EPA/540/8-91/009
                                          May 1991
Synopses of Federal
Demonstrations of Innovative
Site Remediation Technologies
        Prepared by the Member Agencies of the
        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable:
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                        Department of Defense
                            U.S. Army
                            U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                            U.S. Navy
                            U.S. Air Force
                        Department of Energy
                        Department of Interior
                            Bureau of Reclamation
                      Summer 1991
                                       Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                          NOTICE

The information in this document has been funded wholly by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency under Contracts 68-CO-0083 and 68-01-7481  to  ICF  Incorporated.  It has been subject to
administrative review by all agencies participating in the Federal  Remediation Technologies Roundtable,
and  has been approved for publication.  Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

-------
                                  Table of Contents
BIOREMEDIATION

     Above-Ground Biological Treatment of Trichloroethylene	,	    1
     Aerated Static Pile Composting	    3
     Aerated Static Pile Composting	    6
     Biodecontamination of Fuel Oil Spills  	    8
     Biodegradation	   10
     Biodegradation  of Lube Oil Contaminated Soils	   11
     Biological Aqueous Treatment System	   12
     Bioremediation / Vacuum Extraction	   13
     Biotreatment Enhanced with Pact®/Wet Air Oxidation  	   14
     Enhanced In Situ Biodegradation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons
           in the Vadose Zone  	   16
     Geolock / Bio-Drain Treatment Platform	   17
     In Situ Biodegradation  	   19
     In Situ Biodegradation  	   20
     In Situ Biological Treatment 	   22
     In Situ Bioremediation Process	   24
     Liquid/Solid Contact Digestion	   25
     Submerged Aerobic Fixed-Film Reactor  	   26
     TNT Slurry  Reactor	   27
     U1/U2 Ground-Water Biological Treatment Demonstration	   28

CHEMICAL TREATMENT

     Chemical Detoxification of Chlorinated Aromatic Compounds  	   29
     Chemical Oxidation/Cyanide Destruction	   31
     Combined Chemical Binding / Precipitation and
           Physical Separation of Radionuclides  	   32

THERMAL TREATMENT

     Centrifugal Reactor	   33
     Circulating  Bed Combustor	   34
     Desorption and Vapor Extraction System  	   35
     Flame Reactor	   37
     Infrared Thermal Destruction	   38
     Low-Temperature Thermal Stripping	   40
     Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT3)	   41
      Pyretron® Oxygen Burner	   44
      Radio Frequency (RF) Thermal Soil Decontamination  	   46
     Waste-to-Fuel Recycling	   48
     X*TRAX™  Low-Temperature Thermal Desorption  	   49

VAPOR EXTRACTION

      Ground-Water Vapor Recovery System	   51
      In Situ Air Stripping with Horizontal Wells 	   52
      In Situ Soil Venting	   55
      In Situ Soil Venting	   57
      In Situ Steam/Air Stripping Process	   58
      Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum Stripping	   60
     Terra Vac In Situ Vacuum Extraction	   62
      Vacuum-Induced Soil Venting	   64
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
i

-------
                              Table of Contents (cont'd)
SOIL WASHING

      BEST Solvent Extraction	   65
      Biogenesis Soil Cleaning Process	   67
      Biotrol Soil Washing System	   68
      Debris Washing System	   70
      Ghea Associates Process	   72
      Soil Treatment with Extraksol  	   74
      Solvent Extraction	   75

SOLIDIFICATION/STABILIZATION

      Chemfix Solidification / Stabilization Process	   77
      IM-TECH Solidification / Stabilization Process	   79
      In Situ Solidification / Stabilization Process	   81
      Soil-Cement Mixing Wall (S.M.W.)	   83
      Solidification / Stabilization	   84
      Solidification / Stabilization with Silicate Compounds	   85
      Solidrtech Solidification / Stabilization Process	   86
      Stabilization with Lime  	   88

OTHER PHYSICAL TREATMENT

      Carver-Greenfield Process for Extraction of Oily Waste 	   89
      Catalytic Decontamination  	   90
      Catalytic Ozone Oxidation	   92
      Chemtact™ Gaseous Waste Treatment	   94
      Freezing Separation	   95
      Geosafe Process	   97
      In Situ Vitrification	   99
      Membrane Microfiltration	101
      Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering	103
      Rotary Air Stripping 	105
     Treatment with Ultra Violet, Hydrogen Peroxide, and Ozone  	107
      Ultrafiltration	108
      Ultraviolet Radiation / Oxidation  	;	109
     Wetlands-Based Treatment	m
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                        PREFACE

     This collection of abstracts,  compiled by the  Federal Remediation  Technology Roundtable,
describes field demonstrations of innovative technologies to treat hazardous waste.  The collection is
intended to be an information resource for hazardous waste site project managers for assessing the
availability and viability of innovative technologies for treating contaminated ground water, soils, and
sludge.   It is  also  intended to assist  government agencies coordinate ongoing hazardous waste
remediation technology research initiatives, particularly those sponsored by the U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE). Innovative technologies, for the purposes of this compendium, are defined as those technologies
for which detailed performance and cost data are not readily available.

      The demonstrations contained herein have all been sponsored by EPA, DoD, and DOE.  In total,
75 demonstrations in seven different technology  categories are described.  A matrix listing these
demonstrations, the type of contaminant, media that can be treated, and the treatment setting for each
innovative technology is provided in Exhibit 1 on page vii.

      This document represents a starting point in the review of technologies available for application to
hazardous waste sites. This compendium should not be looked upon as a sole source for this information
- it does not represent all innovative technologies nor all technology demonstrations performed by these
agencies. Only Federally-sponsored studies and demonstrations that have tested innovative remedial
technologies with site specific wastes under realistic conditions as a part of a full-scale field demonstration
are included.  Those studies included  represent all that were provided to the  Federal Remediation
Technology Roundtable at the time of publication.  Information collection efforts are ongoing.

      The enclosed abstracts were obtained from the following resources:

      •     U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Air Force, Joint Technology Review Meeting on Soil and
            Ground Water Remedial Technologies, The Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Air
            Force Engineering Services Center, Office of Technology Development, Atlanta, Georgia,
            February 6-8, 1990.

      •     U.S.  Department  of  Defense, Installation  Restoration and Hazardous  Waste  Control
            Technologies, prepared for the U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency by  ITT
            Research  Institute,  The National  Institute for Petroleum  Energy Research, Bartlesville,
            Oklahoma, August 1990, (Report No. CETHA-TS-CR-90067).

      •     The Alternative Treatment Technology Information Center (ATTIC), sponsored by the U.S.
            Environmental Protection Agency,  Office  of  Environmental Engineering and Technology
            Demonstration.

      •     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
            Program:  Technology Profiles, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response and Office
            of Research and Development, Washington, DC, November 1990, (EPA/540/5-90/006).

The Federal Remediation Roundtable

      This publication was prepared under the auspices of the Federal Remediation Technologies
 Roundtable (Roundtable). This  organization was created to establish a process for applied hazardous
waste site remediation technology information exchange, to consider cooperative efforts of mutual interest,
 and to develop strategies and analyze remedial  problems that will benefit from the application of
 innovative technologies. The Roundtable is comprised of representatives from several Federal agencies:
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
in

-------
 Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Innovation Office (EPA/TIO)

       The mission of the Technology Innovation Office (TIO) is to increase applications of innovative
 treatment technology by government and industry to contaminated waste sites, soils, and ground
 water.   TIO intends to increase usage of innovative  techniques  by  removing regulatory  and
 institutional impediments  and providing richer technology and market information to  targeted
 audiences  of  Federal  agencies,  States,  consulting  engineering  firms,  responsible  parties,
 technology developers, and the investment community.  The scope of the mission extends to
 Superfund sites, corrective action sites under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
 and underground storage tank clean-ups.  By contrast, TIO is not a focus for EPA interest in
 treatment technologies for industrial or municipal waste streams,  for recycling,  or for waste
 minimization.                                                                I

 Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (EPA/ORD)

      The Office of Research and Development (ORD) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
 (SITE) program supports  development of technologies for assessing  and treating waste from
 Superfund sites.  The SITE  program was  authorized by the Superfund Amendments and
 Reauthorization Act of 1986 with the goal of identifying technologies, other than land disposal, that
 are suitable for treating Superfund wastes.  The program provides an opportunity for technology
 developers to demonstrate their technology's capability to successfully process and remediate
 Superfund waste. EPA evaluates the technology and provides an assessment of potential for future
 use for Superfund cleanup actions.  The SITE program  has currently evaluated  or supported
 research efforts for more than 100 innovative treatment technologies.  The SITE program is
 administered by EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) in Cincinnati, Ohio.

