efficiency for each principal organic
hazardous constituent (POHC) in the permit. Each facility permit will
specify POHCs to be used in monitoring the emission levels. More stringent
destruction efficiencies are required to burn PCBs. In general, rotary
.kiln and high-temperature fluid wall incinerators are able to accept
compounds with a higher heat of combustion than multiple hearth and fluidized
bed incinerators (Stoddard 1981).
D.3.2.3 Limitations
Incineration is not applicable for destruction of inorganic wastes.
Highly chlorinated waste, such as PCBs and dioxins, are not permitted at most
facilities. Incineration is also not applicable for any waste type that
will cause an existing facility to violate permit conditions.
D.3.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Air pollution control equipment is generally required to remove
particulates and certain gases from the exhaust gas stream. Wet scrubbers
are generally used for this purpose, although electrostatic precipitators
may be used for removal of particulates, and afterburners may be used for
combustion of certain gases.
Incinerators generally require use of water to cool certain portions
of the system. Auxiliary fuel may also be required particularly for low-BTU
wastes.
Federal regulations require that an operator obtain a permit to
incinerate hazardous wastes. The Federal regulations specify incinerator
requirements, including test burns for new facilities, under 40 CFR Part 264.
State regulations may be more stringent than the Federal regulations.
D.3.3 Land Treatment/Disposal
D.3.3.1 Description
The description of land treatment and disposal of wastewater and other
liquid effluents under Section D.I.1.1 also applies to treatment residuals.
D-12
-------
D.3.3.2 Applications
The applications of land treatment and disposal of liquid and solid
wastes under Section D.I.1.2 also applies to treatment residuals.
D.3.3.3 Limitations
The limitations of land treatment and disposal of liquid and solid
wastes under Section D.I.1.3 also apply to treatment residuals.
D.3.3.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
The special requirements and considerations of land treatment and dis-
posal of liquid and solid wastes under Section D.I.1.4 also apply to treatment
residuals.
D.4 SUMMARY
Disposal methods and information pertinent to their evaluation and
selection are summarized in Table D-l.
D-13
-------
TABLE D-l. SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATED MATERIAL DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Coat
Landfilling
Can receive hazardous and
nonhazardous solids and some
sludges.
Open Water
Disposal
Sediments with low contaminant
concentrations.
Large volumes of sediments.
Transportation costs nay
be extreme for hazardous
materials.
Free liquid cannot be
accepted.
PCB-contaninated
materials are accepted
at only a small number
of approved landfills.
Construction of a
dedicated landfill is
costly and time-consuming.
Permitting approval
process is tine con-
suming.
Various studies may be
needed to predict
impacts.
Potential for causing/contri- Low to
buting to leachate generation High
and groundwater contamination.
Potential for causing a second Low to
environmental problem or spreading Medium
the initial problem.
Potential water contamination via
resuspension of contaminants.
Not applicable to highly Potential contamination of
contaminated sediments. fisheries.
Land Treatment/ Sediments, liquids, and sludges Not permitted in high Potential for causing leachate Low to
Disposal with low and/or biodegradable- water-table areas, high generation and groundwater and High
contaminant concentrations. rainfall areas, arid cold surface water contamination.
climates. (continued)
-------
TABLE D-l. (continued)
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Relative Cost
Land Treatment/
Disposal
(continued)
Direct
Discharge
Deep Well
Injection
t)
>—
Ol
Incineration
Treated effluents with low
flow rates relative to the
receiving water body.
Highly contaminated liquids
with low concentrations of
suspended solids.
Organic liquid, solid, and
sludge wastes and contaminated
sediments.
Can be land intensive for
long periods of time.
Liquid must meet strict
permit requirements for
concentrations of con-
taminants.
Permitting process can
be time-consuming.
Transportation costs may
be extreme for hazardous
materials.
Pretreatment may be
required for suspended
solids.
Construction of on-site
well is not practical.
Does not apply to
inorganic wastes.
Facility must be per-
mitted to accept
contaminants of concern.
Permitting for on-site
incineration may be time-
consuming and costly.
Residuals must be treated
or disposed.
Potential for causing contamina-
tion of surface water and sedi-
ments.
Potential contamination of
fisheries.
Low
Potential for causing ground-
water contamination.
High
Potential for causing air
pollution.
Medium
to High
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
IN SITU CONTAMINANT TREATMENT AND ISOLATION TECHNIQUES
In responding to a spill or a discharge of a sinking hazardous sub-
stance, it is sometimes physically or economically impractical to consider
removing all of the contaminated material from its location in the water-
course. Response techniques that allow the spilled substance or the con-
taminated sediments to remain in place (or "in situ") may be applicable in
such situations.
E.1 TREATMENT
In situ treatment methods involve the addition and mixing of chemical
or biological reagents with contaminated bottom materials in place. The
treatment promotes a physical, chemical, or biological reaction with the
contaminants to form products that pose a reduced hazard. Treatment methods
include sorption and chemical and biological processes. Each of these
treatment methods is discussed in the following sections.
E.I.I Sorption
E.I.1.1 Description
Sorption is the general term that refers to two processes: adsorption
and absorption. In both processes, a sorbant material removes contaminants
from a substance of concern (such as sediments) and incorporates the contam-
inants into its own structure. In adsorption, contaminants are drawn into
small pore openings on the surface of the adsorbant material by physical
and chemical attractive forces. In absorption, contaminants are "soaked
up" by the absorbant, sometimes causing the absorbant to swell as the
process takes place.
There are various types of sorbents and gels that can be added to
contaminated sediments to induce the sorption process: activated carbon,
polymer foams and fibers, resins, and gelling agents.
E-l
-------
Activated Carbon—
Activated carbon is a highly porous carbon. It is so porous that a
large percentage of the carbon atoms are surface atoms and are capable of
adsorbing other materials. Activated carbon is made by controlled heating
of a variety of materials, including wood, coal, and coconut shells. Three
methods of applying activated carbon to contaminated bottom materials are
carbon "pillows", direct carbon application, and permeable treatment barri-
ers.
Carbon pillows are permeable filter bags filled with granules of
activated carbon. Liquids can flow through the bag material, contact the
carbon, and flow back through the bag material into the water column.
Flotation units can be attached to the bags such that the bags are in a
vertical position on the bottom of the water body and the contaminants are
removed over an interval of depth (Pilie et al. 1975).
Granules of activated carbon can also be applied directly to contami-
nated bottom materials. Activated carbon is more capable than sediments of
"holding" contaminants over time and, to the extent that contaminants are
transferred from sediments to activated carbon, the contaminants are made
less available to leaching into the water column or otherwise re-entering
the environment. A three-phased equilibrium is established with the higher
contaminant concentrations adsorbed to carbon, a lower concentration on the
sediment, and the lowest concentration in water (Mackenthur et al. 1979).
Laboratory studies have demonstrated the use of activated carbon in reducing
levels of organics in the water column, but the feasibility of this has not
been demonstrated on a large-scale application.
Permeable treatment barriers consist of two parallel wire mesh fences
that are firmly anchored to the bottom. The spacing between the fences is
filled with activated carbon in the form of carbon fibers, which resemble
loosely packed steel wool. The fibers are weighted to sorb sinking spills.
Carbon fibers developed for testing purposes have shown excellent adsorption
potential in laboratory experiments (Pilie et al. 1975), but full-scale
applications have not been demonstrated.
Polymer Foams and Fibers—
A wide range of polymeric foams and fibers has been developed in
conjunction with hazardous oil spill recovery work. These products have
been manufactured in a number of forms, including pillows, sheets, strips,
booms, and pads. They are manufactured using various materials, including
polyethylene, polypropylene, and polyurethane. Polymer foams and fibers
can be used in the treatment or sinking spills by weighting the sorbents so
that they sink to the bottom and contact the spill.
Resins—
Resins are synthetic sorbents with a porous structure that is similar
to the molecular porosity of activated carbon (Bauer et al. 1976) and can
E-2
-------
be applied to in situ treatment of bottom materials in the manner described
for activated carbon, above.
Gelling—
Gelling agents may be used for in situ coagulation of contaminated
sediments. One commercially available product is imbiber beads, which are
made of polybutyl styrene. These beads have the capacity to absorb organic
substances up to 27 times their volume. Water can initially pass through
pads or pillows of the beads, which provide approximately 30 percent void
space. Upon contact with an organic fluid, the beads expand and fill the
void space, preventing further flow. Water is not absorbed and organic
contaminants are permanently locked into the imbiber bead matrix. Gelling
agents are available in blankets or packets, which are weighted so they can
be deployed to the desired depth (EMCO undated).
E.1.1.2 Applications
Sorbents can be used only in relatively quiescent waters because of
the logistics of placement and the risk of resuspending contaminants.
Activated carbon can effectively adsorb a broad range of organic and
inorganic constituents. The adsorption efficiency depends on the type of
carbon, the properties of the constituents (i.e., molecular size, polarity,
solubility, and solution pH), and the contact time with the carbon.
Resins are less versatile than activated carbon. However, if sulfo-
nated, resins sorb dissolved ionic contaminants more readily and are,
therefore, better suited to sorption of metals and ionic organics than
activated carbon. Resins also tend to sorb soluble species, whereas acti-
vated carbon favors sorption of nonsoluble compounds.
E.I.1.3 Limitations
In situ treatment techniques are generally not widely proven and
accepted for treatment of contaminated bottom materials. Consultation with
researchers and technical representatives may be needed to successfully
implement the techniques.
The primary limitation of any sorption technique is that sorptive
materials do not destroy or remove the contaminants and desorption (release
of contaminants) over the long-term may occur. In addition, there are some
limitations to the location in which some of the sorption methods can be
applied. For example, carbon pillows are not effective in calm waters, as
some nominal flow is needed to continuously bring contaminants into contact
with the carbon. Permeable treatment barriers cannot be used in deep and
E-3
-------
fast-flowing waters. High flow rates tend to wash away the wire mesh
fence, whereas low flow rates limit the contact between the carbon and the
contaminants.
E.I.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Deployment and placement of sorbents can require support vessels with
booms or cranes. Diver assistance may be necessary in deep-water applications,
Manual labor and light equipment will be needed in shallow-water applications.
Costs of in situ sorption treatment can vary widely, ranging from low
to high relative to other in situ techniques, depending on the contaminants,
the setting, and the sorbent used.
E.1.2 Chemical and Biological Treatment
E.I.2.1 Description
Various chemical and biological treatment techniques can be used to
treat in situ contaminated sediments and sinking spills or discharges.
These Techniques include precipitation, neutralization, oxidation, chemical
dechlorination, and biological treatment. These techniques are most common-
ly used to reduce the concentrations of hazardous substances in industrial
sludges and liquids. Chemical and biological treatment techniques involve
mixing a treatment reagent with the contaminated sediments, allowing a re-
action to take place that will modify the waste and render it less hazardous.
Most chemical and biological treatment methods require other stream diver-
sion or containment of the contaminated sediments in order to allow for
proper mixing of the treatment reagent with the sediments and to ensure
adequate time for the treatment reagent to be in contact with the sediments.
Precipitation—
Precipitation controls contaminants by converting high-solubility
substances into low-solubility substances, thereby limiting their ability
to contaminate the water column. The process involves stream diversion or
containment of a spill, followed by spreading and mixing precipitating
agents with the sediments. The result is a low-solubility solid substance
(a "precipitate") that is a less hazardous substances. This process is
amenable to inorganic contaminants. Sulfide precipitation reagents are the
most promising because metal sulfide precipitates are the least soluble
metal compounds that are likely to form over a broad pH range. Calcium
sulfate, iron sulfate, or gypsum may also be used as precipitation agents.
Solutions and slurries of precipitation agents can also be applied directly
to sediments in calm waters using pumps and hoses.
E-4
-------
Neutralization—
Neutralization involves stream diversion or containment of a spill,
followed by spreading and mixing neutralizing agents with the sediments.
This process is amenable to treating highly acidic and basic contaminants.
The treatment reagents are weak acids and bases that react to form water
and, in general, less hazardous substances. For example, calcium carbonate
or sodium bicarbonate (bases) are used to neutralize acidic substances.
Neutralizing agents can be applied to in situ sediments as slurries by
using sand spreaders or a diffuser head, or by open pipe discharge. They
can be applied as solids either by broadcast spreading or by use of hand
shovels within the contained area.
Oxidation—
Oxidation involves the application of treatment reagents to oxidize
spilled substances, thereby converting them to less hazardous substances.
Containment of spills or contaminated sediments may be necessary prior to
oxidation in order to prevent loss of oxidant and oxidation of non-target
compounds outside the contaminated area. Contaminants amenable to oxidation
include a wide range of organics. Highly chlorinated compounds and nitro-
aromatics are not well suited to oxidation. Treatment reagents used for
oxidation are oxygen and/or ozone, and hydrogen peroxide.
Chemical Dechlorination'—
Chemical dechlorination entails the mixing of chemicals that react
with chlorinated compounds, converting the chlorine component to chlorine
salts and other nonhazardous compounds. The process requires stream
diversion and sediment dewatering prior to mixing dechlorination agents
with the sediments. Treatment agents used in this process are polythylene
glycol or potassium hydroxide. Dechlorination is amenable to highly chlor-
inated organic contaminants, such as PCBs and dioxin.
Biological Treatment—
Biological treatment involves containment of contaminated materials
followed by the addition of microorganisms to the materials. These micro-
organisms metabolize the contaminants, rendering them less hazardous. An
oxygen source (for aerobic degradation) and nutrients must also be added to
support the microorganisms. Biological treatment is used to degrade organic
cont aminant s.
E.I.2.2 Applications
In general, in situ chemical and biological treatment methods may be
most applicable to water bodies with low-velocity flows and currents.
E-5
-------
Precipitation is applicable to inorganic contaminants that are in the
ionic (dissolved) form, particularly metals.
Neutralization is applicable to highly acidic and basic contaminants.
However, unless the spilled substance is otherwise hazardous or if the
volume of the spill is large in relation to the size of the water body,
natural dispersion and dilution can often rapidly return the pH of the
water body to background.
Oxidation is applicable to most organic compounds, except highly
chlorinated organics and nitro-aromatic compounds.
Chemical dechlorination is applicable to highly chlorinated organic
compounds, such as PCBs and dioxin.
Biological treatment is applicable to organic contaminants, provided
that, for aerobic treatment, sufficiently high concentrations of oxygen are
naturally or artificially available to the active bacteria.
E.1.2.3 Limitations
jCn situ treatment techniques are generally.not widely proven and
accepted for treatment of contaminated bottom materials. Consultation with
researchers and technical representatives may be needed to successfully
implement the techniques.
Sulfide precipitation of inorganic contaminants (such as metals) is
effective only under reducing conditions. In addition, sulfide precipitation
has the potential to release toxic hydrogen sulfide gas.
The use of ferric sulfate as a neutralization agent under aerobic
conditions may result in the formation of hydrous iron oxides. These oxides
can scavange heavy metals from the water column and may coat the gills of
bottom-feeding organisms.
Oxidation may be difficult to induce in compounds that are sorbed to
sediments. Further, when oxidation does occur, it can result in degration
products that are more mobile than the original contaminants.
Chemical dechlorination treatment systems have a limited tolerance to
water. Therefore, this method cannot be used where in situ dewatering
cannot be accomplished prior to treatment.
Partial degradation products of biological treatment processes may be
more soluble or more toxic than the original contaminants. In addition,
some microorganisms used for treatment may be pathogenic. Degradation by
biological treatment may also proceed so slowly, especially at low tempera-
tures, that its use alone may not be practical as a rapid spill response.
E-6
-------
E.I.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
A11 12. situ chemical and biological methods have the potential for
secondary environmental impacts either as a result of the use of toxic
treatment reagents or as a result of toxic products from reaction or degrada-
tion. Consequently, in situ treatment is generally limited to situations
where the contaminated area can be contained during treatment or where
stream flow can be diverted for the duration of treatment (see Appendix B).
For all in situ treatment methods, the treatment reagents should be
well mixed with the contaminated material. " Mixing can be accomplished in
shallow waters with low-flow velocity by diverting the stream flow, spread-
ing the reagents, and mixing the reagents using rubber-tired or crawler
type rotor or trenching mixing equipment.
When stream diversion is not possible, in situ chemical injection and
mixing methods may be used in cases of sinking liquids or slurries, and
covering/capping methods may be used in cases of solids or sediments. The
application methods must be conducted under carefully controlled conditions
to minimize contamination of the water column. Because of the potential
for secondary contamination and the difficulty of ensuring complete mixing
of the reagent with the spill-or contaminated sediments, chemical and
biological treatment without stream diversion has limited application.
Costs of in situ chemical and biological treatment can vary widely
ranging from low to high relative to other in situ techniques, depending on
the contaminants, the setting, and the chemical agent or biological organism
used.
E.2 ISOLATION
Contaminated bottom materials can be physically isolated from the water
column by a variety of methods that essentially confine the contaminants in
place. The confinement can be short-term or long-term, depending on the
needs of the situation. Available isolation methods include covering and
capping and chemical fixation methods. These methods are discussed in the
following sections.
E.2.1 Covering and Capping
E.2.1.1 Description
Covering is the application of a noncontaminated material over the
surface, of deposited contaminated materials. Covering is intended to
E-7
-------
physically protect the contaminated material from erosion and transport and
to limit interaction of the materials with the water column.