 Department of Defense (DoD), Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP)

      The Office of the Secretary  of Defense (OSD), operating through the Deputy Assistant
 Secretary of Defense, Environment (DASD (E)), establishes policy and monitors the Armed Force's
 execution of the DoD hazardous  waste site  cleanup  program.  The Defense Environmental
 Restoration Program (DERP) funds activities at over 17,000 DoD sites  located on nearly 1,700
 properties through the Installation Restoration Program (IRP). The DoD works cooperatively with
 the Environmental Protection Agency and the States toward the goal of taking timely, effective, and
 efficient actions at all stages of the DERP. Research and development of better methods for site
 investigation and cleanup is an important part of DERP.  Many innovative technologies have been
 developed and demonstrated to improve the speed and cost-effectiveness of DoD site cleanups.

 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

      In  support of the  Army's Installation  Restoration (IR) Program, the U.S.  Army Corps of
 Engineers has the  responsibility of ensuring the  development of necessary and  improved
 technology for conduct of the Program.  The U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers is also  charged with
 the responsibility for developing  improved  pollution  abatement and  environmental  control
 technology in support of the U.S. Army Material Command industrial complex (Pollution Abatement
 or PAECT Program). The purpose of the IR Decontamination Development Program is to  provide
 R&D support to required assessment and cleanup actjons at Army installations.  Efforts  include
 evaluating commercially available state-of-the-art technologies as well as developing new, innovative
technologies that are more economical and efficient than existing technology. The PAECT program
 addresses waste minimization and disposal alternatives for the Army's industrial operations.
                  Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
     U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency (USATHAMA)

          The U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency (USATHAMA), a Field Operating
     Activity (FOA) of the U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers, is a  major focal  point in the  program
     management and support efforts of the Army-wide environmental program.  With its principal focus
     directed toward supporting the installation in achieving and maintaining environmental compliance,
     the Agency's activities fall into five major categories:

                      Environmental Compliance;
                --     Installation Restoration Program (IRP);
               —     Environmental Training and Awareness;
                -     Research and Development (R & D); and
                      Environmental Information Management.

     U.S. Air Force/Engineering and Services Center (AFESC)

          The Air Force Engineering and Services Center (AFESC) is responsible  for  identifying,
     developing, and testing technologies that may be useful for remediating contaminated sites as part
     of the Air Force's Installation Remediation Program.

     U.S. Navy, Naval Energy and Environment Support Office (NEESA)

           The Naval Energy and Environmental Support office (NEESA), in Port Hueneme, California,
     provides technology transfer  information to Navy and Marine Corps Installations with hazardous
     waste cleanup responsibilities. NEESA wrote and periodically updates the Navy's Remedial Action
     Technology Guide, which provides guidance to Navy commands on preview technologies including
     cost data. NEESA is also involved in developing Remedial Action Contracts, which will be available
     Navy-wide to implement cleanups.   NEESA coordinates closely with the Navy Civil Engineering
     Laboratory, in Port Hueneme, California, to match new R&D efforts to actual field sites in order to
     test new technologies.   The technology transfer  mission extends to  CERCLA  actions, RCRA
     corrective actions and UST cleanups/removals.

     Department of Energy, Office of Technology Demonstration (DOE/OTD)

           The Department of Energy's (DOE)  Office of Technology Demonstration  (OTD)  was
     established to identify technologies in the research and development and demonstration (RD&D)
     stage,  and to demonstrate, test, and evaluate those technologies that  will provide DOE with
     accelerated and/or improved methods for achieving its environmental goals as specified in its Five-
     Year Plan.

Future Demonstrations

     This publication will be updated on a periodic basis.  If you will be conducting a demonstration
featuring an innovative hazardous waste treatment technology in the future, or if you are aware of any
project that is relevant to this collection, but has been omitted, please forward this information to TIO:

                 Daniel M. Powell
                 Environmental Protection Specialist
                 Technology Innovation Office
                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 401 M Street, SW,  OS-110
                 Washington, DC 20460
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
       For your convenience, we have included, at the end of this volume, the Innovative Remedial
 Technologies Information Collection Form to guide you in formatting the information for inclusion in this
 compendium. The Roundtable developed this form as a model for use in collecting findings On innovative
 technologies and their applications, effectiveness, and costs.

       The form is intended to facilitate new data collection efforts and to indicate the data we are most
 interested in capturing.  If, however, you  have already collected and recorded the information  in an
 alternative format, please feel free to forward any previously written abstract or summary.  We will reformat
 it to be included in this compendium.

       If you have any comments on the usefulness and clarity of this publication, please complete the
 suggestion form on the last page, and send it to Daniel  Powell at the address listed above.
vi
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                            Exhibit 1

                      Matrix Showing the Various Technology/Contaminant/Media
                           Combinations Addressed within this Compendium
Solidification/Stabilization

-------

-------
Bioremediation

-------

-------
                                                                            Bioremediation
           Above-Ground  Biological Treatment of Trichloroethylene
                          Trichloroethylene (TCE) in Ground Water
Technology Description

In this treatment,  methane-degrading  bacteria
co-metabolize short-chain, chlorinated  aliphatic
hydrocarbons. This technology is applicable to
the  removal  of  short  chain  (C1 and  C2)
chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons  from water.
It can be used as an above-ground "pump and
treat" method of treating contaminated ground
water.  Other applications can include in situ
decontamination  or  the  removal  of similar
compounds from any water stream.

An  enzyme,  a  non-specific  oxygenase that
metabolizes methane,  attacks trichloroethylene
(TCE).  The bacteria cannot, however,  use TCE
as "food" but must have methane as a carbon
source.   The reaction  can take  place  in  a
bioreactor or in situ.  A mixture of  oxygen and
methane  is  passed through the  reactor or
reaction zone to sustain the microbial population.
The contaminated water is allowed  to percolate
down through the bed.  The packing  material
can be soil,  but  care must be taken  to  avoid
plugging.
Technology Performance

A  field  pilot  testing  of  this treatment was
conducted at Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma,
during  1989.    Approximately  80  percent
destruction of TCE was achieved.  Complete
biodegradation  may   be  achieved   with
lengthening of the reactor columns. Flow rate
for the contaminated water in this process is two
to three Lymin, with a retention time of 20 to 50
minutes in the  reactor,  depending upon the
packing  material  used.     No   hazardous
intermediate compounds are created with this
process.

Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.

Contacts

Captain Catherine M. Vogel
HQ AFESC/RDVW
Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403-6001
904/ 283-4628
Autovon 523-4628/2942
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                              Roof
                                      Concr«« pad (IS'Xayxa" thick)
2
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                              Bioremediation
                           Aerated Static Pile Composting
                      Explosives (TNT, RDX, HMX) in Lagoon Sediments
Technology Description

Composting is a  process  by which  organic
materials are biodegraded by microorganisms,
resulting in the  production  of  organic and
inorganic byproducts and energy in the form of
heat.  This heat is trapped within the compost
matrix, leading to the self-heating phenomenon
known as composting.  Composting is initiated
by   mixing  biodegradable  organic  matter
(explosives in this  study), with organic carbon
sources and bulking agents, which are added to
enhance the  porosity  of the mixture to be
composted.

In "static pile" composting,  an  aeration/heat
removal system is utilized to  increase process
control  over the  composting system.   The
aeration/heat removal system typically takes the
form of a network of perforated pipe underlying
the compost pile.   The pipe is  attached to  a
mechanical blower and air is periodically  drawn
or forced through the compost to effect aeration
and heat removal.

The composting test facilities were constructed
of  concrete  test  pads with runoff collection
systems and sumps,  covered  by a roof to
protect the compost piles from weather and to
minimize the amount of moisture collected in the
sump.   Bulking  agents and carbon sources
consisted of horse manure, alfalfa, straw, fertilizer
and  horse feed.   Baled straw was  used to
contain the pile contents, and was arranged in a
 ring around the perimeter of each pile.  Sawdust
 and hardwood mulch were used to construct the
 pile bases, provide additional bulking material,
 and insulate the piles. After mixing, the compost
 was transported to the composting pads. Each
 compost  pile  contained  a  system  of pipes
 connected to a blower, as described above.  A
 cross-sectional schematic diagram of a compost
 pile is provided.
Technology Performance

The  primary objective of  this  study  was  to
evaluate  the  utility   of  aerated  static  pile
composting as a technology for remediating soils
and sediments contaminated with the explosives
TNT, HMX, RDX, and tetryl.

Secondary  objectives  included  evaluating the
efficacy of thermophilic (55°C) versus mesophilic
(35°C) composting, evaluating different materials
handling and process control strategies, and
determining  transformation   products  when
Standard Analytical Reference Materials (SARMs)
were available.

Temperature was the  primary  test  variable
investigated. The  temperature  of  one set  of
compost piles was kept within  the mesophilic
range; the temperature of the second set of piles
was kept in the thermophilic range.  The initial
concentration of  explosives  in test sediments
collected from the lagoon was  17,000 mg/kg.
Phase I,(piles 1  and 2) was conducted with a
mixture of  lagoon sediments, sawdust,  wood
chips, and  a straw/manure mixture.  Based  on
data received from phase I, phase II (piles 3 and
4) added alfalfa and horse feed to the compost
mixture  to  increase  the  concentration  of
biodegradable organic carbon in  the compost
mixture.   After 153 days  of composting,  the
sblvent-extractable total explosives were reduced
to 376 mg/kg and 74 mg/kg  in the mesophilic
and thermophilic  piles, respectively. The mean
percent reductions of extractable TNT, RDX and
HMX were 99.6, 94.8, and 86.9 weight percent in
the mesophilic piles, and 99.9,  99.1,  and 95.6
weight percent in the thermophilic piles.

The results of this field demonstration indicate
that composting is a feasible  technology  for
decontaminating  explosives-contaminated soils
and   sediments.    Further  investigation   is
warranted for optimizing the materials balance
 and  soil  loading  rate  for  mixtures to  be
 composted, minimizing bulking agent used, and
 developing  a design and operation management
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtabie

-------
 plan  for a  full-scale  composting facility.   In
 addition,  the  compost  residue should  be
 subjected to a toxicity evaluation and more
 extensively analyzed to determine the final fates
 of HMX, RDX, TNT, and tetryl.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


General Site Information

This  field-scale  demonstration  project  was
conducted at the Louisiana Army Ammunitions
Plant  (LAAP). Compost piles were constructed
and tested at LAAP between December 1987
and April 1988.  Phase I piles were tested for 33
days; phase II piles were tested for 153 days.
Approximately 21 cubic yards of sediment was
excavated from Pink Water Lagoon No. 4 for use
in this study,

LAAP was built to load and pack  ordinance for
the U.S.  Army.   Explosives have never been
manufactured at the facility, but are brought in
and utilized in loading, assembling, and packing
lines.    Initially,  the.  area  where  the  field
demonstration was conducted was used as a
burning  grounds  to   dispose   of   out-of-
specification ordnance. These burning pits were
converted to  lagoons in the mid-1940s.  The
lagoons were used to dispose of wastewater
 generated during wash down of the munitions
 loading lines. Equipment used to load munitions
 was  washed  with  water,  and the  resulting
 wastewater  contained high  concentrations of
 suspended explosives ("pink water"). Pink water
 was transported to the unlined lagoons and
 dumped into individual lagoons via a concrete
 spillway. Suspended explosives settled to the
 bottom of the  lagoons.   Over the period of
 approximately 30 years during which pink water
 was  disposed  of  in   the  lagoons,   high
 concentrations of explosives accumulated in the
 upper sediment.  The  highest  concentrations
 (300,000-600,000 mg/kg) accumulated near the
 spillways.  In October 1984,  the  pink  water
 lagoon site at LAPP was proposed for inclusion
 on the National  Priority List (NPL).
Contacts

USATHAMA - Aberdeen Proving Grounds:
Gregory B. Mohrman - CETHA-TS-D
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5401
301/671-2054
Technology Developer Contacts:
Richard T. Williams - Section Manager
P. Scott Ziegenfuss - Project Scientist
Peter J. Marks - Project Manager   i
Roy F.  Weston, Inc.
One Weston Way
West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380
                       Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                     Roof
                                                Wood chip
                                                cover and
                                                   base
          Concrete pad (18'X30'X8" thick)
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                               Bioremediation
                            Aerated Static Pile  Composting
                        Propellants (Nitrocellulose) in Soil and Sediments
 Technology Description

 Composting is  a process  by which  organic
 materials are biodegraded by microorganisms,
 resulting  in the production  of  organic  and
 inorganic byproducts and energy in the form of
 heat.  This  heat is trapped within the compost
 matrix, leading to the self-heating phenomenon
 known as composting.  Composting is initiated
 by  mixing  biodegradable   organic   matter
 (nitrocellulose (NC) in this study), with organic
 carbon sources  and bulking agents, which are
 added to enhance the porosity of the mixture to
 be composted.

 In  "static pile"  composting,  an aeration/heat
 removal system  is utilized to increase process
 control over the  composting  system.   The
 aeration/heat removal system typically takes the
 form of a network of perforated pipe underlying
 the compost pile.   The pipe is attached to a
 mechanical  blower and air is periodically drawn
 or forced through the compost to effect aeration
 and heat removal.   The  primary objective  of
 hazardous materials composting is to convert
 hazardous substances into innocuous products
 for ultimate disposal, such as land application.

 The composting  test facilities were constructed
 of concrete test pads  with runoff collection
 systems  and  sumps, covered by a roof  to
 protect the compost piles from weather and to
 minimize the amount of moisture collected in the
 sump.   Bulking  agents and carbon sources
 consisted of a cow manure slurry, alfalfa,  straw,
 and horse feed.  Baled  straw was used  to
 contain the pile contents, and was arranged in a
 ring around the perimeter of each pile.  Sawdust
 and hardwood mulch were used to construct the
 pile bases, provide additional bulking material,
 and insulate the piles. After mixing, the compost
 was transported to the composting pads.  Each
 compost pile contained a system of perforated
 and non-perforated pipes connected to a blower.
The blowers were used to pull air through the
 compost piles to promote aeration and remove
 excess  heat.   A cross-sectional schematic
 diagram of a compost pile is provided.


 Technology Performance

 The  primary  objective  of  this study  was to
 evaluate  the  utility  of  aerated  static  pile
 composting as a technology for NC fine (out-of
 specification NC) remediation and destruction of
 soils  contaminated  with  NC.    Secondary
 objectives  included evaluating the efficacy of
 thermophilic (55°C) versus mesophilic  (35°C)
 composting, determining a maximum soil loading
 rate,  and comparing  different process control
 and material handling strategies.

 The test variable  in  compost piles  1  and  2
 (phase I) was temperature.  The temperature of
 pile 1 was kept within the mesophilic range, and
 the  temperature of pile 2  was  kept  in the
 thermophilic range. The concentration of NC in
 test soils collected from the dredge basin were
 18,800 mg/kg for phase I tests.  After mixing,
 total NC concentrations in pile 1  were 3,670
 mg/kg, and concentrations in pile 2 were 3,608
 mg/kg. After 152 days of the study, mean total
 NC  concentrations were 651  mg/kg  and 54
 mg/kg, respectively. Information concerning the
 effect of temperature on the NC concentration
 was inconclusive, however, because there were
 apparent discrepancies in the starting data
 gathered for pile 1.

 The test variable in piles 3 and 4 (phase II) was
 the degree  of soil loading within each pile. The
 initial soil loading was increased from 19 percent
 in phase I  to  22 percent  in pile 3, and 32.5
 percent in pile 4.  The concentration  of NC in
 tests soils  collected for phase II  was  17,027
 mg/kg. After mixing, the concentrations of NC in
 pile 3 were 7,907 mg/kg, and. 13,086 mg/kg in
 pile 4.  After 112 days of the study, total mean
 concentrations of NC  were 30 mg/kg  and 16
 mg/kg, respectively. Both piles showed greater
than 99.5 percent  reduction of NC from  the
starting point of the test.  These results suggest
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
that successful composting will likely occur at
sediment loading rates of up to 50 percent or
exceeding 50 weight percent.

The results of this field demonstration indicate
that  composting  is  a feasible technology for
reducing the extractable NC  concentration in
contaminated  soils.   In addition, this  study
provides tentative evidence indicating that NC
can  be  degraded when incorporated into a
mixture  to   be  composted   at   a   high
concentration. The fate of the NC could not be
determined; however,  microbial degradation of
the likely process.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


General Site Information

This  field-scale  demonstration  project  was
conducted at the Badger Army Ammunitions
Plant (BAAP) in Sauk County, Wisconsin.  Four
compost piles were constructed at BAAP during
the period from April 1988 to January 1989. The
first set of compost piles was tested for 151
days; the second set was tested for 112 days.
Approximately 13 cubic yards of test soils were
excavated from Dredge Spoil Basin No. 1 for use
in this study.
Constructed  in  1942,  the  plant  operated
intermittently over a 33-year period, producing
single- and double-base propellants for rocket,
cannon, and small arms ammunition. During the
plant's  period  of  active  operation,  various
chemical materials  were produced,  and  the
associated   wastes  and   manufacturing
byproducts were disposed on-site. The wastes
included acids, nitroglycerin, and nitrocellulose
(NC).  As a  result  of  the disposal  practices,
contamination of soils,  the  underlying aquifer,
and,  to  some  extent,  surface  waters  have
occurred.
Contacts

USATHAMA - Aberdeen Proving Grounds:
Wayne Sisk - CETHA-TS-D
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5401
301/671-2054

Technology Developer Contacts:
Richard T. Williams - Section Manager
P. Scott Ziegenfuss - Project Scientist
Peter J. Marks - Project Manager
Roy F. Weston, Inc.  ,
One Weston Way
West  Chester, Pennsylvania 19380
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                               Bioremediation
                         Biodecontamination of Fuel Oil Spills
                                        Fuel Oil in Soil
 Technology Description