Capping is a special case of covering in which low-permeability materi-
als are placed over contaminated materials so that the materials are essenti-
ally "sealed", preventing physical transport and contaminant migration by
dissolution into the water column.
There are three basic types of cover and capping materials: inert
materials, such as sand, silt, and clay; active materials, such as greensand,
gypsum, and limestone; and synthetic liner materials.
Inert materials are placed over contaminated materials in granular
form and are not intended to chemically alter the contaminants. Inert
capping materials can be further divided into three classes: coarse-grained
materials, fine-grained materials, and noncontaminated dredge spoils.
Active cover materials can be applied alone or with an inert material.
The purpose of an active cover is to react with the contaminated materials
to neutralize or otherwise detoxify the material, as well as to function as
a cover. Potentially applicable active cover materials include:
• Limestone - neutralize acids
• Greensand - neutralize acids
• Oyster shells - neutralize acids
• Gypsum - precipitate metals
• Ferric sulfate - precipitate metals, neutralize bases
• Alum - neutralize bases
• Alumina - remove fluoride.
Activated carbon and ion exchange resins are also active cover materials
In the sense that they adsorb contaminants. The use of these materials is
discussed in Section E.1.1, Sorption.
The correct emplacement of active cover materials is critical. If
placed outside the spill or contaminated area, active cover materials can
be harmful to benthic organisms. Because of the potential hazard of these
materials, they should be employed using a diffuser head or other system
that generates little suspension.
Synthetic liners are low-permeability, flexible sheets that are custom-
arily used to seal lagoons for seepage control or to cap waste disposal
sites for infiltration control. Liners are made from a variety of materials,
including polyethylene, polyvinyl-chloride, and hypalon. In applications
involving contaminated bottom materials, a continuous liner can be placed
E-8
-------
over the entire area of contamination. Large applications require splicing
and sealing of sections, which cannot be accomplished under water.
There are basically three methods for placing granular (inert or
active) cover materials:
• Point dumping
• Pump-down methods
• Submerged diffuser systems.
The amount of suspension and dispersion generated during capping and
covering is largely a function of the method and equipment used for emplac-
ing the material. Levels of suspension and dispersion are greatest with
point dump methods and lowest with diffuser head applications. In point
dump applications, cover material is dumped from the water surface, so the
initial impact is largely determined by the range of particle sizes and the
coheslveness of the material (Hand et al. 1978).
In comparison with point dumping methods, pump-down methods are advan-
tageous because they create substantially less suspension and resuspension
of contaminated sediments. Pump-down is accomplished by means of pumping
the cover material through a discharge pipe with an outlet located close to
the desired area on the bottom of the water body.
The submerged diffuser system is one of the most effective methods for
controlling the placement of cover material. The primary purpose of the
diffuser head is to reduce the velocity and the turbulence associated with
the discharged cover material. This is accomplished by routing the flow
through a vertically oriented axial diffuser. The submerged diffuser
provides increased control over the location of cover, decreased scouring
of the bottom area, and less turbidity in the area of operation.
A variation on the diffuser system is the application of shotcrete
(pneumatically applied concrete sprayed by hoses and nozzles). Close
control of the nozzle can be maintained to place an effective cap or cover
over submerged or exposed sediments.
The ability of bottom organisms to colonize a capped area without
significant bioaccumulation of contaminants depends on the type of cover
material, the similarity to natural surrounding sediments, the thickness
of the cover, and the potential for leaching. The cap must be sufficiently
thick to prevent burrowing. The majority of organisms will be found in the
upper 0.3 to 0.5 feet of the strata with certain species expected to burrow
to depths of one to two feet. Therefore, a cap thickness of two feet is
considered adequate (Bokuniewicz 1981). Clay or silt caps are more sus-
ceptible to burrowing than sand caps, and this also should be considered
when determining the thickness of the cap.
E-9
-------
E.2.1.2 Applications
Covering and capping methods are best suited for use in waters where
bottom currents and flow velocity are relatively low. Coarse-grained cover
materials are best suited for applications where fine-grained materials
would Be transported or eroded by currents.
Covering and capping methods may be applied as a temporary remedial
response or as a primary and long-term response action. They can also be
used as a final step in the remedial process to isolate any residual con-
taminated material following the recovery and removal of contaminated
material. Covering and capping methods can also be used in conjunction
with other methods, such as containment dikes or trenches, to isolate and
treat contaminated materials.
E.2.1.3 Limitations
Placement and long-term effectiveness of caps and covers may not be
achievable in water bodies with high velocities or currents. Placement of
covering and capping materials may cause suspension of the materials in the
water column and .resuspension of bottom materials by the. turbulence of cap
or cover placement.
Synthetic liner materials have been.considered at a number of sites
for containing contaminated sediments. Splicing of sections of conventional
synthetic liners cannot be achieved under water, generally limiting the use
of synthetic caps to relatively small surface areas. Also, many problems
with the placement of the membrane on top of the sediment, the durability
of the liner, and the compatability of the liner with the contaminated
sediments prohibit this method from being of value as a long-term isolation
technique.
E.2.1.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Placement of cover and cap materials requires special equipment,
including some combination of barges, scows, pumps, piping, and diffusers.
Synthetic liners require specially fabricated equipment that is not readily
available. In all but shallow water applications, diver assistance or
closed-circuit television observation of the covering and capping progress
may be needed to ensure that proper depth and continuity are achieved.
Costs of covering and capping techniques can vary widely, ranging from
low to high relative to other in situ techniques, depending on the
contaminants, the setting, and the cover or capping materials used.
E-10
-------
E.2.2 Fixation
5.2*2.1 Description
Fixation involves the mixing of a substance (fixation agent) with
• contaminated material in order to embed the contaminated material in a
stable, solid form. The process is most commonly used in solidifying
industrial sludges in order to make contaminants less mobile in the
environment. A number of materials are used as fixation agents, including
cement, fly ash, quicklime, silicates, and bentonite.
There are basically two methods for applying fixation agents to
contaminated bottom materialsi in situ chemical injection and stream diver-
sion followed by mixing.
In situ chemical injection methods involve the stabilization of con-
taminated sediments through the injection of grouting materials into the
sediments. A method for grouting with clay-cement is the Deep Cement
Mixing Method, which was developed in Japan. The system consists of a
number of injection pipes mounted on a barge. The injection pipes are
connected to mixing pipes that enter the sediments. Similar equipment is
available for deep mixing with .quicklime. The process is completed by
lowering the operating mixing apparatus (mixing blades are located within
the individual shafts) to the required depth and injecting a cement- or
lime-based slurry into the sediments. The mixing blades are then reversed
and the shafts are removed and relocated (Takenaka Doboku, Co., Inc. un-
dated). Another barge-mounted injection and mixing apparatus continuously
mixes the slurry with bottom materials and eliminates the need to continu-
ously raise, relocate, and lower the mixing apparatus (Natori 1984).
Dewatered, exposed sediments can also be "fixed" by mixing cement,
quicklime, or a grout with the contaminated sediments in order to promote
stabilization. The stabilizing agent is applied to the surface and mixed
with the contaminated sediments using rotor or trencher mixing equipment.
Following completion of the sealing or stabilizing operation, the sediment
bottom is restored to its natural grade and sediment composition in an
effort to restore the habitat for bottom organisms.
E.2.2.2 Applications
Fixation can be applied in water bodies with relatively low-flow
velocity and currents. Fixation may be applied in high-velocity streams by
diverting stream flow around the area of concern. The applicability of
fixation to the contaminant of concern is a matter of selecting the appro-
priate fixation agent.
E-ll
-------
E.2.2.3 Limitations
Permeability and chemical compatibility restrict the potential
applications of many types of grouts. For example, clay-cement grout may
not achieve a sufficiently low permeability to be acceptable in all cases.
Quicklime is suitable only for the containment of inorganics. Neither clay
nor cement are compatible with acids and bases. Compatibility and durability
of bentonite must be determined on a case-by-case basis. The long-term
permeability and durability of silica gel grouts is not well known.
E.2.2.4 Special Requirements/Considerations
Fixation of contaminated bottom materials can require the use of
specialized equipment, such as mixing and injection equipment and support
vessels. Diver support or closed-circuit television cameras may be needed
to monitor the progress and continuity of the process.
Where stream diversion is used to expose bottom materials, cofferdams,
diversion channels, and pumps may be needed to maintain stream flow.
Tillers and bulldozers may also be needed for spreading and mixing fixation
agents with the bottom materials.
Costs of in situ fixation can vary widely, ranging from low to high
relative to other~in~situ techniques, depending on the contaminants, the
setting, the accessibility of the bottom materials (e.g., shallow depth or
stream diversion), and the fixation agent used.
E. 3 SUMMARY
The in situ treatment and isolation techniques that are described in
this appe"n7ix~in"clude sorption, chemical and biological treatment, cover
and capping methods, and fixation. A summary of the characteristics and
applications of each of these techniques is provided in Table E-l.
E-l 2
-------
TABLE E-l. SUMMARY OF IN SITU TREATMENT AND ISOLATION TECHNIQUES
Technique
Applications
Limitations
Secondary Impacts
Type of Substance Treatable
Relative
Cost
I—•
OJ
Sorption In situ purification
by adsorption of toxic
substances in contam-
inated sediments.
Long-term treatment of
contaminated sediments.
Adsorption of a broad
range of organic and
inorganic waste con-
stituents.
Carbon pillows used in
waters with high flow
rates in order to
achieve needed adsorp-
tion kinetics.
Permeable treatment
barriers used in
shallow water.
Permeable treatment
barriers used in narrow
range of flow rates.
Various waste compati-
bility limitations.
Technique not
widely proven
and accepted for
treatment of
contaminated
bottom materials.
Carbon pillows not
effective in calm
waters.
Desorption can occur
over time because the
contaminants are
neither destroyed nor
removed.
Resins best for sorption
of metals and ionic
organics.
Activated carbon best
for sorption of non-
soluble compounds.
Low to
High.
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-l» (continued)
Technique
Chemical
and
Biological
Treatment
Applications
Long-ten treatment
of contaminated
sediments.
In situ treatment of
contaminated sed-
iments or sinking
spills.
Chemical and biolog-
ical treatment of a
KrnnH rancrt* nf or—
Limitations
Technique not
widely proven
and accepted for
treatment of
contaminated
bottom materials.
Various waste
compatability
limitations.
Degradation
Secondary Inpacts
All chemical and
biological treat-
ment methods can
contaminate the
water column.
Type of Substance Treatable
Precipitation of inor-
ganic cationic and
anionic wastes.
Neutralization of
acids and bases.
Oxidation of a wide
range of organics,
except for highly
chlorinated compounds
and nitro-aromatics.
Relative
Cost
Low to
High.
ganic and inorganic
wastes.
Use in waters with low
flow velocity and low
volume for applica-
tions involving
stream diversion.
Cover and Temporary or long-term
Capping isolation of contami-
Methods nated sediments from
streamflow.
Final step in removal
of contaminated sed-
iments to isolate
residual contaminants.
Used in conjunction
with containment
methods to provide
long-term isolation of
contaminants.
products may be
more toxic than
original
contaminants.
Technique not
widely proven
and accepted
for treatment
of contaminated
sediments.
Active cover
materials must
remain in place
long enough to
react with and
treat the contam-
inants.
Active cover - -•
materials can
contaminate the
water column.
Natural grade and
sediment composition
are altered.
Habitat for benthic
organisms is destroyed.
Must be restored for
their survival.
Chemically compatible
solids and semi-solids.
Low to
High.
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-l. (continued)
Technique
Cover and
Capping
Methods
Applications
Used in waters where
bottom currents and
flow velocity are
relatively low so as
not to erode the cover.
Limitations
Synthetic
membranes may be
difficult or
impossible to
place.
Secondary Impacts Type of Substance Treatable Relative
Cost
w
t—'
Ul
Fixation Long-term treatment of
contaminated sediments.
In situ treatment
used to immobilize
contaminated sed-
iments and prevent
their interaction
with the water
column.
Clay-cement grout
used with low-per-
meability sediments.
Chemical injection
methods used in
calm waters.
Stream diversion
methods used in shallow
waters with low flow
velocity.
Technique not
widely proven and
accepted for
treatment of
contaminated
sediments.
Type of sediment
applicable can be
limited by viscos-
ity and particle
size of fixation
agent.
Various waste
compatability
limitations.
Natural grade and
sediment' composition
are altered by
fixation.
Habitat for benthic
organisms is destroyed.
It must be restored for
their survival.
Toxicity of some organic
grouts is uncertain.
Waste compatibility factors Low to
must be evaluated on a High.
site-specific basis.
-------
-------
APPENDIX F
DATA ON CHEMICALS THAT SINK
Most commercial and waste substances are a mixture of a variety of
chemical compounds. A variety of physical, chemical, and toxilogical data
are available for the individual chemicals, but not for the composite
substances. Therefore, the properties of the individual chemicals are
generally used to predict the behavior of a spilled substance.
The tendency of a substance to sink in water can be predicted from the
substance's specific gravity, a measure of density relative to the density
of water, and from its water solubility. The water solubility of a substance
is the maximum mass of the substance that dissolves per unit mass of water,
which can be expressed as parts per million (ppm). The solubility thus
represents the concentration of the substance at saturation in water.
In addition to the specific gravity and the water solubility of a
spilled substance, other physical, chemical, and toxicologic properties
determine how it spreads in the environment, its ultimate fate, and the
threat to.humans and to the environment. The most important properties for
predicting environmental transport, fate, and impact include the following:
• Specific gravity
e Water solubility
• Physical state
0 Reactivity
« Toxicity
• Bioaccumulation
• Aquatic persistence.
The physical state of a chemical and its reactivity with water help to
determine its potential threat to the sediments. Liquids tend to flow more
readily and to dissolve more rapidly than solids. Chemicals that react
exothermically will dissolve and disperse rapidly, creating a water body
contamination problem, while averting contamination of sediments.
F-l
-------
If the spilled chemical remains at the bottom of a water body, it can
permeate the sediments and enter the food chain through ingestion by benthic
organisms, decompose slowly to form water soluble products, or slowly
dissolve or become suspended in the water body, producing toxic effects in
aquatic and terrestrial flora and fauna. More seriously, the chemicals may
produce toxic effects in humans who drink the water, eat the plants or
animals, or come in contact with the water. Whether these events occur at
all, and the extent to which they occur, is determined by the toxicity,
bioaccuraulation, and aquatic persistence of the spilled chemical. Therefore,
the urgency of remediation in the event of a chemical spill to surface
water is determined by the properties of the spilled chemical. Knowledge
of these properties will also help in deciding what remedial actions are
necessary and most likely to be effective.
To assist the on-scene coordinator in responding to spills of sinker
chemicals, a database was developed using chemicals from the Chemical Hazard
Response Information System (CHRIS) and chemicals regulated under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), or'"Superfund". The chemical data are presented in Table F-4.
The following sections describe the development of the database, including
how the sinkers were identified and characterized.
F.I BACKGROUND OF THE SINKERS LIST
The current list of 1,117 CHRIS chemicals and 90 additional chemicals
denser than water not on the CHRIS List, but on the list of chemicals
regulated under CERCLA, were combined to form an initial file'of chemicals.
A new file of 697 chemicals was drawn from the initial file that contained
only those CHRIS and CERCLA chemicals with specific gravity greater than
one ("Heavies"). The water solubilities of the chemicals in the Heavies
file were then entered into the file,'supplementing the CHRIS data from
standard reference texts. Quantitative solubility data were entered whenever
possible; otherwise, relative terms, such as slightly soluble, very soluble,
etc., were used. Another new file, "Sinkers," was then extracted from the
Heavies file, based on water solubility. Only Heavies with water solubility
less than 100,000 parts per million in water (10 percent), or less than
"very soluble" if the solubility information was qualitative, were entered
into the Sinkers data file.
The Sinkers file was purged of nonhazardous chemicals (such as corn
syrup); chemicals that can be transporter! under pressure as dense liquids,
but are gases at ambient temperatures above 32°F (such as dichlorodifluoro-
methane); and chemicals that react exothermically with water to yield
nonsinking chemicals, since they would dissipate before cleanup could take
place. The resulting list of Sinkers, which includes 468 chemicals, is
presented in Table F-4.
F-2
-------
F.2 CONTENT OF THE SINKERS LIST
The following information was gathered on each of 468 sinking chemicals,
within the limitation of the availability of data, and is presented on the
Sinkers List.in Table F-4:
• Chemical name
• CHRIS code
• Physical state
• Specific gravity
• Water solubility
• Toxicity
• Ignitability
• Reactivity
• Bioaccumulation
• Aquatic persistence
• Recovery and handling hazards
• Recommended response.
A significant number of data gaps exist in the information presented
in the list because quantitative data are not readily available.
Explanations of the abbreviations and symbols used on the list are provided
in Table F-l. Criteria used for the ratings are provided in Tables F-2 and
F-3. The information categories are explained in the following sections.
F.2.1 Chemical Name and CHRIS Code
The chemical names used on the Sinkers List are those used in the CHRIS
or CERCLA Lists, except that Roman numerals are used to distinguish between
oxidation states of transition metal compounds, such as cobalt acetate, as
in current chemical nomenclature: cobalt (II) acetate, or cobalt (III)
acetate. The CHRIS Code is provided for.sinkers that were on the CHRIS
List. It is a unique three-letter code for a particular compound.