 In  this  treatment,   biodegradation   is
 accomplished by applying special oil-degrading
 bacteria to a bioreactor while filling the reactor
 with leachate water.  As the reactor overflows,
 bacteria are  carried to a spray field sump and
 then  to injection wells  and  the  spray field.
 Surface sprayers apply the treated leachate
 water on the spray field while the injection wells
 apply the treated leachate water to soil under the
 buildings.  As more water is added to the system
 and the  ground  under the  buildings,  the
 contaminated area becomes saturated. Run-off
 water along with leachate water is collected in a
 trench down-slope from the contaminated area.
 The collected water  is pumped back to the
 aerated reactor where bacterial growth on the
 high surface  area matrix, on which  some of the
 bacteria  are immobilized,  occurs.    Clean
 nutrient-, detergent-, and oxygen-enriched water
 with bacteria is recirculated to the spray field
 and injection wells.
Technology Performance

The   microorganisms  function   best
temperatures between 20° and 35° C.
                 at
                          Remediation Costs

                          The site was cleaned to a satisfactory level for
                          approximately $37,000, not including shipping
                          the equipment  to the site, installation  labor
                          supplied  by facility personnel,  and analytical
                          costs.
                          General Site Information

                          This method was implemented to clean up a fuel
                          oil spill resulting from leaking pipes at a  Naval
                          Communication Station atThurso, Scotland. The
                          contaminated area had a considerable slope,
                          and the contaminated soil was a thin layer over
                          a relatively impermeable rock substrate.  In this
                          case,  oil was  entrapped  in the soil  matrix
                          beneath boiler and  power buildings,  an area
                          approximately 800 m .  The project lasted from
                          February to October 1985.
Contact

Deh Bin Chan, Ph.D.
Environmental Protection Division, Code L71
Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory
Port Hueneme, California 93043-5003
805/982-4191
Autovon 551-4191
8
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
       NUTRIENTS
                                  LEACHATE COLLECITON PUMP—*-[l

                         BIOREACTOR                             I
DETERGENT
SPRAY FIELD PUMF
INJECTION
WELLS
                                                 LEACHATE
                              SPRAY FIELD SYSTEM  COLLECTION
                                                 TRENCH
             Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                               Bioremediation
                                      Biodegradation
                                 TCE in Soil and Ground Water
 Technology Description

 This biodegradation process has two phases: (1)
 use of pump and treat bioreactors to degrade
 trichloroethylene (TCE) and polychloroethylene
 (PCE) in ground water and (2) use of vegetation
 to encourage a rhizosphere that  can degrade
 TCE and PCE in surface soil.  The first phase
 has three parts:  isolating microbes from TCE-
 contaminated soil that are capable of degrading
 TCE  and  PCE  in  water;   optimizing the
 degradation  capabilities  of these microbe in
 laboratory bioreactors; and  building and testing
 a pilot-scale (10 gpm) bioreactor at C&P Burning
 Rubble Pits.

 One benefit from this task is  that large-scale
 bioreactors  can be used in various pump and
 treat scenarios of ground water to remove both
 TCE and other volatile and non-volatile organics.
 Another benefit from this task is that whenever
 organic chemicals  contaminate surface  soils,
 selective vegetation and cultivation techniques
 can be used to remediate the site in a very
 aesthetic and cost effective  manner.
Technology Performance

This process  was  recently tested at DOE's
Savannah River site. The results from the first
task were positive:

•     Bacteria was isolated from native soil that
      can aerobically degrade TCE;

•     Propane  or  methane was  found  to
      stimulate TCE degradation  more  than
      several other electron donors;

•     Fluidized expanded bed bioreactors, using
      propane or methane as a primary energy
      source, were 99 percent and 50 percent
      efficient in reducing TCE concentrations in
      water, respectively; and
                          •     Other wastes were also degraded when
                                mixed wastes were used in the reactor.

                          The  results from  the  second task were also
                          positive:

                          •     Vegetated  soil  was demonstrated to
                                oxidize TCE-contaminated soil faster than
                                unvegetated soil or sterilized soil at the
                                Miscellaneous Chemical Basin;

                          •     Vegetation analysis showed ho difference
                                with normal vegetation succession for the
                                area;

                          •     Four of the dominant plants at the test site
                                were compared  and  found  to  have
                                significantly different abilities to encourage
                                TCE degradation; and

                          •     Phospholipid fatty  acid  analysis  of the
                                rhizosphere  defined  the  physiological
                                state of rhizosphere microbes.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information

                          Biodegradation  technology  was : tested  at
                          Savannah River Site,  Miscellaneous Chemical
                          Basin, and C&P Burning Rubble Pits to remove
                          TCE from soil and ground water.


                          Contacts

                          Terry C. Hazen
                          Westinghouse Savannah River Company
                          Savannah River Laboratory
                          Environmental Sciences Section
                          Aiken, South Carolina 29802
10
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                              Bioremediation
                  Biodegradation of Lube Oil Contaminated Soils
                                       Motor Oil in Soil
Technology Description

This treatment process requires the addition of
inoculant and nutrients to the contaminated soils
during disking. (The nutrients in the pilot studies
have  consisted  of  sodium  acetate,  minerals
(potassium, magnesium, ammonium, phosphate,
and sulfate ions), and Tween 80, a surfactant.)
Afterward,  the site  is  covered with  plastic
sheeting.  The plastic sheeting must have holes
to allow the transport of air.

This  method  is  applicable for oil  spills  at
maintenance facilities, air strips, along roadways
and streets, and parking lots.  Although research
on the method has been directed to degradation
of used lubrication oil, it should be applicable to
almost  any  nonfunctionalized  aliphatic
hydrocarbon.
Technology Performance

A small-scale pilot test has been conducted at
the   U.S.  Army   Construction  Engineering
Laboratory in  Champaign,  Illinois.  Noticeable
reduction in contaminant concentrations were
evident  after four  to  six weeks.   Pilot plots
consisted  of  plastic  tubs  containing  eight
kilograms of contaminated soil placed outside
and  covered with  plastic.   Flask  tests were
conducted initially to identify optimum conditions.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

Jean Donnelly
U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research
Laboratory
P.O. Box 4005
Champaign, Illinois 61820
217/352-6511
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         11

-------

                                                                             Bioremediation
                       Biological Aqueous Treatment System
                   Organic Compounds in Ground Water and Process Water
Technology Description

The Biotro! Aqueous Treatment System (BATS)
is a patented biological treatment system that is
effective for treating ground water and process
water  contaminated  by  pentachlorophenol,
creosote components,  gasoline  and fuel  oil
components,   chlorinated   hydrocarbons,
phenolics, or solvents.   Other potential target
waste streams include coal tar residues and
organic pesticides.  The technology may also be
effective  for  treating   certain  inorganic
compounds such  as nitrates; however, this
application has not yet been demonstrated. The
system does not treat metals.

The BATS system uses an amended microbial
mixture, i.e., a microbial population indigenous to
the  wastewater   to   which   a   specific
microorganism has been added.  This system
removes the target  contaminants as well as the
naturally   occurring   background   organics.
Contaminated water enters a mix tank, where the
pH is  adjusted  and  inorganic  nutrients  are
added.  If necessary, the water is  heated to  an
optimum temperature, using a heat exchanger to
minimize energy costs. The water then flows to
the  reactor,  where the  contaminants  are
biodegraded.

The  microorganisms,   which   perform  the
degradation, are immobilized  in  a three-cell,
submerged, fixed-film bioreactor.  Each cell is
filled with  a highly  porous  packing material to
which  the microbes  adhere.    For  aerobic
conditions, air  is  supplied  by  fine  bubble
membrane diffusers mounted at the bottom of
each cell.  The  system may  also  run  under
anaerobic conditions.

As the water flows  through the bioreactor, the
contaminants are degraded to carbon dioxide,
water, and chloride ion.  The resulting effluent
may be  discharged  to  a publicly  owned
treatment works (POTW)  or may be reused on-
site. In some cases, discharge with a National
                         Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
                         permit may be possible.

                         Technology Performance

                         In 1986-87, Biotrol performed a successful nine-
                         month  pilot  field test  of  BATS  at a  wood
                         preserving facility.  Since that time, several other
                         demonstrations  and  commercial  installations
                         have been completed. In 1989, EPA conducted
                         a SITE demonstration of the BATS technology at
                         the MacGillis and Gibbs Superfund site in New
                         Brighton,  Minnesota, in which the system was
                         operated  continuously for six weeks at three
                         different  flow   rates.     Results   from  the
                         demonstration showed that PCP was reduced to
                         less than one ppm at all flow rates.  Removal
                         percentage was as high as  97  percent  at  the
                         lowest flow rate.  EPA released the Technology
                         Evaluation Report in December 1990.

                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.

                         General Site Information

                         The SITE demonstration of the BATS technology
                         took place from July 24 to September 1,1989 at
                         the MacGillis and Gibbs Superfund site in New
                         Brighton, Minnesota.

                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Mary K. Stinson
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         Woodbridge Avenue
                         Edison, New Jersey 08837
                         908/321-6683
                         FTS:  340-6683

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         John K. Sheldon
                         BioTrol, Inc.
                         11 Peavey Road
                         Chaska, Minnesota 55318
                         612/448-2515
12
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                             Bioremediation
                        Bioremediation / Vacuum Extraction
                                   Petroleum Fuels in Soil
Technology Description

The bioremediation/vacuum extraction process
decontaminates  soils  that   have   been
contaminated  with  fuels  by  removing the
contaminated soil and stockpiling it for treatment.
This  technology  can  be   applied  to  soils
contaminated with diesel, JP5, or other fuels that
have leaked from underground storage tanks.

In order to decontaminate the stockpiled soil, it
is processed through a screen to eliminate rocks
greater  than four inches in diameter.   The
screened  soil is transported to  a site that is
protected by a 40-millileter liner with eight inches
of sand base. Three feet of contaminated  soil is
spread along the base of  the prepared pile and
then a series of vacuum extraction  pipes are
trenched  in  the  soil  and  connected to the
Vacuum Extraction System (VES) blower.  The
VES  blower provides  movement  of oxygen
through the  pile. The remaining soil is piled into
a trapezoid  shape about  15 feet high, 200 feet
long, and  60 feet wide.  Fertilizer is added, and
an irrigation system is installed.  Computer-
controlled sensors are placed within the pile to
monitortemperature, pressure, and soil moisture.
Technology Performance

The field pilot test conducted in  Bridgeport,
California, showed two results:
      After  approximately  two   months  of
      operation, the average concentration of
      total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) is 120
      ppm; and

      The Navy declared the tested site was
      "clean"  in  a  report  prepared  for  the
      California Regional Water Quality Control
      Board.
Remediation Costs

Remediation   costs   are   estimated  at
approximately  $80  per ton  of soil  at the
Bridgeport, California, pilot project.
General Site Information

A field pilot test was conducted at Bridgeport,
California  in  fiscal  year  1989.    Full-scale
implementation at the 29 Palms, California, MC
Air Ground Combat Center is anticipated.
Contacts

Denise Barnes
NCEL Code L71
Port Hueneme, California 93043
805/982-1651
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        13

-------
            \
             u
                                                                             Bioremediation
              Biotreatment Enhanced with Pact®/Wet Air Oxidation
                             Organic Contaminants in Wastewater
Technology Description

 This technology is applicable to municipal and
industrial wastewaters, as well as ground water
and leaehates  containing  hazardous organic
pollutants. This treatment system combines two
technologies: the PACT® treatment system and
wet air oxidation  (WAO). The PACT® system
uses   powdered   activated  carbon   (PAC)
combined with conventional biological treatment
(e.g., an activated sludge system) to treat liquid
waste containing  toxic organic  contaminants.
The WAO technology can regenerate the PAC
for reuse in the PACT® system.  The system is
mobile and  can  treat from 2,500 to 10,000
gallons of wastewater per day. Larger stationary
systems,  treating  up to 53  million gallons per
day, are  already in operation.   In the PACT®
system,  organic  contaminants  are removed
through biodegradation and adsorption.  Living
microorganisms  (biomass)  in   the  activated
sludge   system  are  contained   in  liquid
suspension in an aerated basin.  This biomass
removes  biodegradable  toxic  organic
compounds from the liquid waste. PAC is added
to  enhance this  biological   treatment   by
adsorbing toxic  organic compounds.

The degree of treatment achieved by the PACT®
system   depends  on  the  influent  waste
characteristics  and the system's  operating
parameters.   Important  waste  characteristics
include   biodegradability,  absorbability,  and
concentrations of toxic organic compounds and
inorganic compounds,  such  as heavy metals.

Major operating  parameters  include  carbon
dose, hydraulic retention time of the aeration
basin, solids retention time of  the biomass-
carbon mixture, and biomass concentration in
the system.  Liquid wastes fed into the PACT®
system should have sufficient nutrients (nitrogen
and  phosphorous)   and  biodegradable
compounds  to  support  the growth of active
biomass in the aeration basin. The temperature
of the waste should be in the range of 40° F to
100° F, and the influent pH should  be in the
                         range of six to nine. Solids retention times affect
                         both the  concentration and type of biomass in
                         the system; these vary from two days to 50 days.
                         Hydraulic retention times affect the degree of
                         biodegradation  achieved and typically range
                         from two hours to 24 hours for relatively dilute
                         wastes, such as contaminated ground water,
                         and up to several days for concentrated wastes
                         and leachate.   Carbon doses  vary  widely,
                         depending   on   the   biodegradability   and
                         adsorptive characteristics of the contaminants in
                         the waste. Higher PAC concentrations improve
                         the settleability of the PAC-biomass mixture and
                         reduce   air   stripping   of   volatile   organic
                         contaminants.

                         Excess solids  (PAC with adsorbed  organics,
                         biomass,   and  inert  solids)  are  removed
                         periodically  from   the  system  through  the
                         system's clarifier (settling tank) or thickener (see
                         Figure 1). These excess solids are routed to the
                         WAO system reactor to  regenerate the spent
                         PAC and destroy  organics  remaining  in  the
                         biomass.  Temperatures  and pressures in the
                         WAO system will be about        •
                         480° F  and 800 to 850 pounds per square inch,
                         respectively.  After treatment in the WAO system,
                         the regenerated PAC may be separated from the
                         ash formed from destruction of the biomass  and
                         returned to the aeration basin for reuse.
                         Technology Performance

                         The PACT® system has successfully treated a
                         variety  of  industrial  wastewaters,  including
                         chemical  plant  wastewaters,  dye production
                         wastewaters,   pharmaceutical   wastewaters,
                         refinery  wastewaters,  and  synthetic  fuels
                         wastewaters, in addition to contaminated ground
                         water and mixed industrial/municipal wastewater.
                         In general, the PACT® system can treat liquid
                         wastes containing wide ranges of biochemical
                         oxygen demand  (BOD), from 10 to 30,000 parts
                         per million (ppm), and chemical oxygen demand
                         (COD),  from 20 to 60,000 ppm.  Toxic volatile
                         organic compounds  can be treated up to the
14
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
 level where they interfere with biomass growth,
 about 1,000 ppm.   Treatability studies have
 shown that the PACT system  can reduce the
 organics in contaminated ground water from
 several hundred ppm to below detection limits
 (parts per billion range).
 Remediation Costs

 Cost information is not available.


 Contacts

 EPA Project Manager:
 John F. Martin
 U.S. EPA
! Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
 26 West Martin Luther King Drive
 Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
 513/569-7758
 FTS: 684-7758

 Technology Developer Contact:
 William M. Copa
 Zimpro/Passavant Inc.
 301 West Military Road
 Rothschild, Wisconsin 54474
 715/359-7211
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
15

-------
                                                                             Bioremediation
         Enhanced In Situ Biodegradation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons
                                  in the Vadose Zone
                         Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Unsaturated Soil
Technology Description

This enhanced in situ biodegradation process is
a modification of soil  venting technology and
treats  unsaturated  soils  contaminated  with
petroleum hydrocarbons.  This technology can
be applied to JP-4 fuels in the vadose zone.

Bioventing technology modifies the soil venting
process. Soil venting introduces large volumes
of air into the soil, providing oxygen needed to
enhance the biodegradation of hydrocarbon
contaminants.  Bioventing  uses soil  venting
coupled   with  nutrient  and   moisture
augmentation.

This technology has a number of benefits:

•    A large amount of volatile organics can be
     removed  from unsaturated soil  without
     destroying the remaining soil;

•    The contaminants are merely  transferred
     from one phase to  another and  the soil
     venting  off-gas  will   probably  require
     further treatment;

•    By  modifying  soil  venting  rates  in
     conjunction with supplying nutrients and
     moisture  to the subsurface, the in situ
     biodegradation of the fuel components will
     be enhanced; and

•    This  process  will   provide  complete
     destruction of a large portion of the in situ
     contaminants and minimize the amount of
     off  gas requiring additional  treatment.
     This technology, however, is  limited to
     treating soil in the unsaturated zone.
Technology Performance

The pilot-scale field test was successful:
                         •    Under optimum conditions, approximately
                              80  percent  hydrocarbon  removal  was
                              achieved;

                         •    Biodegradation removal rates ranged from
                              two to 20 mg/kg of soil per day.  The
                              stabilized value averaged five mg/kg of
                              soil per day; and

                         •    The   system  was not  operated  long
                              enough to determine the lower level of
                              treatment that could be achieved.

                         Remediation Costs

                         Remediation  costs   are  estimated   at
                         approximately $12-$15 per cubic yard of soil.
                         This estimate assumes no off-gas treatment will
                         be required.

                         General Site Information

                         A pilot-scale field test was conducted at  POL
                         Area B  at  Tyndall  Air Force Base,  Florida,
                         between July 1989 and August 1990. This field
                         study only involved four small treatment plots,
                         approximately twenty feet by six feet by five feet
                         deep. The site was previously used as a JP4 jet
                         fuel storage area.