F-3
-------
TABLE F-l. KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
Physical State
Water Solubility
L - Liquid
-S - Solid
S - Soluble
M - Moderately soluble
SS - Slightly soluble
I - Insoluble
R - Reactive
D - Decomposes
Numerical values are in parts
per million (ppm)
TABLE F-2. HAZARD RATING CRITERIA
Rating
N
L
Toxicity (LD5Q*)
>15 g/kg
5 to 15 g/kg
Ignitability '
Not ignitable
Flash point >
Reactivity
with Water
No reaction
Mild reaction; unlikely
M 0.5 to 5 g/kg
H 50 to 500 mg/kg
140PF (60°C)
Flash point -
100 to 140°F
(38 to 60°C)
Flash point <
100°F (38°C) and
boiling point
to be hazardous
Moderate reaction
More vigorous reaction;
. may be hazardous
* Lethal dose; see Glossary, Appendix G.
F-4
-------
TABLE F-3. BIOACCUMULATION RATING CRITERIA
Rating
. L
(Low)
M
(Moderate)
H
(High)
E
(Extreme)
Qctanol/Water
Partition
Coefficient*
(Kow)
< 3
>_ 3, < 5
_> 5
^
Bioconcen-
tration
Factor*
(BCF)
< 100
,> 100
^ 1000
*™
Tendency to
Adsorb to
Sediment
and Soil
Adsorbs
weakly
Adsorbs
moderately
Adsorbs
strongly
*"
Aquatic
Persistence*
95% degradation in
6 months or less
95% degradation in
2 years or less
95% degradation in
; 10 years or less
< 95% degradation
in 10 years or more
* See Glossary, Appendix G.
Source: Information adapted from Hand et al. 1978.
F-5
-------
F.2.2 Physical State
The physical state is indicated as "S" for solids and "L" liquids.
However, some sinkers can exist as either liquids or solids, depending on
their temperature and purity. Phenol is such a material; its physical
state is indicated as "S/L." Liquids flow more readily than solids and
tend to pool in low points on the bottom of a water body. The rate at
which a chemical will dissolve in water is affected by its physical state,
but additional information about the chemical should be gathered at the
spill site. For chemicals of similar solubility, one that is a liquid or a
fine powder will dissolve more rapidly than one that has the form of large
crystals, pellets, or chunks. Physical state must be considered together
with the water solubility to predict whether a sinker can be removed before
it dissolves.
F.2.3 Specific Gravity
The specific gravity of a sinker is greater than the specific gravity
of water, causing it to sink in water. However, not all sinkers will sink
in every situation. Sinkers with specific gravities only slightly greater
than one will tend to disperse more readily than sinkers that are more
dense. Of course, factors not related to the chemical, but to the environ-
mental conditions, have a substantial effect. For instance, a rapidly
moving river will-suspend and disperse liquids or finely divided solids,
even if they are denser than water.
F.2.4 Water Solubility
The solubility of a chemical is one of the most critical parameters
predicting its behavior in the environment. As with the specific gravity,
but to an even greater degree, the solubility of a sinker is dependent upon
environmental factors. Warm bodies of water will dissolve much more of a
chemical than cold ones. Salt water will not dissolve organic chemicals
as completely as fresh water. Turbulent water bodies will cause a sinker
to realize its solubility faster than quiescent water bodies. If the
turbulence is caused by a river, then even slightly soluble sinkers can
become completely dissolved and dissipated in a short time. If the
turbulence is tidal, then the sinker will tend to reach saturation rapidly,
but not be dissipated unless the spill size is small.
F.2.5 Tpxicity
The threat posed by a spilled chemical to the nearby population and
to the environment is critically dependent on its toxicity. The factors
F-6
-------
already discussed earlier, physical state and solubility, affect the
chemical's environmental transport to potential receptors, and its bio-
accumulation and aquatic persistence, discussed below, also determine if
and how the chemical will exert its toxicity on human and environmental
receptors. However, a spilled chemical's toxicity can also be realized
through absorption by workers attempting to remove the chemical.
F.2.6 Ignitability and Reactivity
The ignitability and reactivity of a sinker are mainly a threat to the
workers performing removal operations. If the substance can ignite and
burn once removed from the water, or if it reacts with water or equipment
to generate pressure or toxic products, it must be handled more carefully.
F.2.7 Bioaccumulation and Aquatic Persistence
The characteristics of bioaccumulation and aquatic persistence govern
the environmental transport and toxic effects of spilled chemicals. If a
chemical bioaccumulates, that is, tends to remain in organisms rather than
being excreted, it is more likely to cause a toxic effect in the organism.
Even if a bioaccumulative chemical does not reach toxic levels in a lower
organism that absorbs it, it may accumulate to higher concentrations in
animals higher in -the food chain, such as people. Then it can produce
adverse health effects. The aquatic persistence is a measure of the chemi-
cal stability of a chemical in a wet environment. Aquatic persistence
indicates whether the chemical will last long enough to be transported" in
the surface water to reach an environmental receptor, bi'oaccumulate, and/or
produce toxic effects. Since the toxicity of a chemical is concentration-
dependent, low aquatic persistence has the same effect on toxicity as does
dilution or dispersion—it reduces the probability of a toxic effect.
Bioaccumulation has the opposite effect of dilution—it increases the
probability of a toxic effect on some environmental receptor.
F.2.8 Recovery and Handling Hazards
Personal protective equipment, appropriate to the hazard and necessary
for safe handling of sinkers during removal, is recommended in this column.
This column also contains additional toxicity information and warnings of
any other handling hazards. The absence of an entry in this column does
not mean that the chemical poses no hazards; all chemicals on the list are
hazardous and appropriate protective clothing should be worn by response
personnel handling these chemicals.
F-7
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Cheaical Wtu
Allyl Trichloto.il.ae
AluainuB Fluoride
ABinoethyl Etbinolraine
Aaitrole
AiBUmiiui Lactet*
AiBOaiuB Uuryl Sulfate
_. AmoniuB Oxalate
•T]
1
!-•
O
AuoniuK Peataborate
AaMniuB Fereulfate
Jamoaium Ficrate
Imnnim Stearate
*«Mnniu» Vaaadat*
Aayltricbtoroailan*, n-
Aailine
CHIIS fhyi. tp.clfic
Cod* Et*te Gravity
ATC L 1.21J
ALF S 2.550
AEA L 1 .028
8 1.157
ALT 8 1 .200
ALS L 1 .030
OAX 8 1 .500
AFB 8 1.580
APE 8 1 .980
8 1.719
AMR 3 1 .010
B 2.326
ATS L 1 .137
ANL L 1.022
tfiter Toiicity Ignite- Itictivity lio*ccu«- Aquatic Ricovtry & Handling IieoBHnded Iciponic
Solubility bility ulatioo Feraia- Uiiarda
tcnce
K
5590 H M H E Gogglea and matk to gecauae of toxicity,
! protact againat rewval preferred.
particulate Baterial. lurial aecond-beat
Aquaoua solution ia alternative.
toxic.
M H L N
48
8 L N
H L N
25, WO K L M Highly toxic via oral i
inhalation routea.
Fomrful irritaot
corroaiva to tiaaua.
70.300 H H Highly toxic
affecta CHS. Foiaoning
cauaaa dapreaaioa of
circulation, vomiting.
ahock and COM. Abaorbad
by akin only through
wouoda, opan akin.
58,200 ML H Moderately toxic via oral
rout*.
1100
H L H
6,060
g
37,000 H L N L M Wear organic vapor ' Toxic, ahould b*
respirator, gogglea, reaoved.
rubber glovea end
boota. Contact »/
atrong acida Hill cauaa
violent aplattaring. Hill
attack aoae form of
plaatica, rubber and
CMtiD«*- (continued)
-------
Table F-4, (continued)
Choice 1 Dane
Aniaoyl Chloride
Antbraceae
Ant i*ony
Antuony Fentacbloride
Antiaony Fentafluoride
CUKIS Phya.
Code State
ASC L
ATH S
8
AFC L
APF L
1
Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccua- Aquatic
Gravity Solubility bility ulation Persis-
tence
f
1.260 8
1.240 I L M . ML
6.684
2.354 D
2.340 a '« H E
Recovery * Handling Gecoanended Response
Baaarda
Mildly irritating. A
recognized carcinogen of
akin.
Moderately toxic via
oral route.
Hben awiature it praaent
cauaea aever* corroaion
of aatala (except ateal).
Hay caua* fire in contact
with coabuatible uterial.
Antiaony Potaaaiua Tartrate APT 8
2.600
83.000
Highly toxic via oral
route. Can cauae
aalivatioo, nauaea,
diarrhea, akin raan.
Large doae cauaea aevere
liver daatage.
Antiaony Tribroside ATB S 4.148 D
Antimony Trioxide ATX S S.200 I H «
Arocblor 1254 L 1.50
Araenic S 5.727
Araenlc Diaulfide ABO 8 3.500 I MM
Araenic Trichloride ASI 8 2.156 DUN H
Hear cbeaical protective
auit u/ aelf contained
breathing unit, goggUa,
rubber glovea. Inhalation
irritatea or ulceratea
reapiratory paaaagea.
Hear gogglea.
aelf-contained breathing
unit, rubber glovea.
Inhalation cauaea
irritation to noae,
throat. Severe irritant to
eyea i akin.
Should be reauved and
treated cbeaically and
phyaically.
laolate and reaove or
diaperae and fluab.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chemical N.M CUIIS »hy». Specific Water Toxicity Igiita- Reactivity lioaccum- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation reraia-
trace
lecovery i Hapdliu
Hatarde
Keccwoteiuled leaponae
At.eDIc Trioxid.
Areenic Tri.ulfid.
ATO 8 3.700 37,000 E H
A«T 8 3.430 0.5
Avoid contact v/ .olid 4
duet. Irritant to eyea,
Doae t tbroat. Wear
reapirator, flovti,
gogglea, full protective
auit.
Avoid contact v/ duat or
eolid. Irrtant to akin
•ay ciuae ulceratioa.
Hear chemical protective
auit w/ aelf contained
braatbinf unit, (ogglea,
glovea.
laolate and remove.
laolate and remove.
Protectiv. clothing «d
goggl.a abould be uorn
vben handling hot
material. Hay foul
dredging equipment..
Should be buried or
removed .
Atraxine
Azinphoemethyl
Barium
Barium C.rbon.te
Barium Nitrate
larium Peroxide
Beax (a) anthracene
ATZ S 1.200 I H N N L L
• AZM 8 » -*00 30 E N N Highly toxic via dermal
and oral route..
S 3.51
•«C 8 4.300 20 U N N H Solution i. toxic. Hill react „/ aulf.t. to
form inert inaoluble
barium aulfate. If not
reacted */ aulfate.
material abould be
removed.
INT s 3.240 87,000 N N
"0 S 4.960 I H L To,ic if inge.ted.
Avoid breathing duat
to handling.
Corrodea metal alowly.
If mixed with
S 1.274 .011 combuetible material, era
ignite apontaneoualy.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (pontinued)
Chemical Name
Benzal Chloride
Benzaldehyde
Benzene Uexacbloride
Benzene Phosphorous
Thiodichloride
Benzene Phosphorus Dicbloride
Benzenesulfonyl Chloride
Benzeoethiol
Benzideue •
Benzo (a) Pyrene
Ben zoic Acid
Benzonitrile
Benzophenone
Benzoquinone
Benzotrichloride
Benzoyl Chloride
CHRIS Phys.
Code Stste
L
BZD L
1HC 8
BPT L
BPD L
S
S
BZA S
BZN L
BZP 8
S
L
BZC L
Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccum- Aquatic
Gravity Solubility bility ulation Persis-
tence
1 .295
1 .046 3,000 M L ' N L L
1.891 10 H M H H
1 .378 R
1 .140 R
1.384 I M
1 .077
1 .250 400
1 .351 .012
1.316 3,400 ML H L L
1.010 I L N L
1.085 1 KM
1.318 15.000
1.3723 5.9 ,
1.211 3,300 L L L
Recovery • Handling
Hazards
Local contact may cause
contact dermatitia.
Goggle* and protective
clothing abould be worn.
Hear gogglea t self
contained breathing
apparatus .
Poisonous if Inhaled.
Poisonous If Inhaled.
Eye protection and
protective clothing
should be voro.
When heated salts highly
toxic cysnide fumes. Hill
attack SOB* plastic*.
Hill attack aoM
plastic*.
Recommended Response
Toxic, should be removed.
Due to high degrsdstion
rate, material may not
remain aufficiently long
to dredge.
Diaperaion may be only
recourae.
Toxic, abould be
removed .
Moderately toxic, should
be removed, if possible.
Dispersal may be
acceptable.
Reacta v/ water to Toxic, abould be removed,
produce hydrochloric if poasible. Otherwise
acid. Protective clothing, neutralize w/ lime and
gogglea. glovea, t full diaperse.
face respirstor required.
Will corrode dredge
equipment. (continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chemical Name
leniyl Alcohol
lensyl Bromide
Benzyl Chloride
Benzyl Chloroformate
Benzyl n-Butyl Phthalata
Benzyl trimethylammonium
Chloride
Beryllium Oxide
Beryllium, Metallic
Bia (2-Chloroethoxy) Methane
Biamuth Oxychloride
Biaphenol A
Biaphenol A Diglycidyl Ether
Boiler Compound - Liquid
1 Boron Tribromide
CHIIS Fhy*. Specific
Code State Gravity
BAL L i.QSO
BBR L I .4*1
BCL L 1 .100
BCF L i .220
BBP I 1.120
BMA L i .070
BBO 8 3 .000
BEH 8 1 .850
1.2339
BOC S 7 .700
BPA S 1.195
BDE L 1.160
BCP L 1 .480
BU L 2.645
Water Toxleity Ignite- Inactivity lioaceum- A,u.tic I.eovery 4 H.«dli«g Iecom«*«d.a leapon..
Solubility bility ulatioa reriia- Riurd*
tence
30,000 H L H 1 Hill attack aorna
pliatica.
1 L ' L L Intanaaly irritating to
•kin, eye* end mucoua
membrane* .
33 H L L L Highly irritating to
reapiretory tract.
Hoderately irritating vie
oral route.
8 L L Irritating to (kin, Should be removed.
eye*, and mucoui
membrane*. Hear
protective auit w/ *elf
contained breathing unit
l> glove*.
I H L N
M L L
°-2 * 1 L Duat meek, protective Toxic, ahould be removed.
clothing and goggle*
required.
1 E . N N Avoid contact H/ aolid • laolata and remove.
duat. Hear goggle* 4 **lf
contained breathing unit.
Duat extremely toxic if
inhaled.
81,000
I "M N
600 H L N H Protective clothing and Toxic, abould be removed.
respirator required.
I E L M
M H H
D
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
CheBical Haae CHRIS Phya. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccua- Aquatic Recovery & Handling
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Persia- Haxarda
tence
Boron Trichloride BRT G 1.350 D H H
.
1
BroBine RRX 1 3.120 35,800 H
"1 .
1
Ui
BroBine Pentaf luoride BPX L 2.480 D
BroBine Trifluoride BIF L 2.610 D
BroBoacetone L 1 .634 .01
Broaobenxena BBZ L 1.490 41,000 M H
Brucine BRU B >1 I E L H-
Butanediol. 1.4- BOO L 1.017 M M 1 H
Butenediol, 1,4- BUD L 1.070 H L M
Butylphenol, p-tert- BTE S 1.037 I H 1 H
Butyltrichloroailane BCS L 1.160 R
CadaiuB S 6.642 20
C.d.iim Fluoborate CFB S 1 .600 H H H
CadBtuB Oxide COP S 6.950 I
CalciuB Araenate CCA 8 3.620 130 E H H
Irritant to eyea, noaa,
throat. Inhalation cauaea
edeaa I severs irritation
to raepiratory tract.
Hear gogglea.
arlf-coBtainad breathing
unit. Attacks elastomers
synthetic rubbers.
In presence of moisture,
highly corrosive to most
metals. '
E Highly corroaive
cauaea fire in contact
«/ coBbuatiblea. React!
violently vl elueinua.
Pull protective clothing
required. Epoxy or
Teflon-lined equipment
should be used to avoid
corrosion daaage.
An irritant to eyea and
Bucoua aeBbranea .
A deadly poison.
Highly irritating via
oral and inhalation
routea.
Recoanended Response
Disperse and flush or
iaolate 4 reaove.
&
Toxic, Bay be flushed
atray becauae of high
solubility or Bay be
removed .
(continued
-------
Table F-4. (cpntinued)
Chtmieal Name
°
fcs.Hu, ™lelty .si.;-
8eco:^.tr UBI
tence
Calcium Carbide
Calcium Cyanide
Calcium Fluoride
I
CT> Calcium Hydroxide
Calcium Hypochlorite
Calcium Oxide
CCI 8 2.220
CCN » 1.853
CAF S 3-18°
100 E H
"
16
CAH 8 2.240 1,850 L H
CUV 8 2.350 D
CAO S 3.300 1,310 H
laacta with water to form Should be revived aa aooo
acetylene gaa, which it aa poaeible.
flauable. ly-product ia
calcium hydroxide, which
ie alkaline.
Keleaaea very poiaoooua
hydrogen cyanide gea
alowly on contact with
water or rapidly w/
acida.
Protection agaioat Kemove or bury.
inhaling particuletea
required. ' Presence is
dangerous to aquatic organ-
isins & local water sup-
plies.
Goggle, and duet-proof lemove, bury or
meak required. Solution diaperae.
ia corroaive (etrongly
alkaline).
Generatea heat when on
contact H/ water.
Gogglea. glovea, and
reapirator ahould be
worn. Solution ia
corroeive (atrongly
alkaline).
Hill react completely do
form calcium hydroxide
which ebould be removed,
buried or diaperaed.
Calcium Peroxide
Calcium Phoaphate
Calcium Phosphide
Calcium Reaioate
Calcium, Metallic
Captan
•j
CCP
CAL
cpp
CR£
CAM
CPT
S
S
S
a
s
a
2.920
2.500
2.510
1.130
1.550
1.740
ILL
3.000 •« H
D
I L H
D
D
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (cqntinued)
Chemical Name
Carbaryl
Carbolic Oil
Carbon Diaullide
Carbon Tetrachloride
CHRIS Phya. Specific Hater Toricity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccim- Aquatic Recovery i Handling Recoraended Reaponae
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia- Haxarda
tence
CBY 8 1.230 IBM N L M Avoid contact «/ solid or Toaic, ahould be
solutions Abaorbed via removed.
all toutea,
| cauaea blurred viaioa.
headache, atoBacbachc,
voBiting.
8 1 040 84 160 L N L M Hay explode if aixed •/ Toaic, ebould be
' air. Air >aak, rubber removed.
glovee, protective
clothing, and full face
shield required.
CUB L 1.260 2,200 H N Toxic by oral intake.
inhalation or prolonged
akin contact .
CBT L 1.590 800 M H H L H Pace »aak, protective Toxic, ahould be
clothing abould be worn, removed.
Cauatic Soda Solution
CSS L
1.500
42,000
Expoaure to high
concentrationa can cauae
unconaciouaneaa & can be
fatal.
A aevere hazard. Solid or
concentra'ted aolution
deatroya tiaaue on
contact.
Cerroaive to alumimm.
Chloral
Chlordane
Chlorine Trifluoride
Chloro-o-toluidine, 4-
Chlotoacetophenone
Chloroacetyl Chloride
Chlorocniline, n-
L
i
CDN L
CTF C
CTD S
CRA S
CAC I
8
1.5121
1.600
1.850
1.101
1.320
1.420
1.430
14,740
.009 H L H
D
I H L . N
I H L M
R
17,000
ii«c, and tin.
H I Readily abaorbed through
the akin aad highly
toxic .
Poisonous if inhaled.
L A powerful irritant via
oral and inhalation
routea.
React* aloHly with MCtala
cauaing mild corroaion.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chc.ic.1 HIM CUtIS rhya. (pacific Uater Toxicity Igaita- Reactivity Moaccum- Aquatic Recovery t landling
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Faraia- Haxarda
tence
Chlorobenxene CRI L 1.110 490 H M H L H Heavy vapor can travel
coaaidareble diateace to
1 . flame. Protective
clothing, full face
reapirator, gogglaa
required.
Chlorobutyronitrile, 4- CBN L 1.220 I N May attack tome forava of
plaatic.
CblorodibroBOmethane L 2.4SI
Chloroform CBF L 1.490 8.000 H N N L U Cogg lea. full face Meek
or aelf-contained
breathing unit required
depending on
concentrationa
M encountered. 'Moderately
1 toxic via oral »•
>— inhalation routea.
CO
Recommended Reaponae
Toxic, abould be
removed.
Toxic, abould be
removed .
Chlorohydrin (crude)
ChloroMthyl Methyl Ether
CUD L 1.180 60.000 g U
CM£ L 1.070 D M
Chloronitrobencene, o-
Chloropbenol, p-
Chloropicrin
CPN S 1.368
CPL g 1.310
L 1.640
I
21,100
1,800
Chloropropionic Acid, 2-
Chloroaulfonic Acid
CSA L
1.259
1.350
High toxicity via oral
and inhalation routea.
High toxicity via inhal-
ation routea, moderately
toxic via oral route .
teacta with aurface
•oiature to evolve MCI
which ia corroaiva to
•etal.
Pronounced irritant to
all body aurfacea.
Cauaea akin irritation.,
bronchitis,
pulaonry edeaw. Short
expoeucauy cauae .fatal
lung daaage.
Moderately toxic via oral
route.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (pontinued)
Cheaical Naae CHRIS Fhya.
Code State
Chlorotoluene, m-
Chlorotoluene, o-
Cblorotoluene. p-
CbroBic Sulfate
CbroaiuB
Chroaoua Chloride
ChrOByl Chloride
Chryaene
Cobalt (II) Acetate
Cobalt (II) Flouride
Cobalt (II) Fonate
Copper (I) Broaide
Copper (I) Cyanide
Copper (I) Iodide
Copper (II) Acetate
Copper (II) Acetoaraenite
Copper (II) Araenite
Copper (II) Iluoborate
Copper (II) laphthenate
Copper (II) Oxalate
CouBapboa
CHS
CRC
t
CMC
CBA
COF
CFH
CUD
CCY
CID
COF
CAA
CPA
CPF
CNN
COL
COU
Specific Hater Toxicity Ignite- Reactivity BioaccuB- Aquatic
Gravity Solubility bility . ulation Fereia-
tence
L
L
L
8
8
8
L
S
8
• a
s
s
s
s
8
S
8
L
8
8
8
1.072
1.082
1.070
3.012
7.20
2.878
1.960
1.274
1.710
4.46
2.129
4.98
2.920
$.620
1.900
1.101
1.101
1.540
1.980
1.001
1.474
I H . H H
I L I M
I L H
I
20
8 '"
D
.002
8 R H M
15.000
SO, 300
I H H
I N N
8 • H
72.000 H H H
30.000 EM N
I H M
M UN
I H M M
2S.3 H M
I E L M
Recovery » Handling RecoBBended Response
Uazarda
Moderately toxic vie oral
route. Can have
corroaive action on akin
and Bucoua BCBbranea.
Moderately toxic via oral
end inhalation routea.
Highly toxic via oral and
inbalation routea.
May corrode aoae aetala.
Highly toxic via oral and
inbalation routea.
Moderately toxic via
derail routea. (continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chemical HIBC CHRIS Pbya. Specific Utter Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity lioaccin- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility illation Peraia-
tence
Recovery t Hind ling
Haxarda
Recowuiided Reeponae
Tl
1
1^3
0
Creoaota, Coal Tar
Creaol, •-
Creaol, o-
Creaol, p-
Creaola
Creayl Glycidyl Ether
Cunene Uydroperoxide
CCT L
L
L
L
CRS L
CGE L
CMH L
1.070
1.034
1.027
1.018
1.050
1 .090
1.030
I H L
5.000 U L
25,000 U L
18.000 U L
22.000 L
1 L
I H L
N
N
M
N.
M
H
E
Kodarataly toxic via oral
and inhalation routei. A
recogniaad carciaogaa of
tkin, foreara, acratua,
fac«, neck aid *»ie.
L . M
L M
L H
Hay attack ao«e lotm* of
plaatic.
Known akin aanaitiaar.
Toxic by inhalation, akin
abaorption and ingaation.
CupriethylenediaBine Solution CES L 1.101
Am irritant and
corroaiva aubatanc*.
Oiaaolvaa cattai^uood, and
other calluloaa
•atariala. Corroaiva to
copper, aluminim.. tin and
xinc .
Cyanoacetic Acid
CYA L 1.101
Cyclohexaaonc Peroxide
CUP L 1.050
Cyclohexeayltricbloroailane CHT L 1.230
ODD ODD 8 1.476
Skin irritant. Vapor can
be abaorbed via akin and
reapiratory tract.
Upon heating.
acetonitrile foraui, of
which high concentrationa
are rapidly fatal.
Irritant to akin, eyea
and aucoua •ubranea .
Highfytoxic via oral
route. Hoderately toxic
via derul routea.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (cQntinued)
Cheaiical Maae CIUIS Fhya. Specific Utter Toxicity Ignite- Reactivity Iio»ccu»- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia-
Kecovery a Handling
Haxards
lecoeMcnded leaponae
DDT
DDT a
1.560
Protective clothing
required.
Abaorbed readily through
akin if in aolution.
High toxicity via oral
end deraal routes.
Toxic, ahould be moved.
Dalapon
DLP L
Deaeton
DTN L
1.390
1.100
Moderately irritant to
akin, eyea and nwcaua
•eebraaae and via oral
and inhalation routea.
lary corroaive to
aluaiiaum and copper
alloyt.
Highly toxic inaacticide.
via oral and denul
routea.
Hay attack eoM fora* of
pleatice.
Di-(o-Chlorobenxoyl)reroxidc * \.\0\
Di.llate • »•»" '*
Diaxinon OZN 1 i.»» «> ".' " "
Dibenso la. hi anthracene 8 1.069$
Dibeaxyl Ether I « •«*" I M L H
Dibutyl Phthalat* DPA L 1.049 1 M L H
Dichlorobenxene. »- I 1.282 *
Dichlorobeaxeoe, o- DUO L 1-360 25 in
L L High toxicity via oral
and dermal routee.
Moderate irritant.
Moderately toxic via oral
route, fepora narcotic
in high concentrations.
M High toxicity via oral
routea. Protect eyaa.
M H
EoMubat toxic, ahould
probably be reauved, but
ia a poaaible candidate
for containBeat and
burial .
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
?
M
Ni
Ctteaical X«M
Oicblorobaaxaaa, p-
DichlorobroBOutbsaa
Oicblorobutaaa
Oichloroetbana. 1,1-
Dicbloroathyl Itbar. 2,2-
Dichloroatbylana, 1,2-
Dichloroiaopropyl Ethar
DichloroMthane
CMIS Ikya. litcific Uittr Toxicity Ignita- laactivity lio*ceu«- Afaatic
Coda Itata Gravity Solubility bUity ulation feraia-
tanca
DBF I 1.451 BO M L H H H
• 1 .»SO
L 1.112 2,000 B L
L 1.270 500 M H M L L
L 1.220 10,700 H H H
DEL L 1.282 6.300 H H H
1.103
DCH L 1.322 13,800 H N L L H
lacovary i Hwdlins lacoueBdad leiponie
•axarda
•igb toxicity via oral
aad iabalatioo rout at.
Corrodaa matal vka* vat.
Hodarataly toxic via oral
routa.
Toxic by inhalation or
oral intake: at long
eye, akin I raapiratory
irritant. Absorbed by
akia. Decomposes vben
heated to toxic,
irritating producta.
Organic vapor 'nask, cya Toxic, should be reaovedj
Dicbloropbenol, 2,4-
Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid,
2.4-
Dichloropbeaylaraine
DCP 8
DCA
1.400
1.563
1.8358
4,600
700
clotbing raquirad. Vapor bility, diaperaal Bay ba
in high concentrations only racourae.
•ay cauaa narcoaia and
daatb.
H M Uaa of raapirator, rubber Toxic, ahould be
glovaa and goggUa reaoved.
raquirad. Modarataly
toxic via oral routa.
L L An herbicide. High
toxicity via oral routa.
Hoder'ataly tosic via
deroal routea. Can cauac
nauaaa, vomiting and CK8
dapraaaion.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. . (continued)
Chemical Utmt
CHRIS Phy*. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccun- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Persia-
ery » Hand ling
Haxarda
Recoawended Reaponae
Dichloropropane, 1,1-
Dichloropropane, 1,2-
Oichloropropane, 1,3-
Dichloropropene, 1,3-
L 1.1)2 2,700 L
Off L 1.158 2,700 H U N
L 1.188
DPR L 1.200
Dicbloropropene, 2,3-
Dichloropropene, DHX L
Dichloropropane Mixture
1.217
H N
I U H N
I H
SS
L H Flaahback along vapor Toxic', abould be
trail Bay occur. Rubber removed.
glovea i boota, goggles *
protective clothing
required.
L U Flaahback along vapor Toxic, ahould be
trail >ay occur. Rubber removed.
glovea t boota, goggles »
protective clothing
required.
L H riaahback along vapor Toxic, ahould be
trail May occur. Rubber rraoved.
glovea • boot*, gogglei i
protective clothing
required.
L U Toxic by iakalation or
oral iataka. ttroag eye. Toxic, should be removed.
•kin t reapiratory
irritant. Dacoapoaea olian
heated to fora tosic and
irritating product*.
Full (ace organic vapor
•aak required.
L H Toxic by inhalation or Toxic, ahould be removed.
oral intake. Strong eye,
•kin t reapiratory
irritant. Daconpoaea
when heated to for* toxic
» irritating product*.
Toxic gaaea produced in
{ire. Full face organic
vapor aaak required.
Dichlorotetraf luoroethane C 1.455
Dieldrin D£D S 1.750 .25 E N N L
OiethanoUuine DEA L 1 .09$ H M H N L
An insecticide. Readily
abaorbed through akin and
other portala. Acta aa
CHS atisulant.
Hoderately toxic
route .
via oral
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chimical Hi«c
Diethyl Fbtbalate
Diethyl SuUata
Diethylaraine
IT) Dielhylene Glycol
£J Diethyleneglycol Hommethyl
Ether
DiethyUinc
Dif luorophoaphoric Acid,
Anhydroua
Dihydroeafrolc
Diiaobutyl Fbthalate
Diiaopropyl Fluorophoaphate
Di*ethoate
Dinethyl Fhthalate
Diaethyl Sulfate
Dimethyl Sulfoxide
Dimethyl Terephtbalate
Dimethylcarbanoyl Chloride
CI4JUS Fhya. Specific Uater Toxicity Ignita- leactivity lioaccu*- Aquatic
Cod* State Gravity Solubility bllity ulation Peraia-
tcnce
Dpll L 1.120 ILL H
L 1.177 I M L L
1.1338
DEC L 1.118 H L H
L 1.025 H L H
UEZ L 1.207 t
DFA L 1.583 H
1 .0695
L 1 .049
L 1 .055
S 1 .277
L 1.19 I M L N
DSF L 1.330 2,800 H L L H
QMS L 1.101 S
DMT S 1.200 I L H
L 1.168
Itcovery 1 Kindling lecmawnded leaponae
Uatarda
Aa irritant to Bucoua
•evbranta and • narcotic
in high concentrations.
Hay attack aoaie foma of
plaatica.
Toxic by inhalation, akin
contact or oral in tike.
Mien heated to
decOBpoaition, aaiita
highly toxic fu«*a of
aulfur oxidea.
Moderately toxic via oral
routea.
Extreaely irritating.
cauaea aevere burna.
Hazard, to eyea. Toxic by
inhalation, akin contct
or oral intake. Cogglea.
rubber clothing required.
Corrodea netal when wet.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
I
NJ
Ui
Chemical Mine
Dioethyldichloroeilane
DiBethylxinc
Oinitroaniline, 2,4-
Dinitrobenxene
Dinitrobenxene, •-
Dinitrobenxene, o-
Dinitrocreaola
CHRIS Phya. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity BioaccuB- Aquatic Recovery * Handling Reconmended Response
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Persia- Haxarda
tence
DMD L 1 .070 R
DM2 L 1.390 R
ONT S 1.615 I H L ' M H Toxic if inhaled. Toxic, should be removed,
ingested or in contact
v/akin. Self-contained
breathing apparatus.
goggles, rubber gloves.
impermeable clothing
required.
May require special
handling. Consult
American Aailiue Products
or Martin Marietta Corp.
S , 1.600 1,800 L High toxicity via oral
route.
DNB S 1.580 5.000 L H L
L 1.600 I LI
DNC S 1.101 I E L ,H Highly irritant to akin,
Dinitrophenol, 2,4-
DHP S
1.680
eyea t iiucoua BeBbranea.
Can cauae brain damage i
injury to liver t kidoeya
when absorbed via
inhalation, ingeation, or
ikin.
High toxicity orally,
araderately toxic
dermally. Phytotoxic.
Hay explode if heated
uben confined. Hear
breathing apparatua,
iaperMable clothing.
Hay require apecial
handling. Conault
Anerican Aniline Producta
or Martin Marietta Corp.
Toxic, abould be removed.
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
* Chemical Na«
Dinitrotolucne, 2,4-
Dinitrotoluene, 2,5-
Dinltrotoluene, 3,4-
1 Dinoaeb
to
Dioctyl Sodium SuUoauccinate
(aolid or liquid)
Dipbenyl Rtfcer
Diphenylamine
Dipheny Idichloroai lane
Dipbenylmethane Diiaocyanate
CHtIS thjf. Specific Uater Toxicity- Ignita- Reactivity Ueaccum- Aquatic Recovery 4 l>«dliai
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia- Baiarda
tence
DTT 8 1 .379 24.500 H L H L Can cauae anrnla,
, •athemoglobinemic i
cyaaoaia. Uglily toxic by
akin abaorption,
ingeation or inhalation.
Can cauae liver injury.
1.202
1,259 I H • L Can cauae anemia,
•ethemoglobinemia 4
cyanoaia. Bighly toxic by
akin abaorption,
ingeation or inhalation.
Can cauae liver injury.
1 .2647 52
8/L 1.100 1.500 M M N Moderately toxic via oral
route .
DPE S/L 1 .010 I H L M H Moderately toxic via Orel
and inhalation route*,
•ild irritant. Prolonged
expoaure damage* liver,
•pleen, kidney* »
thyroid* , and upaeta GI
tract .
8/L 1.068 I It L • H Moderately toxic via oral
rout*. Can cauae
anoxemia and depreaaion
of the central nervoua
•yitem.