                         Contacts
                                                               /

                         Dr. Rob Hinchee
                         Battelle Columbus
                         Columbus, Ohio
                         614/424-4698

                         Captain Catherine Vogel
                         Project Officer
                         HQ AFEC/RODW
                         Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403
                         904/283-6036
16
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
    ft  \
                                                                               Bioremediation
                       Geolock / Bio-Drain Treatment Platform
                             Biodegradable Contaminants in Soils
Technology Description

The Geolock/Bio-Drain treatment platform  is a
bioremediation system that is installed in the soil
or waste matrix. All types and concentrations of
biodegradable contaminants can be treated by
this system.   Through direct degradation or
cometabolism,  microorganisms  can  degrade
most organic substances. This technology can
be adapted to the soil characteristics of the area,
the concentration of contaminants, and geologic
formations.  The system  is composed of an in
situ tank, an  application system, and a bottom
water recovery system.

The tank,  an in situ structure, is composed of
high density polyethylene (HOPE), sometimes in
conjunction with a slurry wall.  An underlying
permeable waterbearing  zone  facilitates   the
creation of ingradient water flow conditions.  The
tank defines  the treatment area, minimizes in-
trusion  of  off-site  clean  water,  minimizes  the
potential for release of bacterial cultures to the
aquifer, and keeps  contaminant concentration at
levels that facilitate treatment.  The ingradient
conditions also facilitate reverse leaching or soil
washing.  The application  system, called  Bio-
Drain, is installed within the treatment area.  Bio-
Drain delivers bacterial cultures, nutrients,  and
oxygen or any other proprietary chemical to the
soil profile.   Bio-Drain acts to  aerate the soil
column and any standing water.  This creates an
aerobic environment in the air pore spaces of
the soil. The cost of installation is low, and Bio-
Drains  can  be   placed   in  very   dense
configurations.

Existing wells or new wells are used to create
the water recovery system for removal of con-
taminated soil washing water. By controlling the
water levels within  the tank, reverse leaching or
soil washing and  the volume of off-site clean
water entering the system can be controlled and
minimized. This minimizes the potential for off-
migration.  It also creates a condition such that
the direction of existing contaminants and bac-
terial degradation products is toward the surface.
Conventional biological treatment is limited by
the depth of soil aeration, the need for physical
stripping,   or  the  need   to  relocate  the
contaminated   media  to   an  aboveground
treatment  system.    The  Geolock/Bio-Drain
treatment platform surpasses these limitations as
well as reduces or eliminates the  health risks
associated with excavation and air releases from
other treatment, technologies. Extremely dense
clays   may  be  difficult  to  treat with  this
technology.   Rock shelves or boulders may
render installation impossible.
Technology Performance

EPA accepted this technology  into the SITE
Demonstration Program in August 1990.  EPA
began preparation of the Quality  Assurance
Project Plan and site selection.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7271
FTS:  684-7271

Technology Developer Contact:
Lynn D. Sherman
YWC Midwest and IET
6490 Premier Avenue, N.W.
North Canton, Ohio 44720
216/499-8181
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         17

-------
                                         Geolock
                                          E-XI Oxyien (H^K:J3 Otjita hS
18
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                              Bioremediation
                                 In Situ Biodegradation
            Fuels, Fuel Oils and Nonhalogenated Solvents in Soil and Ground Water
Technology Description

This in situ biodegradation process treats soil or
ground water contaminated with hydrocarbons
such  as  fuels,  fuel oils, and nonhalogenated
solvents.  This technology can be applied to fuel
spills, leaky storage tanks, and fire training pits.

Nutrients (especially nitrogen and phosphorus),
soil-conditioning  chemicals,  and  hydrogen
peroxide are introduced through infiltration wells,
ditches, or soil surface irrigation.  Pumping wells
remove excess  fluids  or contaminated ground
water.  Contaminated  water can be treated on
the surface or reinjected for treatment in the soil.
Monitoring wells  must be  placed  within and
surrounding  the site. Increased fluid throughput
might  be  accomplished  by  surface  spray
irrigation  techniques.  Stoichiometrically, three
pounds of oxygen delivered in the hydrogen
peroxide   is  required for  each  pound  of
hydrocarbon treated.  In practice, more oxygen
will be required  to satisfy other demands, such
as the oxidation of iron.
Technology Performance

Results from testing this technology at Kelly Air
Force Base, Texas, were negative:

•     Degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons
      was indicated;

•     Although   biodegradation  of  these
      compounds by indigenous bacteria had
      been demonstrated  in  laboratory scale
      microcosms under anaerobic and aerobic
      conditions respectively, this site was not
      ideal for this method;

•     Injection  wells  became  clogged from
      precipitation of calcium phosphate, which
      reduced their injection  capacity  by 90
      percent; and
      This test  showed that the  design  of
      hydraulic  delivery  systems  and  the
      compatibility of injection chemicals with
      soil minerals is as important to successful
      treatment as enhancement of bacteria.
Remediation Costs

Exclusive of site characterization, one estimate of
the cost range of this method is from $100 to
$200 per ton of contaminated soil.  Monitoring
could be expensive, depending upon the type of
contaminant. Site characterization must be done
to determine soil/chemical compatibility. Another
estimate is that  a nonresearch project would
cost between $230  and $300 per gallon  of
residual fuel in the soil.
General Site Information

A large-scale pilot field test was  conducted at
Kelly Air Force Base, Texas, from May 1985 to
February  1986.   A large-scale  pilot test is
planned for a tank farm at the Naval Air Station,
Patuxent River, Maryland.
Contacts

Captains Edward Heyse and Doug Downey
HQ AFESC/RDV
Tyndali AFB, Florida 32403
904/283-2942
Autovon 523-2942

Ron Hoeppel
NCEL
Environmental Protection Division
Port Hueneme, California 93043
805/982-1655
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        19

-------
                                                                               Bioremediation
                                 In Situ Biodegradation
                                  Organic Compounds in Soil
Technology Description

This in situ biodegradation process  reclaims
contaminated soil in-place.  It can be applied to
organic compounds released from fuel spills,
leaky storage tanks, fire training pits, and other
contaminant sources.

In situ biodegradation involves the enhancement
of  environmental  conditions  that   facilitate
biodegradation of  organic contaminants by
native or exotic soil or sediment microorganisms.
Aerobic  degradation   is  normally  the most
efficient means by which microorganisms break
down organic contaminants. Direct exposure to
the atmosphere is one means to provide aerobic
conditions  for in situ  biodegradation.   For
flooded or poorly drained soils or subsurface
soils, it may not always be possible to provide
direct exposure to atmospheric oxygen without
improving drainage.  In such situations,  in  situ
biodegradation can  be enhanced by providing
alternate electron acceptors, such as nitrate or
hydrogen  peroxide, to  the  system.   The
efficiency of in situ biodegradation enhancement
procedures can be tested in laboratory reactors
before scale-up for  field  application is carried
out.

Nutrients (especially nitrogen and phosphorus),
soil-conditioning   chemicals,  and  hydrogen
peroxide can be introduced through infiltration
wells, ditches,  or soil surface irrigation.  Another
source  of oxygen for  aerobic biodegradation
may be fresh air introduced during the process
of soil venting for remediation of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from the soil.   Pumping
wells remove  excess  fluids or  contaminated
ground water.  Contaminated  water  can be
treated on the surface or reinjected for treatment
In the  soil.  Monitoring wells must be placed
within   and surrounding  the  site.     Water
requirements  can be  met by  surface  spray
irrigation techniques. Although every pound of
hydrocarbon  contaminant  requires  about 10
pounds  of  molecular  oxygen  for complete
degradation, in practice,  more oxygen will be
                          required  to  satisfy  other demands,  such as
                          oxidation of iron.

                          This technology has numerous advantages:

                          •     Excavation is not required;

                          •     Resulting products are not toxic;

                          •     Contaminant concentrations are reported
                                to have been reduced by bacteria to less
                                than one ppm; and

                          •     Theoretically,   in   situ  treatment  of
                                contaminated  soil  can be accomplished
                                faster than the long-term flushing required
                                for surface-based water treatment.

                          In  situ  biodegradation,   however,   also  has
                          limitations:

                          •     High   calcium,  magnesium,   or   iron
                                concentrations in the  soils and plugging
                                and loss of soil  permeability  limit the
                                effectiveness of the method;

                          •     The method currently is limited primariiy to
                                sandy   soils   having   a   hydraulic
                                conductivity of at least 0.0001  cm/sec;

                          •     Some  mobilization of  heavy metals can
                                occur;

                          •     Applicability is site-specific;

                          •     Considerable oxygen is required; and

                          •     Daily maintenance  might be necessary if
                                hydrogen peroxide is in the  lines  and
                                pumps and if special metals are not used.
20
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Technology Performance

Results from preliminary full-scale testing at Eglin
Air Force Base, Florida, were negative:

•     After 15 months of operation at this site, it
      was  concluded that  using   hydrogen
      peroxide  as  an  oxygen  source  for
      biodegradation has limitations which could
      restrict  its  successful  application  to
      relatively few Air Force sites.

Results from a large-scale pilot field test at Kelly
Air Force Base, Texas, were mixed:

•     Degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons
      was indicated;

•     The site was not ideal for this method;

•     Injection wells became  clogged  from
      precipitation of calcium phosphate, which
      reduced their injection  capacity by  90
      percent; and

•     Design of hydraulic delivery systems and
      compatibility of injection chemicals with
      soil minerals is as important to successful
      treatment as enhancement of bacteria.
Remediation Costs

The cost  varies  depending  on  site-specific
conditions.  Exclusive of site  characterization,
one estimate of the cost range for this method is
from $100 to $200 per ton of contaminated soil.
Monitoring could be expensive, depending upon
the type of contaminant.  Site characterization
must  be  done  to  determine  soil/chemical
compatibility.    Another  estimate  is  that  a
nonresearch project would cost between $230
and $300 per gallon of residual fuel in the soil.
General Site Information

This method was implemented at Eglin Air Force
Base, Florida, starting in November 1986.  Full-
scale implementation began in early summer of
1987.  In addition, a large-scale pilot field test
was conducted at Kelly Air Force Base, Texas,
from  May   1985 to  February  1986.   The
Waterways  Experiment Station  (WES) currently
is assisting the  US  Navy  in evaluation  of
anaerobic in situ biodegradation for cleanup of
a gasoline  spill from  an underground  tank
located in a wetland area.
Contacts

Ron Hoeppel
NCEL, Code L71
Port Hueneme, California 93043
805/982-1651

Captain Ed Marchand
HQ AFESC/RDVW
Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403-6001
DSN 523-6023
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         21

-------
                                                                              Bioremediation
                              In Situ Biological Treatment
                   Organic Constituents in Soil, Sediment, Sludge, and Water
Technology Description

Biological processes can be applied to water,
soil, sludge, sediment,  and  other  types of
materials   contaminated   with   organic
constituents.  This bioremediation technology is
designed to biodegrade  chlorinated  and  non-
chlorinated organic contaminants by employing
aerobic bacteria that use the contaminants as
their carbon source. This proposed technology
has two configurations:  in situ biotreatment of
soil and water; and on-site bioreactor treatment
of contaminated ground water.

A primary advantage of in situ bioremediation is
that contaminants  in  subsurface  soils   and
ground water can be treated without excavating
overlying soil.  This technology uses  special
strains  of  cultured  bacteria  and  naturally
occurring  microorganisms in on-site  soils  and
ground water. Because the treatment process is
aerobic, oxygen and soluble forms  of  mineral
nutrients must  be introduced  throughout the
saturated zone.  The end products of the aerobic
biodegradation  are carbon dioxide, water,  and
bacterial biomass.    (This  system  must  be
engineered to maintain parameters such as pH,
temperature,  and  dissolved   oxygen  (if  the
process is aerobic), within ranges conducive to
the desired microbial activity.)

Contaminated   ground  water  can  also   be
recovered  and  treated  in  an  aboveground
bioreactor. Nutrients and oxygen can then be
added to some or all of the treated water,  and
the water can be recycled through the soils as
part of the in situ soil treatment.

Because site-specific  environments  influence
biological treatment, all chemical, physical,  and
microbiological  factors are  designed into the
treatment system. Subsurface soil and ground-
water samples collected from a site are analyzed
for baseline  parameters,  such  as  volatile
organics, metals, pH, total organic carbon, types
and quantities of microorganisms, and nutrients.
A  treatability study, which  includes flask  and
                          column  studies, determines  the  effects of
                          process parameters on  system performance.
                          The flask  studies test biodegradation  under
                          optimum conditions, and the column studies test
                          the three field applications:   (1) soil flushing;
                          (2) in  situ   biotreatment,  and   (3)  in  situ
                          biotreatment using  ground water treated  in a
                          bioreactor.
                          Technology Performance

                          The planned demonstration of this technology on
                          a wide range of toxic organic compounds was
                          canceled  after the  completion  of  treatability
                          studies in  April 1990.   EPA  released the
                          treatability  study  report in  January  1991.
                          Although the demonstration was canceled at the
                          first site, the technology may be demonstrated at
                          another hazardous waste site in the future.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Naomi P. Barkley
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                          513/569-7854
                          FTS:  684-7854

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Michael Nelson
                          Ecova Corporation
                          3820 159th Avenue Northeast
                          Redmond, Washington  98052
                          206/883-1900
22
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
           Microbes, nutrients
            oxygen source
Biological
Treatment
Makeup
 water
                        Clarlfler
                                           Bloreactor
           Recharge
                                                       Recovery
           Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                                 23

-------
              C3
                                                                               Bioremediation
                            In Situ Bioremediation Process
                                    Volatile Organics in Soil
Technology Description

This in situ bioremediation process increases the
quality and acceleration of biodegradation  in
contaminated soils.  Different contaminants may
have different degrees of  success.    High
concentrations   of  heavy   metals,   non-
biodegradabletoxicorganics, alkaline conditions,
or  acid  conditions  could  interfere  with the
degradation process.  Although volatiles may
volatilize during remediation, volatilization has
been minimized by adding  a hood around the
auger assembly and treating  the  captured
gases.   The  Dual  Auger  System was also
developed for  the  treatment  of  inorganic
contaminated  soils, by injecting  reagent slurry
into the  soil  to solidify/stabilize contaminated
waste.

This  in  situ  bioremediation  process uses  a
specialized equipment system to inject site-
specific microorganism mixtures,  along with the
required nutrients, and homogeneously mix them
into the contaminated soils.  The injection and
mixing process effectively breaks down fluid and
soil strata barriers,  and eliminates pockets of
contaminated soil that would  otherwise remain
untreated.

The process  uses  a twin,  five-foot  diameter
auger system powered and  moved  by  a
standard  backhoe.   The   auger drills into
contaminated soil with hollow shafts, allowing the
microorganism and  nutrient  mixture  to pass.
The  allocation  of  the  microorganisms and
nutrients occurs during the  initial auger action.
The auger flights break the  soil loose, allowing
mixing   blades   to   thoroughly  blend  the
microorganism and nutrient mixture with the soil.
This occurs in an overlapping manner to ensure
the complete treatment of all contaminated soil.
The mixing action is continued as the augers are
withdrawn. Treatment depth can exceed 100
feet. Water, nutrients, and bacteria are added to
the contaminant area as needed.
                          Technology Performance

                          EPA accepted this  technology  into the SITE
                          Program in June 1990 and is currently locating
                          a site to demonstrate this project.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is  not available.

                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Edward J. Opatken
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7855
                          FTS: 684-7855

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Richard P. Murray
                          In Situ Fixation Company
                          P.O. Box 516
                          Chandler, Arizona 85244-0516
                          602/821-0409
24
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                              Biodegradation
                            Liquid/Solid Contact Digestion
                             Organic Materials in Soil and Sludge
Technology Description

Remediation Technologies (formerly Motec, Inc.)
has developed a liquid-solid contact digestion
(LSCD)  process  which  biodegrades liquids,
sludges,  and   soils  with   high   organic
concentrations. Specifically, this technology can
treat halogenated and nonhalogenated organic
compounds,  including some  pesticides and
herbicides.  In this process, organic materials
and  water  are  placed   in  a  high energy
environment,   in   which   acclimated
microorganisms   biodegrade   the   organic
constituents.

The  system consists  of two or three portable
tank digesters or lagoons: (1) a primary contact
or mixing tank; (2) a primary digestion tank; and
(3) a polishing tank.  Treatment may take ten
days or more,  depending  on the type and
concentration of  the  contaminants and  the
temperature in the tanks.

In the primary contact tank, water is mixed with
influent sludge or soil. The mixing  process is
designed  to achieve a 20 to 25  percent solids
concentration. Water is obtained either from the
contaminated source  or a fresh water source.
Emulsifying  chemicals may be added and pH is
adjusted to increase the solubility of the organic
phase.  After water is  added, the batch mixture
is transferred to  the  primary digestion tank,
where acclimated seed bacteria are added and
aerobic biological oxidation is initiated. Most of
the biological oxidation occurs during this phase.
reached, the supernatant from the polishing tank
is  recycled to the primary contact tank and
biological sludge is treated in prepared bed solid
phase bioreactors.
Technology Performance

This technology has not been demonstrated to
date. The developer is seeking private party co-
funding for a three- to four-month demonstration
on petroleum or coal tar-derived wastes.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.

Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7856
FTS:  684-7856

Technology Developer Contact:
Randy Kabrick
Remediation Technologies, Inc.
1301 West 25th Street, Suite 406
Austin, Texas 78759
512/477-8661
 When the biodegradation  reactions decrease
 significantly, the batch mixture is transferred to
 the polishing tank for final treatment. Once the
 pH has been readjusted in the polishing cell, co-
 metabolites and nutrients are added to maintain
 and  enhance  the  biomass.   In  this phase,
 organic constituents are degraded to  target
 concentration levels. Because the  system  runs
 on a negative water balance, water is added
 throughout the process.  Once target levels are
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         25

-------
                                                                               Bioremediation
                       Submerged Aerobic Fixed-Film  Reactor
                                Biodegradable Materials in Liquid
 Technology Description

 This  biological  treatment  system  relies  on
 aerobic  microbial processes  to  metabolize
 contaminants present in a liquid waste stream.
 This system can treat liquid waste containing low
 concentrations (less than 20 ppm)  of  readily
 biodegradablematerialsandyield concentrations
 in the low parts per billion (ppb) range.