L 1.220 R
UPM 8 1.200 I L L ' II S lev reaction «/ Hater,
forma carbon dioxide.
•Mpirator, glove*.
••Ml**, and protective
cUtking recommended.
Recommended Reaponae
Toxic material and
reaction producte, ahould
be removed .
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Cheaical Naae CHRIS Phya. Specific Hater Toxicity Igoita- Reactivity Bioaccuat- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Feraia-
tence
Recovery t Handling
Hazarda
Recomended Reaponae
ro
Dipropylene Clycol
DPG
Dodecyl Sulfate,
Diethanolaaine Salt
Dudecyl Sulfate, Hagneaiua
Salt
Dodecyl Sulfate.
Triethanolanine Salt
Dodecylbencene Sulfonic Acid
Dodecylbenxeneaulfonic Acid,
Triethanolaaine Salt
Dodecyltricbloriailane
Uowthera
Endrin
EDK
Epichlorobydrin
EPC
1.023
DSD
USM
DST
DBS
DTC
DTK
8
S
a
L
L
L
1.010
1.040
1.101
1.081
1.200
1.030
1 .060
1.650
1.180
M H L
13.8
0.16 E L
60,000 H
Low toxicity via oral
route. Moderately
irritant to akin, eyea,
•ucoua Benbranea. Can
cauae CHS atieuilatiou
followed by depreaaion if
ingeated.
Wear eye protection.
toxic and
aesthetically
objectionable, abould be
renoved.
Toxic by (kin contact,
inhalation, ingeation
cauaea diszineaa,
ueaknaaa of lego, nauaea,
abdoaiinal peina.
Abaorbed by akin (tea
aolutionc > 2.51.
Eatreaely toxic via oral
& dermal routea.
Higb toxicity orally,
•oderately toxic
deretally. Producea
aterilty, respiratory
paralyaia, kidney davage.
irritation to
eyea,lunga,akin.
Toxic, ahould be reaoved.
However due to reactivity
i aolubility, diaperaal
aay be aoat practical
reaponae to a water
apill.
Enters. 2,4,5-T
1.200
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Cbomlcal Ka*e
Eatera, 2.4-B
Elbiou
Ethoxy Triglycol
Ethoxylated Moaylphenol
Etbyl Chloroacetate
•jtf Ethyl Chloroformate
CD Ethyl Cuthion
Etbyl Uctate
Ethyl Fboapboaothioic
Dichloride, Anhydroua
Ethyl Phoaphorodicbloridate
EtliylaluaiuuB Dichloride
EthylaluaiinuB Beaquichloride
Ethyldichloroailane
Ethylene Cblorobydrin
CHRIS fhy*. faccific Uater Toxicity I|«ita- Reactivity lioiecuar
Code State Gravity Solubility bility illation
1.163 I
1.22 2 E ;
ETC L 1.020 H L L H
ENP 8/L 1.010 H
EGA L 1.150 I L H
EOF L l.HS »
1 .284 I
ELT L 1.010 M H M N
EPD L 1.350 t
EPP L 1 .ISO *
BAD S 1.227 I
EAS L 1.0S9 t
ECS L 1.092 D
ECU L 1.197 M H H H L
• Aquatic Iccovery 4 Maodliat tecoweaded leapopae
reraia- Hazard*
tence
An inaecticide. Very
high toxicity orally.
High toxicity via dermal
routea.
Low toxicity via oral and
dermal routea.
Moderately irritating via
oral and inhalation
route*.
Moderately toxic via
oral route.
High toxicity via dermal,
oral and inhalation
routea. Vapor irritatea
•ucoua aeabranea, cauaea
drowaineaa, vomiting
later dyapnea, headache,
cyanoaia, heart pain.
Fatal amounta can be
abaorbed through akin.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chemical Name
Ethylene Cyanohydrin
Ethylene Dibroaiide
-
Ethylene Dichloride
CHRIS Phya. Specific Water Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity lioaccua- Aquatic Recovery 4 Handling
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia- Haiarda
tence
L 1 .047 H L L When heated or on contact
with acid, emit* highly
toxic cyanide product*.
' Can react vigoroualy M/
oxidizing Material.
Moderately toxic via oral
4 deraal route*.
EDB L 2.180 2.700 H H M H Wear canniater-type naak.
neoprene glovea/gogglea.
Vapor toxic by
inhalation, akin contact,
inge*tion. Irritating to
eyea, *kin 4 reapiratory
tract.
EDC L 1.253 8,000 M H L L H Flaahea back along vapor
trail. Protective
Reconnended Reaponae
Toxic, ahould be
[moved.
Toxic, ahould be
reavoved.
clothing, gogglea t gaa
•aak or aeIf-contained
breathing unit required.
Toxic by inhalation,
akin, orally.
Ethylpbenyl Dichloroailane EPS L 1.159 R
Ethyltrichloroailane El'S L 1.240 I
Ferric Fluoride FFX 3 4.09 910 H
Ferric Sulfate FSF 8 3.100 SS j, N N
Ferroua Fluoborate < FFB L 1.101 M H N
Ferroua Oxalate FOX s 2.300 0.022 H H H
Highly toxi'c 4
irritating. If ingeated
can cauae voaicing,
aathm, aevere bone
change*. Highly
irritating to eyea, akin
i aMCOua aieaibranea .
A aiild irritant, tow
toxic ity via oral route.
Highly toxic via oral 4
inhalation routea. A
powerful irritant.
Corroaive to tiaaue.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Cheaiical Uaave CE1IS Phya. Specific Uater Toxicity Igoita- Reactivity iioacciw- Aquatic
- Code Stale Gravity Solubility bility ulattom Peraii-
> tence
Ferroua Sulfat* FRS S 1.900 15.65 H H H
Fluoranthene . 8 1.252 .265 •
Fluorene S 1.203 1 .98
Fluoailicic Acid FSL L 1.300 SH H H
Fluoaulfonic Acid FSA L 1.730 SR H H H
Foraic Acid FHA L 1.220 H H H H L
**!
LO
0
Recovery 1 Handling RecnuMnded Reaponae
Uarardi
Hoderately toxic via oral
route.
Highly irritant to akin.
eyea, aucoua nembrinea
and via inhalation rout*.
Acutely irritating^
highly toxic if inhaled
for brief perioda. Very
cauatic to akin.
producing auperficial
bliatera, burn* on
contact.
Fuoaric Acid
Furfural
Furfuryl Alcohol
•
Gallic Acid
Glycerine
FFA L
1.635
1.159
7.000 U
90.000
FAL L 1.130 H H L
CLA S 1.700 11.500 M L
UCR L 1.261 H U L
Probably Ion toxic icy via
oral route.
Hoderately irrtating to
akin, eyea * auicoua
•eabraaea. Liquid ia
dangeroua to eyea. Vapor
ia abaorbed by akin,
•ucoua oeabranea, and ia
CHS poiaoo. frotect
expoaed akin t eyea.
Highly toxic via oral,
inhalation & denal
routea. Moderately
irritating to akin, eyea
t aucoua »embr«Qe».
Moderately toxic via oral
route. Mildly irritating.
Hoderately toxic via oral
route. In torn of mitt ia
a reapiratory tract
irritant.
Toxic, should be removed,
however high solubility
may result in dispersion.
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Cheuical Name
Glycidyl Hethacrylate
Gutliiou
Heptachlor
Hexacli lorobenzene
llexach lorobu tad iene
t-tj Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
1
U)
t—
llexach loroethane
Hexaethyl Tetraphoaphate
Itexylene Glycol
llydroquiiione
Hydroxyetbyl Acrylate, 2-
Hydroxypropyl Acrylate
Hydroxypropyl Methacrylate
Isophthalic Acid
CHRIS Fhya. Specific
Code State Gravity
CCM L 1 .073
S 1.44
HTC S 1.660
8 1 .5691
1 1 .662
HCC L 1 .710
S 2.091
L 1.4273
HXG L 1 .008
UOQ S 1.330
11AI L 1 .100
III' A
L 1 .060
II PH L 1.060
IPL S 1.540
Hater Toxic ity Igofta- Reactivity lioaccu.- Aquatic Becov.ry 4 Band ling R.coMended Reaponae
Solubility biltty ulation feraia- Hsiarda
tence
1 " !• H H Polyethylene coatad Toxic, ahould be
apron, glovca 4 gogglet removed.
ahould be worn. Beat,
peroxidea, and cauatica
' cauae polyaerUation. Hay
clog equipment, Bay
float.
33
°-02 EH M H Highly toxic via oral 4
dermal routea. Prolonged
expoaure cauaea liver
.005 ' danage.
0.0805 UN L M Highly toxic via oral 4
deroal routea.
Reacta a lowly with water
to loin UC1.
In preaence of Boiature,
50 fill corrode iron,
releaaing f laomble 4
exploaive hydrogen gaa.
M H L H Moderately toxic via oral
route. Irritating to
akin, eyea, and mcoua
•enbranea .
'0,000 H L H L Highly toxic orally.
Active allergen 4 atrong
irritant. Vapora
suit be avoided. Cauaea
deraatitia.
M M L H
M L H
H L H
SS M L H L A Bild irritant.
Moderately toxic via oral
route.
(contir
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
N)
Ctumical H«me
Iiopropyl Percarbonat*
laoaaf role
Latex. Liquid Synthetic
Lead
Lead Acetate
9
Lead Araenate
Lead Fluoborate
Lead Fluoride
Lead Iodide
Lead Phoaphate
Lead Subacetate
Lead Tetraacetate
Lead Thiocyanate
CE»IS rhya. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- teictivity lioiccua- Aquatic
Code Slat. Gravity Solubility fcility ulation Ter.i.-
tence
IPC S 1.080 I H L ,H
8 1.1224
1X8 L 1.057 H L H
S 11.344 .001
LAC S 2.550 100 B H H
LAR S 5.790 I II H N E
"
L 1.750 H H
LFIt S a. 240 64,000 H N H
LID S 6.160 64,000 M M
S 7.15 .014
S 3.25 44,300
LTT S 2.200 I-D
LTC S 3.820 5,000 H M
Recovery 4 Hindlinj
Hazard!
Should not be allowed to
ruaia in contact w/
•kin.
Inhalation of vapor or
ingeation ihould be
avoided.
Toxic by inhalation,
ingeation and akin
contact. Do not handle
with bare handa.
Poiaonoua if awal lowed.
leapirator to prevent
inhalation of
particulatea ia required,
protective clothing
neceaiary.
Highly toxic via oral
route.
Moderately toxic via oral
route.
Product* of decomposition
lecouendod Kciponic
Soluble under acid
condition!. Removal ia
belt courae followed by
burial with a baiic
•aterial to prevent
diaiolution and to
iaolate.
air include highly toxic
carbon diaulfide and
aulfuc dioxide.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
U)
=•
Lindane
Hagneniua
Halatbioa
Maleic Hydrazide
Malononitrite
1.87
1.740
1.234
MLU S 1.600
8 1.191
Mercuric Aumoniu» Chloride HCC S 5.
Mercuric Chloride
Hercuric Iodide
Mercuric Sulfide
Hercuroua Chloride
700
MRC 8 5.400
HID S 6.300
MRS S 8.000
S 7.150
.—• « ass- •— •
10
1 L N
»« « L , H
6.000 ML H
100
1.400 a H H
54,000 EH H
7.000 EH H
0.01
L N
2 H H H
s::s:!
tence
Recovery i Head Iing
Hazard*
Recotwended Reaponae
Duat ia a alight
irritant.
E.tre.ely to.ic to To.ic. ahouid be
aquatic fauna. Moderately removed.
toxic via oral t derul
routea. Affect* CHS
cauaea allergic
aenaitization.
Moderately toxic via oral
route.
Highly
cauaea akin burna and
other forna of
irritation. Abaorbed
through the akin.
A deadly poiaon. Highly
toxic via all routea.
Cauaea akin burna i other
forna of irritation.
Abaorbed by akin.
Highly toxic via oral
route. Cauaea akin burna
i other forna of
irritation. Abaorbed by
•kin.
Highly toxic via all
routea. Cauaea akin burna
and other foraa of
irritation. Abaorbed by
akin.
Highly toxic via oral
route. Cauaea akin burna
i other forna of
irritation. Abaorbed by
akin.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chemical Mime CHRIS
Code
Hercuroua Nitrate H»H
t
Mercury Fulminate
Helhacrylic Acid
* Helhanearaonic Acid, Sodium
Salta (liquid)
Met homy 1
Hethoxychlor HOC
Methyl Chlorocarbonate
Methyl Chlorofornate
Methyl Ethyl Ketone Peroxide
Methyl Iodide
Methyl Naphthalene
Methyl Parathion HPT
Hethylcholanthrene
Methylcyclopentadienylmanganea MCT
e Tricarboayl
Hethyldichloroailane MCS
Pltya. Specific Uater , Toxicity Igaita- Reactivity lioaccum-
State Gravity Solubility bility ulation
S 4.780 I-D U L L
S 4.42
L LOIS S
S 1 .500
1 .2946 10,000
S 1.410 I M L . M H
L 1 .223
L 1.220 R
L 1.170
L 2.279 20,000
S 1 .020 I
L/S 1.360 SO
S 1.28
L 1.390 70 E L N
L 1.110
- Aquatic lecovery t Handling Recommended Retponic
Per •!•- Hazarda
tence
Highly toxic via oral
route. Cauaea akin burni
t other forma of
irritation. Abaorbed by
akin.
Solution may corroda moat
metala. Solid in contact
with wood or paper may
cauae fire.
Highly exploaive.
An inaecticide. An
irritant and allergen.
Moderately toxic via oral
i dermal routea.
Prolonged expoaure may
cauae kidney injury.
. Highly toxic via oral 4
^ inhalation routea.
Moderately toxic via
dermal routea. Expoaur*
to dual or fumea can
CM** raafiralory
imfectioma.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
Chenical H«.
CUB IS Fhys. Specific
Code State Gravity
Hethylene Bronide
Hethylphoaphonothioic
Dichloride, Anhydroua
Methylpyrrolidone, 1-
Hetbyltricbloroiilane
Hevinpboa
Holybdic Trioxide
Monochloro.cetic Acid
Honoethanolanine
I- 2.4970 11,930
MPU L 1.420 R
MPY L
1 .030
L 1.270
1.25
HTO S 4.690
MCA
1 .580
MEA L 1.016
Motor Fuel Antiknock Conpoundt MFA L 1.600 0.1-100
(Lead Alkyl*)
N-AninoethanolaBLne
N-Nitroao-N-Methylurethane
N-Nitroaodinethylanine
H-Nitroaodiphenylanine
N-Nitioaopiperidine
1.028
1.133
1.0048
1.23
1.0631
I
77.000
•00° H H
M H L
tence
Cont«ct of liquid or
vapor* vith akin, cyei or
BUCOUI membf»aet thould
be (voided.
Highly toxic via oral i
inhalation routea. Alao
an irritant. Suitable
precaution* ahould be
taken againat inhaling
the aubatance.
High irritant to akin,
eyea and micoua
•e>branea. Highly toxic
via oral route.
Moderately toxic via oral
and derul route*.
Air lupplied reapirator, Toxic, should be
glove*, goggle* required, moved.
V*por* very
toxic, fatal lead
poiaoning nay occur follow-
ing ingeation, inhalation,
akin absorption.
Carcinogen,
no expoaure or bodily
contact ahould be
permitted.
(con', inued)
-------
Table F-4. (cpntlnued)
Che.ic.l N..e CMI1S Fhya. Specific Water ToxlcHy Ignila- Reactivity iloiccuw Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility illation Fereia-
tence
lecovery t Hand lint
Haiarda
lecouunded Reaponie
Naphthalene, Holten
Naphthylaaine. 1-
Naran
Nickel
Nickel
Sulfate
Nickel Carbouyl
NTH 8 I.145
3.000
NAO s 1.120 1.700 H
S 1.140 H
S B.90
MAS S 1.920 85.000
MKC L 1.322
180 £
Nickel Cyanide
Nickel riuoborete
Nickel Fornate
Nitralin
Nilroaniline, 2-
HCH
NFB
HFH
NTL
NTA
S
L
S
S
S
2.400
1 .500
2. ISO
1.001
1.440
60
H
31,500
I
500 a
H
N
N
L
L
N
N
H
H
Organic vapor rcapirator,
gogglei, and protective
clothing abould be voim.
May foul dredging
equipatat. Irritatca
eyaa. *kin, reapiratory
tract. Holtea Daphtbalene
apattera * totmt in
contact n/ water.
Toxic when abaorbed by
lunga, gaatro-inteatinal
tract t akin. May produce
tuBora or bladder cancer
if long expoaure occura.
Airborne nickel duat ia
carcinogenic if inhaled.
Can cauae derma t it U.
Extreaely toxic by
inhalation and ingeation.
A fev breatha could be
fatal.
Highly toxic.
Highly toxic vie oral and
inhalation routea.
Can cauae deraatitia.
Should not be inhaled if
in duat forei.
Highly toxic by akin
contact or inhalation of
vatora.
Toxic, eapecielly to
aquatic life, ahould be
reaoved.
Nitroaniline, 4-
NAL S 1.440
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (.continued)
Chemical Nsme
Nitrobenzene
Nitroethane
Nitroglycerine
1 Hitrophenol, 2-
Nitrophenol, 3-
Nitrophenol, 4-
Nit rotoluene, »-
Nitrotoluene, o-
Hitrotoluene, p-
Octauetliyl Pyrophosphoranide
Octyl Epoxytallate
Oil, Hiac: Road
Para formaldehyde
CHRIS Phys. Specific Uster Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity Bioaccum- Aquatic Recovery t Handling Recommended Reaponse
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia- Uaxarda
tence
NTB L 1.204 1,900 H L N L Rspidly sbsorbed through Toxic, should be
skin. Organic vapor removed.
reapirator, protective
clothing necessary.
Moderately toxic via oral
I dermal route*. Cauae*
x cyanosia.
NTE L 1.050 45,000 HUN L Somewhat toxic by
inhslation and ingeation.
Decomposition products
are highly toxic.
May attack some forms of
plaatic.
L 1.5931 1,800 Highly exploaive.
NIPS 1.490 1,500 H L N L Highly toxic upon
ingest ion, inhalation, or
, • abaorption through akin.
Emits highly toxic oxides
of nitrogen upon thermal
decomposition.
S 1.263 20,000 H L Highly toxic via oral
route.
NPH S 1.480 16,000 H L N L Highly toxic via oral
route.
L 1.153 498 M L L Moderately toxic via oral
and dermal routes.
L 1.153 650 M L L Moderately toxic via oral
* dermal routes.
8 1.113 40 H L L Moderately toxic via
ingeation, inhalation, or
! absorption through skin.
Yields toxic oxides of
nitrogen when burned.
L 1.09 100
GET L 1.002 1 L N
ORD L 1 .100 I L M
PFA S 1 .460
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (qontinued)
00
Che«ical Mine
Farathion
Pentaboran«
Fentaclilorobenxene
Fentachloroethane
Pentachloronitrobenxene
Feutachlorophenol
CHRIS Fhya,
Code State
PTO L
PTB L
S
L
S
PCP 8
Specific Water Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity lioiccim- Aquatic
Gravity Solubility bility uUtion Feraia-
tence
1.269 20 E H L H
1 .6796
1.8342 .135
1.6796 I H L
i
1.718 .02
1.980 1,000 UN H H U
Recovery 1 Handling Recowunded Reaponae
Hixarda
Very toxic.
Can be fatal by akin
contact, inhalation, or
ingeation. When handled,
a aupply of atropine
ahould be available.
Hoderately toxic via oral
route .
Highly toxic via
inhalation route.
Reapirator i protective Toxic, ahould be
Pentaerythritol
Pemcetic Acid
Perchloroethylene
PET S 1.390 62.000 t L
PAA L 1.153 M H M
1.6227
2,000
clothing ahould be worn, removed.
Highly toxic. Irritant to
eyea, akin. Derutitia
occura.
Low toxicity. A nuiaance
duit.
Will produce aevere acid
buma to ikin » eyca.
Prolonged inhalation of
vapor may be hanful.
Corroaive to «o«t Betala
including »lu»iaum.
nay cauae fire in
contact with organic
•ateriala (i.e. wood,
alraw).
Incoordination occura at
vapor expoaurea of
300-1000 ppat. Dixxineaa,
drowaineaa, loaa of
conaciouaneaa I death can
occur at higher
expoaufea.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
ChcBical Haae
PercblorOBCthyl Mercaptan
Fbanol :
PheuyldicbloroaraUe, Liquid
Phorate *
Phoedrin
Pboaphorua Penteaulfide
Phoapborua, Black
Pboapborua, Bed
CURIS Phya. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignite- Inactivity Bioaccua- Aquatic Becovery i Handling BecoBBended Reaponae
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peraia- Uaxarda
tence
PCM 1 1.706
PHN S/L 1.0Si M..OOO H L H L Highly toxic via oral,
deraal routee. Death haa
reaulted froa abaorption
through a akin area of 44
aq ia. Caaaea aevere
tieaue burne.
L l.*57 I ft L Highly toxic via
inhalation, deraal, and
oral routea.
POL i.,» 50 Corrode. ..t.1.
PHD 78.03 H E L L An eye i akin irritant.
Hear protective clothing.
Highly toxic via oral,
1 inhalation 4 dernal
rw> routea. Hill attack aoau
plaatica.
PPP * 2.030 B
i
PPB 8 2.70 Iv
PPB S 2.200 I L H H Heat Bay cauae revereion Toxic, reauve.
to highly toxic a
apontaaaoualy
yellow Bhoaphorua. Duet
Beak, rubber glovee
required.
•eacta violently vith
oxidixing egest in the
preaence of air 4 water
releeaing pboapboroua
acida, pboaphine gaa
(flaBnable).
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. .(continued)
Choice 1 NMC CUIIS fhye. Specific Hater Toiicity Ifaita- iaactlvity Iloiccun- Aquatic
Cod. State Gravity Solubility blllty uUtion Feraie-
ttnc«
Recovery 4
Uauret
Reepooae
Fboapborue, Vbitc
PPU I 1.820
.0003
Highly toxic via mil,
derul k inbalaciom
routaa. I(*itaa
apootueoualy la air.
Haavy ntkbar (lovaa t
face abiald abouU ba
worn.
lequirca apacialiied
biDdliKg by uauiacturara
(FHC Corp 4 Honaanto).
Toxic, abould be moved.
Pbthalic Anhydride
1.530
6,200
ff
Palychlorincted lipbenyl*
tbyluie Polyphenyl
liacyaoitc
folypropylwu Glycol
Put«»iu> Chlorate
Potaaaiuai Penuogaaatc
PutaaaiuB Peroxide
PCB L 1.550
PPl L 1.200
PCC L 1.012
PGR 8 2.340 75,000
FTP 8 2.700
POP 8 1.001
I U L
H
60.000
Hodarataly toxic Hoderately toxic, abould
protective clothinf, ba removed, il poaaibU.
org«»ic vapor raapirator Diaparaal auy be
racoaacaded. Duat 4 vapor acceptable.
irritate eyea, upper
rzipiratory tract, I
•oiat akiau
Glovea 4 protective
clotbiag reco>B*aa«d.
. Moderately toxic via
deraal 4 oral routaa. A
atroni irritut
toxic te liver.
Toxic, Boaecfr*«>ble 4
highly •ioMcueulatioc.
Highly toxic via oral
route.
Hoderately toxic via oral
route. Coatact with
coa&uatiblee Bay cauae
fire.
Skin 4 eye irritant.
tio4er«tely toxic via oral
route. A atrang irritant
becauae of oxidiiiot
propertiea. Attack*
rubber aai anat fibera.
Abaolutely ahouU be
removed.
vconcinueo;
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
CheBical Mane
Propionic Anhydride
Propylene Glycol
Pyreoe
Quinoliae
Safrole
^ Sttlicylaldehyde
h— '
Salicylic Acid
SeleniuB
SeleniuB Dioxide
SeleniuB Trioxide
Silver Acetate
Silver Carbonate
Silver Cyanide
Silver fluoride
Silver lodate
cms
Code
PAH
PPG
QNL
SLA
SLO
8TO
SVA
SVC
SVF
SVI
Pbya.
State
L
L
8
L
L
S
8
8
S
S
8
8
8
8
Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Beactivity Bioaccua- Aquatic
Gravity Solubility bility ulation Feraia-
tence
1.010 1 H L L L
1.040 8 L ' M
1
1.271
1.095 6,000 U L M L
1.100 .0001
1.167 88 L
1.440 SS M L N L
4.01
3.950
3 .600
3.260 10,200 H N
6.100 N H
3.95 0.23
5.820
5.330 H N
Becovery 6 Handling Sccowsoded Baeponie
Ha»rda
lye, akin 4 reepiratory
irritant. Moderately
toxic via oral rout*.
Mo toxicity via oral
route.
Highly toxic via oral t
derail routea. May
produce retinitia. May
attack aoBe foraa of
plaatica.
Moderately toxic via oral
rout*.
Abaorption by cuta in
akin can produce
perBanent pignentation of
the akin.
Abaorption by akin can
cauae perunent
pigaentation of the akin.
Abaorption by akin can
Silver Oxide
SVD 8
7.UO
cause permanent
diccoloration of akin.
Moderately toxic via oral
route.
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
•c-
Chemical U*M
Silver Sulfate
Silvex
Sodium lorate
Sodium Oxalete
Sodium Pboaphat*
Sodium Silicate
Sodium Silicof luoride
Strontium Sulfide
Sulfolane
CUUI rfayi.
Code State
8VS 1
SD1 *
SOX *
Sft *
L
SFI 1
t
SFL S
Specific Water Toxicity Ignita- Inactivity lioaccum- Aquatic
Gravity Solubitity billty Blation Itttlt-
ttnce
5.450
1 .20I» UO
2.367 MM »
2.270 B H M
2.150 18.000
1.400 8 H .M V
2.660 UN M
3.70
1.260 H M L H
Itcovecy 6 Ktndliaj IcciMMuaded Ictpoaia
U a sard a
Abaorptioa by akin can
cauie peraunent
dlacoloratioa of akin.
Kodtrattly toxic via oral
rout*.
Highly toxic via oral
route .
Hoderately toxic via oral
route. Very cauatic,
irritant to akiai 6 aucoua
•eabranea.
Highly toxic via oral
route.
Hoderately toxic via oral
Sulfur
Tet rachloroetbane
1.800
TEC L 1 -602
Tecrachloroethane, 1.1,2,2- L 1.595
Tetrachloroetbyleoe TTK L 1.630
2,820
165
Should be removed or
buried due to potential
production of toxic gaaea
or acid.
Lou toxicity
inhalation can cauae
irritation of aucoua
•embranaa. Safety
fOftlea, rcapirator
ahould be uaed.
Highly toxic to liver via
oral t inhalation routea
moderately toxic via
dermal rout*. Strong
irritant of eyea i upper
reapiratory tract.
May attack aoae form* of
plaatica.
Hoderately toxic via Toxic, should be
inhalation, oral 4 dermal removed.
routea. Injurea eyea. Can
cauae derauititi*. Hear
gogglea, protective
clothing, 4 reapirator.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. (continued)
-P-
U)
Cbeaical HI
CHMS Phya. Specific Hater Toxicity Ignita- Reactivity gioaccun- Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Peni-
tence
Recovery 6 Handling
Hazard*
lecoeweuded Bcapona*
Tetraetbyl Dithiopyropboaphate TED L 1.190
Tetraetbyl Le»d
Tetraetbyl ryrophoaphate
1.180
25
1 B L
H E M
Tetrafluoroethylene
Tetranethyl Lead
TFE C 1.519
TML L 1.919
I
soo
» L
H M
TetraaitroBethana
Thallic Oxide
Thallium
ThalliuB (I) Carbonate
Thalliua (I) Chloride
TballiuB (I) Nitrate (v>
ThalliuB (I) Selenide
Tbiopfaenol
.Tbiophoagene
L 1 .6380
8 9.65
S 11.85
S 7.11 4,030
> 7.004 2,900
8 S.S56 3.910
S.05
1.0766
TPG 1.511 I H „
Corroaive to noat aetala
in the preaence of
•oiature.
Highly toxic via oral. toxic, abould be
inbelation I denat moved.
routea. Diaaolvea rubber.
Cauaea intoxication by
inhalation t absorption
by akin.
Very high toxicity by
all routea. Action
aimilar to parathioa.
•eacta •lowly vitb water
to fora pboapboric acid,
corroaive to aluminum,
•lowly corroaive to
copper, breaa, sine, tin.
Moderately toxic
can act aa an aapbyxiant.
High toxicity by Joxic, abouid b*
inhalation and akin removed.
abaorption. Hear air line
•aak. gogglaa, rubber
boota. neoprcnc glovea.
Highly irritant to akin.
eyea, nucma ewabranca.
Corrodea awtnla in
preaence of noiatura.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4., (continued)
Cbraical N**e
Thiourea
Tbirao
Toluene-2,4-diiaocyanata
Toxapheue
Trichloro-a-triaxinetrioae
Tricblorobeoxene, 1,2,4-
CHIIS »byi. iMclUc Uater Toxlcity Ignite- Reactivity lleaccuar Aquatic
Code itate Cravlty tolukiHty HUty ulatie. Feraia-
g 1.40S M,W»
TriR 1 1.430 I H L M
TDI 1 1.220 I u L L
TJCP 8 1.600 3 M » »
g 1.001 12,000 H '
L 1.454 I M L
Bacevery 4 lasdlimg lecoaiMBded leape»«*
Hoderately toxic by
deraal route. Mild
allergen and irritant.
Strong irritant and
aenaitixer. Vapora came
aerioua lung injury if
inhaled.
Absorbed by tkia Toxic, abould be
highly toxic orally. raawved.
leapirator, rubber
glovea, and gogglea or
face ibield required.
Hoderately toxic via oral
Trichloroetban*, 1,1,1-
TCE L
1.310
Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
Tcicbloroetbyleaa
L 1.441 4.400 M
TCL L 1.460
1,100
rout*.
Incoordimatiou » iapairad Toxic, abould b«
judfamant at vapor ra«>ved.
aipoaucaa of 500-1000
tfm. Disaiaaaa,
drovaiuaaa, loaa of
coBaciouanaaa 4 daatb at
incraaainc aipoaurea.
laacta alouly •/ watar Toxic, ahould ba rcmovW.
foraiini hydrochloric
acid, laapirator and
protective clotting
required. Corrodea dredge
equipment.
IncoordiBBtiou • iapairad Toxic, abould be
judgement occur at vapor removed.'
expoaurea of 500-1000
tfm. Diisioeae,
drovaineaa, loaa of
conaciouBDaaa ( death at
higher expoaurea.
(continued)
-------
Table F-4. ((Continued)
Chenical Htme
Tricblorof luoroaethan*
TrichloroMthaneeulfonyl
Chloride
Tricbloropbenol
Trichloropbenoxyacetic Acid,
hrl z.*.5-
1
<•" Tricbloroailane
Tricreayl Phoapbate (< U
Ortho-I*OBer )
Triethenolaaine
Trietbylene Clycol
Tr if luorocbloroethylene
Triflurelin
Tripropylene Glycol
Uranyl Acetate
Uranyl Nitrate
Uranyl Sulfate
Vanadiua Oxytricbloride
CHRIS Pfaya. Specific Water Toxicity Ignite- Keactivity Bioaccuer Aquatic
Code State Gravity Solubility bility ulation Feraia-
tence
TCF L 1.490 1,100 'I. H » LI
8 1 .700
TPH 8 1.700 <1,000 H N N H H
TCA 8 1.803 240 H L M
TCS L 1.344 B
TCP L 1 .160
TEA L 1.130 M L L N
TEG L 1.125 H H L •
TFC G 1 .307 I n ' N H
TFR 8 1.294
-------
Table F-4. * (continued)
Chtnicat B««
Vanadira Featoxid*
Vanadyl Eulfata
Vinylldene chloride
Vinyl trichtoroailane
Warfarin
Xylenol
Zinc Araenate
hrj Zinc lorate
1
•P- Zinc 'IroBlde
O\
Zinc Chromate
Zinc Dialkyldithlophoaphate
Zinc Dialkylldithiophoephate
(liquid)
Zinc Flaroborate
Zinc rhoaphide
Zinc Potaeelra Chronate
Zirconiua Acetate
Zirconluai Sulfate
CRItS rhya. liecUlc V*ter Toxicity Ignlta- Reactivity lla«cc»«- Afuatic Recovery t la*dll«( Recovaeadtd Reifoaie
Code Itate Gravity SoIuVlllty blllty •tatlon r«rai»- Ratarda
VOX
vir
VCI
VTS
m
ZM
ZU
ZtR
ZCR
ZDP
ZFB
zrc
7.CA
zsr
s
«
L
L
L
t
I
1
•
S
L
L
S
1
1
1
tence
3-360 * M . Buet ia hifhly toxic via
,' - oral t iakalaticx rantaa.
2.500 E M ' H
1.210 I
1 .260 t
Moderately to highly
1.010 2,000 • toxic via oral rout*.
3.310 M •
Moderately toxic orally.
2.700 •)••
«.220
3.430 II •
1.600 1 L •
r.i» i t •
•ifjblf irate via aval
4.5SO E R M •*»*•.
2.100
1.370 M * II
3.000
-------
APPENDIX G
GLOSSARY
Absorption: The soaking up of one substance by another, particularly a
liquid by a solid.
Adsorbate: A solid, liquid, or gas that is adsorbed as molecules, atoms,
or ions to the surface of a solid.
Adsorption: The attraction of molecules, atoms, or ions or compounds to
the surface of a solid.
Aerobic: Having molecular oxygen as part of the environment or growing
in the presence of molecular oxygen.
Alternative: A collection of techniques that are used to accomplish all
objectives of a response.
Anion: A negatively charged atom or group of atoms.
Aquatic persistance: Chemical stability of a substance over time in a
water body.
Aromatics: A class of organic compounds characterized by one or more cyclic
rings that contain double bonds. Benzene is a prominent compound of
this class.
Backwash: An upward flow of water through a filter bed that cleans the
filter after it is exhausted.
Benthic organisms: Plant and animal life whose habitat is the bottom of
a sea, lake, or river.
Bentonite: A highly plastic clay, consisting of the minerals montmorillonite
and beidellite, that swells extensively when wetted.
Berm: A narrow shelf or flat area that breaks the continuity of a slope.
Bioaccumulation: The result of chemical intake by an organism when the rate
of intake is greater than the rate of excretion, resulting in and
increase in tissue concentration relative to the exposure concentration.
G-l
-------
Bioaccumulation factor: The ratio of the concentration of a substance
in the tissue of an organism to the concentration of the substance
in the environment surrounding the organism.
Biomagnif ication: The increase in chemical concentration in tissues of
organisms through the food chain; a progressive increase in bioaccumu-
lation through the food chain.
Biota: Animal and plant life, especially of a particular region.
BOD (Biochemical oxygen demand): A measure of the amount of oxygen required
by bacteria while stabilizing decomposable organic matter under aerobic
conditions.
Bottom materials: Any materials that are on the bottom of a water body,
including sediments, vegetation, and contaminating substances.
Carbonate: A compound that contains the carbonate
Cation: A positively charged atom or group of atoms.
) ion.
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (Superfund), Federal law under which uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites and spills of hazardous materials are remediated.
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations; publication of regulations promulgated
under Federal laws.
Chemical equilibrium: A condition in which a chemical reaction is occuring
at equal rates in its forward and reverse directions, so that
concentrations of the reacting substances do not change with time.
CHRIS: Chemical Hazards Response Information System; a U.S. Coast Guard
information system pertaining to water transport of hazardous chemicals
that consists of the following components: the Condensed Guide to
Chemical Hazards (handbook), the Hazardous Chemical Data Manual, the
Hazard-Assessment Handbook, the Response Methods Handbook, Data Bases
for Regional Contingency Plans, and the Hazard-Assessment Computer
System (HAGS).
Coarse-grained material: Granular material (such as soil or sediments) in
which sands and gravels predominate; in general, material larger than
74 microns (200 mesh).
COD (Chemical oxygen demand): A measure of the amount of oxygen required
to convert organic compounds to carbon dioxide and water by a strong
oxidizing agent.
Cohesive soil: A soil that has considerable compressive strength when it
is unconfined and air-dried and exhibits significant cohesion (clumping)
when it is wetted; opposite of free-flowing material.
G-2
-------
Colloidal particles: Particles that are so small (1 to 100 millimicrons)
Pr°dUCe an aPPreciable influence on the behavior
Md
the quality
Dewatering: Removal of water from a substance or an area by means of
gravity, pumps, drains, or filters.
DOT: U.S. Department of ' Transportation.
hydrauuc or
Endangered species: Biota that are in danger of extinction, especially
of Inte?io1e! H/ ^e °fflctall>' s° "eolared by the uls. LparSnt
or interior and/or state agencies.
Environmental setting: The total natural background of a location,
including hydrology, geology, climatology, and biology.
- .
measured under conditions that simulate a waste landfill.
Exothermic: Releasing heat as a by-product of a chemical reaction.
Exposure: The subjecting of a receptor to a contaminating substance.
Fauna: Animal life, especially of a particular region.
Slices?
Administration of U'S- Department of Health and Human
Filter cake: A concentrated solid or semisolid material that is
separated from a liquid by filtration.
G-3
-------
Fine-grained material: Granular material (such as soil or sediments) in
which silts and clays predominate; in general, material smaller than
74 microns (200 mesh).
Flocculant: A reagent added to a dispersion of solids in a liquid to
bring together fine particles to form aggregates, or floes.
Flocculate: To aggregate or clump small particles into larger masses.
Flora: Plant life, especially of a particular region.
Free-flowing material: Generally granular material (such as soil or
sediments) that can be poured or dumped with minimal clumping;
opposite of cohesive material.
Grain size: The effective diameter of a particle measured by sedimentation,
sieving, micrometry, or a combination of these methods.
HAGS: Hazard Assessment Computer System; a system for obtaining rapid
hazard evaluations from U.S. Coast Guard headquarters; part of CHRIS.
Habitat: The area in which a biological population normally lives or
occurs.
Halogen: Any element of the halogen family of chemical elements
(e.g. chlorine, bromine,' fluorine).
HSWA: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA.
Hydrostatic pressure: The pressure at a point in a fluid at rest caused by
the weight of the fluid above the point.
Hydroxide: Compound containing the OH~ group; the hydroxides of metals are
bases and those of non-metals are usually acids.
IARC: International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health
Organization.
Immediate response: An action or multiple actions that are implemented
with minimal planning and consideration of alternatives to control a
rapidly worsening situation or to minimize the impacts of a severe
situation.
Impact: The effect or result of a receptor being exposed to a contaminating
substance.
In situ; In its original place, as opposed to being moved or relocated.
Ions: Atoms, groups of atoms, or compounds, that are electrically charged
as a result of an imbalance between protons and electrons.
G-4
-------
Leach: The transfer of liquid, solid, or dissolved compounds from a solid
matrix to a liquid as a result of passing of the liquid through the
interconnected pores of a pile or cell of the solid matrix.
Leachate: The liquid that is produced as a result of leaching: generally
considered to be contaminated.
LD50 (or lethal dose): The concentration of substance that is fatal to
50 percent of the population that is exposed.
Micron: One-millionth of a meter; 25,400 microns equal one inch.
Mesh: A size of screen or particles passed through a screen in terms of
the number of openings occuring per linear inch; 200 mesh is equivalent
to 200 microns.
MPRSA: Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; Federal law under
which dumping of materials into ocean waters is regulated.
NAS: National Academy of Sciences.
NCP: National Contingency Plan; Federal plan for implementing CERCLA.
NIOSH: National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety of the U.S
Department of Health and Human Services.
NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the U.S. Department
of Commerce. .
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; a program for
controlling point discharges to surface waters; administered by USEPA
under the Clean Water Act.
Objectives (or response objectives): Goals that are established for
minimizing, eliminating, or reversing the impacts of a release of a
contaminating substance.
Octanol-water partition coefficient: A measure of the affinity of a
substance for octanol (a liquid that behaves chemically similar to
animal fat tissue) relative to water.
On-site: On the same or contiguous geographical area.
Organic matter: Substances comprised mainly of carbon and originating
in animal or plant life or in laboratory synthesis.
OSC (On-scene coordinator): Person that is responsible for responses to
spills of hazardous substances.
OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department
of Labor.
G-5
-------
Oxidation: A chemical reaction in which a compound or radical loses
electrons.
Packed bed: A fixed layer of granular material arranged in a vessel to
promote intimate contact between gases, vapors, liquids, solids,
or various combinations.
Partition: The tendency of a substance to exhibit an affinity for one
material over another (such as sediments over water).
PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls): A toxic and highly persistent class of
compounds that were originally used as insulating fluids in electrical
equipment.
Persistence: Chemical stability of a substance over time.
pH' A measure of the hydrogen ion concentration of a substance, which
controls the direction, speed, and extent of chemical and biochemical
reactions.
Publicly owned treatment works (or POTW): In general, a central system for
collecting and treating municipal wastewater.
Quiescent waters: Areas of a water .body that have relatively little wave
action, current, and flow velocity.
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Federal law under which
solid and hazardous wastes are regulated.
Receptors: Persons, plants, animals, or objects that are subjected to a
contaminating substance.
Release: A substance that has entered the environment through a leak,
discharge, or other failure of a containment or confinement system.
Remote sensing: A class of techniques for monitoring a situation that
does not involve physically entering the substances being monitored;
examples are sonar and x-ray fluorescence.
Residual (or byproduct): A material that is produced without intent
during the processing or treatment of other materials.
Response (or response action): An action or multiple actions that are
taken to minimize the impacts of a release of contaminating materials
to the environment.
Resuspension: The causing of bottom materials to become suspended in the
water column, usually by agititation.
G-6
-------
Scour: The clearing and digging action of flowing water, especially the
downward erosion caused by stream water in sweeping away mud and silt
from the outside bank of a channel.
Scrubber: A device for removal of entrained liquid droplets, dust, or an
undesired gas component from a gas stream.
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act; Federal law under which standards and
criteria are established to protect drinking water.
Sediments: Material that has settled to the bottom of a water body, consist-
ing primarily of eroded and transported soil and organic matter.
Sediment-water partition coefficient: A measure of the affinity of a
substance for sediments relative to water.
Sensitive species (or indicator species): Biota that exhibit an usually
rapid or extreme reaction to a changed environmental condition; such
reactions can provide a qualitative measure of contamination patterns.
Sinker: A chemical substance that is heavier than water and has low
solubility in water.
Slurry: A mixture of solids and liquid, generally of a consistency that
can be pumped.
Soil permeability: The quality of a soil horizon that enables water or
air to move through it. The permeability of a soil may be limited
by the presence of one low-permeability horizon, even though others
are highly permeable.
Solute: The substance dissolved in a solvent.
Sorbent: A substance that can take up and hold a contaminating substance;
includes absorbents and adsorbents. «-«""-e,
Specific gravity: The ratio of the density of a material to the density
of water at a specific temperature.
Spill: Release of a substance from a container, generally of short duration.
Standards and criteria: Regulatory or advisory numerical limits for
concentrations of contaminating substances; generally apply to drinking
water and discharges of waste streams to surface water.
Suspended solids: A mixture of fine, nonsettling particles in a liquid.
Technique: A process, method, or technology that is used to accomplish
a response.
G-7
-------
Toxicity: The characteristic of being poisonous or harmful to plant or
animal life; the relative degree of severity of this characteristic.
Transformation rate: The rate at which the properties of a chemical change
to pose a lesser or greater hazard.
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act; Federal law under which selected
chemicals are regulated , (including PCBs).
Turbidity: Cloudiness of a liquid caused by suspension of solid particles;
a measure of the suspended solids in a liquid.
Underlain! A subsurface'drain pipe or gravel drainage layer into which
water flows.
USCG: United States Coast Guard of the U.S. Department of Transportation
USEPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency.
USGS: United States Geologic Survey of the U.S. Department of Interior.
Water column: That part of a water body that is water, as opposed to the
bottom, banks, vegetation, etc.
G-8
-------
APPENDIX H
REFERENCES
1. Banzoli, V., V. Ditella, L. Dossi, and P. Gaua. 1976. New Concept of
Underwater Remote Controlled Tracked Vehicle for Deep Water Trenching
Operations. In: Eighth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston,
TX. May 3-6, 1976. p. 647.
2. Barnard, W. 1978. Prediction and Control of Dredged Material
Dispersion Around Dredging and Open-Water Pipeline Disposal
Operations. T.R. DS-78-13, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS. 114 pp.
3. Bauer, W.H., D.N. Borton, and J.J. Bulloff. 1975. Agents, Methods,
and Devices for Amelioration of Discharges of Hazardous Chemicals on
Water. CG-D-38-76. United States Coast Guard, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, D.C.
4. Bernstein, C.S. 1985. Hammering Out a New RCRA. Civil Engineering.
Vol 55, No. 4. pp. 57-60.
5. Bokuniewicz, H., 1981. Burial of Dredged Sediment Under the Sea
Floor: Can You Do It? In: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Dredging
Seminar. TAMU-SG-83-103 Texas A&M University. November 12-13.
6. Brunotts, V.A., L.R. , Emerson, E.N. Rebis, A.J. Roy. 1983. Cost
effective treatment of priority pollutants compounds with granular
activated carbon. In: Management of Uncontrolled Hazardous Wastes
Washington, D.C. Oct. 31 - Nov. 2. pp. 209-216.
7. Byroade, J.D., A.M. Twedell, and J.P. LeBoff. 1981. Handbook for Oil
Spill Protection Cleanup Priorities. EPA 600/8-81-002. Versar, Inc.
Prepared for: USEPA, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH.
8. Casarett, L.J. and J. Doull (eds.). 1975. Toxicology: The Basic
Science of Poisons, McMillan Publishing Corp., Toronto. 768 pp.
9. Callahan, M.A. et al. 1979. Water - Related Data of 129 Priority
Pollutants. EPA - 440/479-029a. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. Two Volumes.
H-l
-------
10. Church, H. 1981. Excavation Handbook. McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
New York, NY. 1,024 pp.
11. Clark, D.E., P. Colombo, and R.M. Neilson, Jr. 1982. Solidification
of Oils and Organic Liquids. BNL-5162, prepared for: Brookhaven
National Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy, 25 pp.
12. Clark, G. 1983. Survey of Portable Hydraulic Dredges. T.R. HL-83-4.
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Ill pp.
13. Conway, R.A., and R.D. Ross. 1980. Handbook of Industrial Waste
Disposal. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, NY.
14. Cope, F., G. Karpinksi, J. Pacey, and L. Steiner. 1984. Use of Liners
for Containment of Hazardous Waste Landfills. Pollution Engineering.
Vol. 16, No. 3.
15. d'Angremond, K., J. Brakel, and A. Hoekstra. 1978. Assessment of
Certain European Dredging Practices and Dredged Material Containment
and Reclamation Methods. T.R. D-78-58, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. 228 pp.
16. Dawson, G.W., B.W. Mercer, and R.G. Parkhurst, 1976. Comparative
Evaluation of In-Situ Aproaches to the Treatment of Flowing Streams.
In: Proceedings of 1976'National Conference on Control of Hazardous
Materials Spills, New Orleans, LA. April 25-28.
17. DeRenzo, D.J., ed. 1978. Unit Operations for Treatment of Hazardous
Industrial Wastes. Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ. 920 pp.
18. Dorr-Oliver, undated. The Dorr Clone Hydrocyclone. Bulletin DC-2,
Atlanta, GA.
19. Eagle Iron Works. July 1981. Scalping-Classifying Tanks. General
Catalog Section B.
20. Eagle Iron Works. 1982. Fine and Coarse Material Washers. General
Catalog, Section C. Des Moines, Iowa.
21. EMCO. Undated. Imbiber Beads. Product Literature. Little Rock, AR.
22. Environstone Gypsum Cement. 1982. A Major Breakthrough in Radwaste
Binder Technology. TAC-225/USG/6-82, United States Gypsum Company,
Chicago, Illinois.
23. Erickson, P.R. and J. Hurst. 1983. Mechanical Dewatering of Dredge
Slurries. In: Ninth Meeting, U.S.-Japan Conference on Management of
Bottom Sediments Containing Toxic Substances, Jacksonville, Florida.
October 17-18, 1983. 24 pp.
H-2
-------
24. Essoglou, M. et al. A Transportable Open Ocean Breakwater. In:
Ocean: 75 Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Inc., San Diego, California, 1975.
25. Ghassemi, M.K. Yu, and S. Quinlivan. 1981. Feasibility of
Commercialized Water Treatment Techniques for Concentrated Waste
Spills. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Municipal Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 115 pp.
26. Granlund, R.W., and J.F. Hayes, undated. Solidification of Low-Level
Radioactive Liquid Waste Using a Cement-Silicate Process. Delaware
Custom Material Inc., State College, Pennsylvania. 4 pp.
27. Green, P. 1981. Dewatering coal and refuse. Coal Age. May.
p. 145-157.
28. Haliburton, T.A. 1978. Guidelines for Dewatering/Densifying
Confined Dredged Material. Dredged Material Research Program,
Technical Report DS-78-11, prepared for: Office, Chief of Engineers,
U.S. Army, Washington, D.C. 119 pp.
29. Hand, T.D. , A.W. Ford, P.G. Malone, D.W. Thompson, and R.B. Mercer.
1978. A Feasibility Study of Response Techniques for Discharges
of Hazardous Chemicals That- Sink. CG-D-56-78, U.S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station. Prepared for: U.S. Coast Guard,
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
30. IARC, International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the
World Health Organization.
31. JBF Scientific Corporation 1978. An Analysis of the Functional
Capabilities and Performance of Silt Curtains. T.R. D-78-39. Office,
Chief of Engineers, United States Army, Washington, DC. 182 pp.
32. Jones, D. et al. 1979. A Transportable Breakwater for Near-Shore
Applications. In: Proceedings of the Specialty Conference, Civil
Engineering in the Oceans, IV, San Francisco, California. American
Society of Civil Engineers. 433 pp.
33. Jones, R.H., R.R. Williams, and T.K. Moore. 1978. Development and
Application of Design and Operation Procedures for Coagulation of
Dredged Material Slurry and Containment Area Effluent. Dredged
Material Research Program, Technical Report D-78-54, Prepared for:
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C. 95 pp.
34. JRB Associates. 1982. Handbook: Remedial Action at Waste Disposal
Sites. EPA-625/6-82-006. Prepared for: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH. 495 pp.
35. Kaing, Y. and A.R. Metry. 1982. Hazardous Waste Processing Technology.
Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI. 549 pp.
H-3
-------
36. Kent, J.A. (ed). 1974. Riegels Handbook of Industrial Chemistry,
7th Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York.
37. Kirk-Othmer. 1982. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Third
Edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 24 Volumes.
38. Krizek, R.J., J.A. Fitzpatrick and D.K. Atmatzidis. 1976.
Investigation of Effluent Filtering Systems for Dredged Material
Containment Facilities. Dredged Material Research Program Report
D-76-8, prepared for: Office of Engineers, U.S. Army. 168 pp.
39. Lewis, R.J. and R.L. Tatken (eds.). 1980 Edition. Registry of
Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances. NIOSH publication # 81-116.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC.
40. Long, B.W. and D.H. Grana. 1978. Feasibility Study of Vacuum
Filtration Systems for Dewatering Dredged Material. Dredged
Material Research Program, Technical Report D-78-5, prepared for:
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C. 123 pp.
41. Lubowitz, H.R. and C.C. Wiles. 1981. Management of Hazardous .
Waste by a Unique Encapsulation Process. In: Land Disposal
Hazardous Waste: Proceeding of the Seventh Annual Research
Symposium. EPA-600/9-81-002b, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory,'Cincinnati, Ohio. pp. 91-102.
42. Lyman, J.L., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt. 1982. Handbook of
Chemical Property Estimation Methods. McGraw Hill Book Company
New York. 960 pp.
43. Mabey et al. 1981. Aquatic Fate Process Data for Organic Priority
Pollutants. EPA Report #440/4-81-014. USEPA Office of Water
Regulations and Standards, Washington, D.C. 434 pp.
44. Mackenthur, K.M., M.W. Brossman, J.A. Kohler, and C.R. Terrell.
Approaches for Mitigating Kepone Contamination in the Hopewell/James
River Area of Virginia. In: 4th United States/Japan Experts Meeting
on Management of Bottom Sediments Containing Toxic Substances.
45. Mallory, C.W. and M.A. Nawrocki. 1974. Containment Area Facility
Concepts for Dredged Material Separation. Dredged Material Research
Program. Report D-74-6, prepared for: Environmental Effects
Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MI. 236 pp.
46. Malone, P.G., N.R. Francinques, and J.A. Boa, 1982. Use of Grout
Chemistry and Technology in the Containment of Hazardous Wastes.
In: Proceedings of Management of Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites,
Washington, D.C., Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute,
Silver Spring, MD.
H-4
-------
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
. McLellan, S. 1982. Evaluation of the Use of Divers and/or Remotely
Operated Vehicles in Chemically Contaminated Waters. JRB Associates,
prepared for: EPA, Edison, NJ. 80 pp.
Meritt, F. 1976. Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers. McGraw-Hill
Book Co., New York, NY. 1,305 pp.
Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. 1979. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment,
Disposal, Reuse. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY. 920 pp.
Morrison, A. 1983. Land Treatment of Hazardous Waste. Civil
Engineering. Vol 53, No. 5. pp 33-38.
Nalco Chemical Co. 1979. Nalco Water Handbook, McGraw-Hill Co.
New York, NY. p. 12-1.
National Academy of Sciences. 1977. Drinking Water and Health.
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 939 pp.
Natori, M. Undated. Japan Bottom Sediments Management Association,
Tokyo, Japan. Written communication to Kathleen Wagner, JRB Associates.
14 pp.
NIOSH. Criteria Documents. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. Numerous Documents.
NUS Corporation. 1983. Feasibility Study - Hudson River PCBs Site.
USEPA Contract No. 68-01-6699.
Oppelt, E. T. 1981. Thermal Destruction Options for Controlling
Hazardous Wastes. Civil Engineering. Vol 51, No. 9. pp 72-75.
Patty, F.A. et al. 1963. Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 2nd
Edition Revised. Interscience (A division of John Wiley & Sons),
New York. Three volumes.
Peddicord, R. K. 1980. Technical Aspects of the US Regulations
Governing Disposal of Dredged Material. In: Proceedings of Ninth
World Dredging Conference - Dredging Progress in Equipment and Methods,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Oct 29-31. 1980. pp 447-456.
Pilie, R.J., R.E. Baier, R.C. Zieglar, R.P. Leonard, J.G. Michalovic,
S.L. Peck, and D.H. Boch. 1975. Methods to Treat, Control, and
Monitor Spilled Hazardous Materials. EPA-670/2-75-042, United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
Pradt, L.A. Developments in wet air oxidation. Reprinted from
Chemical Engineering Progress. Volume 68, No. 12, 1972. Updated
1976. pp. 72-77.
H-5
-------
61. Raymond, G. 1983. Techniques to Reduce the Sediment Resuspension
Caused by Dredging. In: Proceedings of the 16th Texas A&M Dredging
Seminar (In Preparation), College Station, TX. 1983.
62. Repa, E. et al. 1985 (In Press). Leachate Plume Management. EPA
Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio.
63. Reynolds, J., J. Seamans, and A. Van der Steen 1977. Trenching in
Granular Soils. In: Second International Symposium on Dredging
Technology, BHRA Fluid Engineering and Texas A&M University,
November 2-4, 1977. pp. E2-13, E2-20.
64. Richardson, T. et al. 1982. Pumping Performance and Turbidity
Generation of Model 600/100 Pneuma Pump. T.R. HL-82-8, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. 660 pp.
65. Sax, N.I., et al. 1979. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials
5th Edition. Von Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. 1118 pp.
66. Seymour, R. 1977. Tethered Float Breakwater: A Temporary Wave
Protection System for Open Ocean Construction. In: Eighth Annual
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, p. 253.
67. Sims, R. et al. 1984 (In Press). Review of In-Place Treatment
Techniques for Contaminated Surface Soils. EPA'540/2-84-003a, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, and Office of Research and
Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency.
68. Skinner, J.H. 1984. Memorandum. Draft Technical Guidance for
Implementation of the Double Liner System Requirements of the RCRA
Amendments. USEPA, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC.
December 20, 1984.
69. Stoddard, S.K., G.A. Davis, H.M. Freeman, and P.M. Deibler. 1981.
Alternatives to Land Disposal of Hazardous Wastes: An Assessment
for California. Toxic Waste Assessment Group, Governor's Office of
Appropriate Technology, State of California. 288 pp.
70. Takenaka Doboku Co. Ltd., Takenaka Komuten Co., Ltd., and Toyo
Construction Co., Ltd. Undated. Deep Chemical Mixing Method -
product literature. Japan.
71. Tao Harbor Works. Undated. Tao Leaflet 78N-610.
72. Toyo Construction Co., Ltd. Undated. Technical bulletin. Tokyo,
Japan.
73. U.S. Coast Guard. 1978. CHRIS A Condensed Guide to Chemical Hazards.
Commandant Instruction M16465.11. U.S. Department of Transportation.
H-6
-------
74. U.S. Coast Guard. 1978. CHRIS Hazardous Chemicals Data Manual.
Commandant Instruction M16465.12. U.S. Department of Transportation.
75. U.S. Coast Guard. 1973. CHRIS Hazard Assessment Handbook. Commandant
Instruction M16465.13. U.S. Department of Transportation.
76. U.S. Coast Guard. 1978. CHRIS Response Methods Handbook. Commandant
Instruction M16465.14. U.S. Department of Transportation.
77. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Process Design Manual:
Sludge Treatment and Disposal. EPA 625/1-79-011, Municipal
Environmental Research Lab, Cincinnati, Ohio.
78. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Environmental Emergency
Response Unit Capability. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Edison, New Jersey. 26 pp.
79. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Process Design Manual
for Dewatering Municipal Wastewater Sludges. EPA-625/1-82-014
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.
80. U.S. Environmental Protection. 1982. Guide to the Disposal of
Chemically Stabilized and Solidified Waste SW-872. Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. 114 pp.
81. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1984. Minimum Technology
Guidance on Double Liner Systems for Landfills and Surface
Impoundments—Design, Construction and Operation. Draft. Office
of Solid Waste, Land Disposal Division, Washington, D.C.
82. Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic
Chemicals, Second Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York.
1310 pp.
83. Wetzel, R., K. Boyer, W. Ellis, A. Wickline, P. Spooner, K. Wagner,
C. Furman, J. Meade, and A. Lapins. 1985. Removal and Mitigation
of Contaminated Sediments. Science Applications International
Corporation. Prepared for: USEPA, Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory, Edison, NJ, and U.S. Coast Guard, Office of
Research and Development, Washington, DC.
84. Windholz, M. et al. (ed.). 1976. Merck Index. Merck and Co.,
Rahway, New Jersey. 1313 pp.
85. Wuslich, M.G. 1982. Criteria for Commercial Disposal of Hazardous
Waste. In: Proceedings of National Conference on Management of
Uncontrolled Hazardous Wastes. Hazardous Materials Control Research
Institute, Silver Spring, MD. pp. 224-227.
H-7
-------
-------
APPENDIX I
BLANK WORKSHEETS FOR DOCUMENTATION
AND DECISIONMAKING
Blank copies of the following worksheets that are presented in the
body of this handbook are provided in .this appendix:
Discharge Summary Worksheet
Spilled Substance Data Worksheet
Water Body Data Collection Worksheet
Environmental Setting Worksheet
Exposure and Impact Data Worksheet
Worksheet and Screening Response Categories
Worksheet and Screening Response Techniques
Worksheet and Development of Response Alternatives
Alternatives Evaluation Worksheet.
It is recommended that additional, separate copies be made for use in field
response situations.
1-1
-------
DISCHARGE SUMMARY WORKSHEET
Site
Time of Observation_
Type of Water Body
Date
CIRCUMSTANCES OF DISCHARGE
Location
Source
Cause.
Status (Circle One): Discrete
Time Elapsed Since Discharge Began_
Quantity of Material Released
Intermittent
Continuous
Rate of Release
Duration of Release (if intermittent)_
Substances Released
Quantity
Form of Release (Circle One):
Powder Crystal/Pellets Chunks
Semi-Solid Liquid
EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
Sediments
Water Body
OBSERVATIONS
1 of 1
-------
SPILLED SUBSTANCE DATA WORKSHEET
Information
Factor
Substance A Information Substance B Information
Source Source
1. Specific Gravity
2. Physical State
3. Particle Size
4. Water Solubility
5. Water Reactivity
6. Chemical Reactivity
7. Ignitability
8. Surface Tension
(continued)
1 of 2
-------
SPILLED SUBSTANCE DATA WORKSHEET (continued)
Information
Factor
Substance A Information
Source
Substance B Information
Source
9. Octanol-water
partition coeffi-
cient
10. Sediment-water
partition coeffi-
cient
11. Bioaccumulation
12. Aquatic persistence
13. Transformation
rate constants
o Hydrolysis
o Oxidation
o Biotrans-
formation
14. Toxicity
o Aquatic species
o Mammals
o Human
o Food chain
2 of 2
-------
WATER BODY DATA COLLECTION WORKSHEET
Information
Requirements
Site-Specific
Data
Information
Source
WATER BODY;
Depth of Water Body
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Width of Water Body
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Water Current Direction
Surface
Subsurface
.Water Current Velocity
Surface
Subsurface
Tidal Cycle
Time of high tide
Time of low tide
Velocity of tide
Amplitude of tide
Wave Height
(continued)
1 of 2
-------
WATER BODY DATA COLLECTION WORKSHEET (continued)
Information
Requirements
Site-Specific
Data
Information
Source
SEDIMENTS;
Depth to Contaminated
Sediments
Sediment Type
Sediment Grain Size
Sediment Organic
Carbon Content
WATER;
Suspended Particulate
Concentration
Water Temperature
Profile
Salinity Profile
SEASONAL CONSIDERATIONS!
Seasonal Conditions
and Impacts
Drought
Snow melt
Storm flood
SKETCH WATER BODY/CHANNEL CONFIGURATION (CROSS-SECTION)
2 of 2
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WORKSHEET
Site Information
Information
Sources
DISTINCTIVE HABITATS (Check and list if near spill area)
1. Breeding Grounds, Nesting, or Roosting Sites
2. Wildlife/Refuges
3. Endangered Species Habitats
4. Marshes or Swamps (e.g., mangrove)
5. Subtidal Seagrass Systems
6. Harvesting Beds
7. Coral Reefs
8. Soft Bottom Benthos
9. Unused Natural Ecosystem (ecologically or
aesthetically important)
10. Other
(continued)
1 of 3
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WORKSHEET (continued)
Site Information
Information
Sources
ENDANGERED SPECIES (List)
SENSITIVE SPECIES (Check if applicable and list)
1. Aquatic (Fish/Shellfish)
2. Birds
3. Reptiles/Amphibians
; 4. Mammals
5. Plants
SENSITIVE WATER BODY USAGE (Check if applicable)
Type of Use
CONSUMPTIVE WATER USE
_____ 1. Drinking Water Supply
2. Industrial Water Supply
•• 3. Irrigation
4. Fire Water Supply
RECREATIONAL USE
1. State/National Park
2. Swimming
3. Boating
4. Fishing
5. Other
Distance Downstream From Spill
(continued)
2 of 3
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WORKSHEET (continued)
Site Information
Information
Sources
COMMERCIAL USE (Check if applicable and list)
1. Shellfish
2. Finfish
3. Resort area or other waterfront property
4. Marinas
5. Harbor/Docks
6. Transportation (shipping lanes)
POTENTIAL RECEPTORS (Check if applicable and identify)
1. Fish
2. Shellfish
3. Aquatic Plants
4. Reptiles/Amphibians
5. Other aquatic or benthic receptors
6. Birds
7. Mammals
8. Humans
Adapted from Byroad, Twedell, and LeBoff, 1981.
3 of 3
-------
EXPOSURE AND IMPACT DATA WORKSHEET
RESOURCE/
RECEPTOR
TYPE OF
EXPOSURE
EXPOSURE LEVEL
CURRENT TIME 1 TIME 2 TIME 3
REGULATORY
STANDARD OR
OTHER EXPOSURE
CRITERIA
COMMENT ON POTENTIAL
FOR HARM
I-1
o
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE CATEGORIES
I. Select the site scenario that characterizes the existing site
conditions (check one or both):
Contaminants are relatively stationary.
Contaminants are mobile.
II. As identified in Table 4-1, Column B, the preferred response category
or "train" of categories, is as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
III. Applicability of the preferred response category:
Ilia. Is containment necessary for implementation of removal
(circle one)?
Yes (go to Illb) NO (go to IIIc)
Illb. Is containment applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to IIIc) No (go to IVa & d)
IIIc. Is immediate and total removal physically applicable
(circle one)?
Yes (go to Hid) No (go to IVa, b & c)
Hid. Does removed material require treatment? (circle one)?
Yes (go to Hie) No (go to lilt)
Hie. Is treatment applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to IHf) No (go to IVd)
(continued)
1 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE CATEGORIES (continued)
Illf. Is disposal of removed material or treatment residuals
necessary (circle one)?
Yes (go to Illg) No (go to Illh)
Illg. Is disposal applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to Illh) No (go to IVa & d)
Illh. The preferred response category is applicable at the site. The
reasons for its applicability are as follows:
IV. Other Response Categories:
IVa. Summarize the reasons why the preferred response category is
not applicable at the site.
IVb. Is immediate partial removal applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to IVbl) No (go t IVc)
IVbl. Does partially removed material require treatment?
(circle one)?
Yes (go to IVb2) No (go to IVb3)
IVb2. Is treatment applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to IVb3) No (go to IVd)
IVb3. Is disposal necessary (circle one)?
Yes (go to IVb4) No (go to V)
IVb4. Is disposal applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to V) No (go to IVd)
(continued)
2 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE CATEGORIES (continued)
IVc. Can removal be temporarily delayed (circle one)?
Yes (go to Hid) No (go to IVd)
IVd. Is in situ response applicable (circle one)?
Yes (go to V) No (go to IVe)
IVe. "No action" should be considered.
(go to V)
V. Based on existing site conditions, the following other response catego-
ries are applicable at the site:
o Partial removal (accompanied by treatment and/or disposal)
o Removal implementation delay
o In situ treatment/isolation
o No action possible
(go to VI)
VI. Summary:
Via. The following response categories are applicable at the site:
o Containment
o Removal
o Treatment
o Disposal
o In situ treatment/isolation
o No action
VIb. Comments:
3 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE TECHNIQUES
Identify those categories and Response Techniques that are applicable
under existing site conditions.
Containment Techniques
Containment curtains
Trenches and pits
Dikes and berms
Cofferdams
Temporary cover material
Pneumatic barriers
Floating breakwater
Removal Techniques
Mechanical dredges
- Dipper dredges
- Bucket ladder dredges
- Clamshell dredges
- Draglines
- Conventional earth
excavation equipment
Hydraulic dredges
- Plain suction dredge
— Cutterhead dredge
- Dustpan dredge
- Hopper dredge
- Portable hydraulic dredge
- Hand-held hydraulic dredge
Pneumatic dredges
- Airlift dredge
- Pneuma dredge
- Oozer dredge
Comments Regarding
Applicability/Inapplicability
(continued)
1 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE TECHNIQUES (continued)
Treatment Techniques for Removed Material
Sediment/water separation
- Settling basins
- Hydraulic classifiers
- Spiral classifiers
- Cyclones
- Filters
Sediment dewatering
- High-rate gravity settlers
- Centrifuges
- Belt press filters
- Vacuum filters
- Pressure filters
Water treatment
- Adsorption
- Ultrafiltration
- Reverse osmosis
- Ion exchange
- Biological treatment
- Precipitation .
- Wet air oxidation
- Ozonation
- Ultraviolet radiation
- Discharge to publicly owned
treatment works
Sediment treatment
- Contaminant immobilization
- Contaminant treatment
Disposal Techniques
Sediments
- Land disposal
- Open water disposal
Water
- Discharge to surface water
- Land application
- Deep well injection
Treatment residuals
- Land disposal
- Incineration
— Land application
- Deep well injection
(continued)
2 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR SCREENING RESPONSE TECHNIQUES (continued)
In Situ Treatment and Isolation Techniques
Treatment
- Sorption
- Chemical treatment
- Biological treatment
Isolation
- Capping
- Covering
- Fixation
3 of 3
-------
WORKSHEET FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES
Alternative Containment Removal
Treatment
Disposal In Situ
o
Ml
B
etc.
-------
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION WORKSHEET
o
HI
§
Alternative
(See
Alternatives
Development
Worksheet)
Performance Reliability Implement-
ability
Environ-
mental
and Public
Health
Impacts
Safety
Cost
Other
Concerns/
Comments
------- |