 This technology is typically used to treat ground
 water and industrial process waters, but is also
 applicable to contaminated lagoon and/or pond
 waters. The water to be treated must fall within
 a pH of 6.5 to 8.5, a temperature of 60-90°F, and
 be free of toxic and/or inhibitory metals. Readily
 biodegradable compounds, such as methyl ethyl
 ketone and benzene can be treated, along with
 some organic chemicals that are initially more
 resistant  to   biodegradation,   such   as
 chlorobenzene.  Halogenated compounds are
 not  readily biodegraded and cannot be treated
 by this system.

 This system consists of an above-ground fixed-
 film  reactor, supplemental  nutrient storage tank
 and pump, cartridge filter, and final activated-
 carbon filter.  High surface area plastic media is
 used to fill the reactor and  the water level within
 the  reactor is set to cover the plastic media.
 Bacterial  growth  is attached as film to the
 surface of the plastic media.

 The  bioreactor is operated  on  a one-pass,
 continuous-flow basis at hydraulic retention times
 as low as one hour. The process  begins when
 contaminated water from a well or equalization
 tank is pumped into the bioreactor. The influent
 waste stream is   evenly  dispersed over the
 reactor packing by a header-distribution system.
 As the waste stream passes through the reactor,
 the biofilm removes the biodegradable organics.
 An  air  distribution system below the plastic
 media supplies oxygen  to the bacteria in the
 form of fine bubbles.  An effluent water header
system collects water from the reactor after is
 has  been treated.  Water exiting the reactor is
                           first passed through a cartridge filter, to remove
                           any  excess   biological  solids,  followed  by
                           activated  carbon treatment,  to further remove
                           any remaining organic compounds.  Depending
                           upon the effluent water discharge criteria, the
                           cartridge and carbon filters may not be needed.
                          Technology Performance

                          The demonstration for this treatment system is
                          expected to start in the spring or summer of
                          1991.

                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.   \


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Ronald Lewis                    :
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive   i
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7856
                          FTS: 684-7856

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          David Allen
                          Allied Signal Corporation
                          P.O. Box 1087R
                          Morristown, New York 07962
                          201/455-5595
26
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                             Bioremediation
                                  TNT Slurry Reactor
                             Explosives (TNT, RDX, HMX) in Soil
Technology Description

In this treatment, a slurry of TNT-contaminated
soils and water are bio-treated in a thoroughly
mixed environment. Loss transfer effects, as well
as biological conditions are controlled via mixing
rate, oxygen, and  nutrient  addition.   Reactor
designs being considered include a knife blade
slurry reactor and  rotary  sequencing  batch
reactors (SBRs). Work includes culture microbe
studies of TNT degraded using C14 tracers. This
treatment may be applied to soils contaminated
with TNT, RDX, HMX, and other potential wastes
associated with explosives.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

Captain Craig Myler
USATHAMA
CETHA-TS-D
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010
(301) 671-2054
Technology Performance

A bench-scale study has been performed.  A
demonstration  and  feasibility   study   was
scheduled  at Argonne National Laboratory  in
fiscal year (FY) 1990.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        27

-------
                                                                             Bioremediation
            U1/U2 Ground-Water Biological Treatment Demonstration
                    Nitrates and Organics in Ground Water and Wastewater
 Treatment Description

 This biological treatment system simultaneously
 removes  nitrates   and  organics   from
 contaminated   aqueous   streams.    This
 technology can be applied to ground water and
 wastewater.

 Biodenitrification  is   a technology  for the
 simultaneous removal of nitrates  and organics
 from  contaminated  aqueous  streams.   At
 Hanford,  the  U1/U2 Groundwater  Biological
 Treatment Project will demonstrate a biological
 process for simultaneous destruction of nitrates
 and specific organic contaminants in Hanford
 ground waters.

 The treatment process uses facultative anaerobic
 microorganisms isolated from the Hanford Site
 that have been shown to degrade both nitrates
 and carbon tetrachloride. These  contaminants
 have been identified in U1/U2 ground water from
 the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site at levels
 exceeding the drinking water standard.
Treatment Performance

Results from demonstrations at the Hanford Site
were positive:

•     Based on tests with a simulated ground
      water feed, greater than 99 percent of the
      nitrates and 93 percent of the carbon
      tetrachlorides were destroyed at influent
      concentrations of 400 ppm and 200 ppb,
      respectively; and

•     Analysis of the product streams indicated
      that the concentrations of nitrates  and
      carbon tetrachlorides were below  the
      drinking water standards of 44 ppm and 5
      ppb, respectively.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information

                          This process was demonstrated with a simulated
                          ground water feed in fiscal year (FY) 1989 and
                          will be demonstrated  at the Hanford  Site,
                          Washington,  in  FY 1991.    Liquid  wastes
                          containing radioactive, hazardous, and regulated
                          chemicals have been generated throughout the
                          40  years  of operations  on the Hanford Site.
                          Some of these wastes were discharged to the
                          soil column and many of the waste components,
                          including nitrates and carbon tetrachloride, have
                          been detected in the Hanford ground water.


                          Contacts

                         Thomas M. Brouns
                          Pacific Northwest Laboratory
                          P.O. Box 999, MSIN P7-44
                         Richland, Washington 99351
                         509/376-7855
                          (FTS) 444-7855
28
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Chemical Treatment

-------

-------
                                                                         Chemical Treatment
         Chemical Detoxification of Chlorinated Aromatic Compounds
                                Dioxin and Herbicides in Soil
Treatment Description

This  chemical   detoxification  of  chlorinated
aromatic compounds detoxifies soils that have
been contaminated with dioxin,  herbicides  or
other chlorinated aromatic contaminants.

The contaminated  soil  is  excavated and  a
determination of the water content is made.  If
the  water  content is too high, the soil  is
dehydrated.  Soil is placed in the reactor with
the reagent and heated to 100 to 150 degrees
Celsius.   The  reagent is a 1:1:1   mixture  of
potassium  hydroxide,  polyethylene  glycol, and
dimethyl sulfoxide. After reaction, the reactor is
drained and the soil is rinsed with clean water to
remove excess  reagents.  Treated soil might  be
replaced in its original location depending upon
the  effectiveness of the decontamination and
local environmental regulations.
 Technology Performance

 Demonstrations of this method achieved greater
 than  99.9  percent  decontamination.  Several
 advantages of this method were indicated:

 •    It is relatively inexpensive for contaminants
      at low concentrations (in the ppm range);

 •    The  reagents can be recycled;

 •    The  products of the decontamination are
      not toxic and are not biodegradable;

 •    Bioassay studies  show that the reaction
      products   do  not  bioaccumulate  or
      bioconcentrate,  they  do  not  cause
      mutagenicity, nor are they toxic to aquatic
      organisms or mammals;

 •    The chlorine atoms are replaced by glycol
      chains   producing   non-toxic   aromatic
      compounds   and   inorganic   chloride
      compounds; and
•    The   equipment  components   are
     commercially available.

Despite the  numerous advantages  of  this
technology, it also has limitations:

•    For  high contaminant concentrations  in
     the percent range, incineration could be
     less expensive to use;

•    Water might interfere  with the reactions
     between the reagents and the chlorinated
     aromatic compounds;  and

•    Some chlorinated compounds, such as
     hexachlorophene 24, are not degraded as
     effectively as others.
Remediation Costs

The costs are in the range of $100 to $200 per
ton.  The Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory
(NCEL) reports  that the costs might be on the
order  of  $300  per  cubic yard.   The most
expensive item is the reagent.
 General Site Information

 Small-scale pilot testing (one to ten drums) has
 been conducted on dioxin- contaminated soil by
 the Air Force  in the laboratory.   Larger-scale
 pilots are planned for the near future by the EPA
 at Edison, New Jersey.  A large-scale pilot (less
 than ten drums) for PCB decontamination is
 scheduled for testing in January 1988 in Guam.
 The pilot will  treat about 30  cubic  yards  to
 determine cost effectiveness and develop design
 criteria. Full-scale implementation  is scheduled
 for the end of  1988.  The pilot reactor  has a
 capacity of two cubic yards.  The capacity of the
 full-scale reactor will be 20 to 30 cubic yards.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         29

-------
 Contacts

 Captain Edward Heyse
 HQ AFESC/RDV
 Tyndal! AFB, Florida 32403
 904/283-2942
 AutOVOn 523-2942

 Deri Bin Chan
 Environmental Protection Division
 Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory
 Port Hueneme, California 93043
 805/982-4191
 Atrtovon 360-4191
                          Additional information is available from:
                          Charles Rogers
                          EPA-HWERL
                          26 West St. Clair
                          Cincinnati,  Ohio 45286
                          513/569-7757
30
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
f
            \
             o
                                                                         Chemical Treatment
                     Chemical Oxidation/Cyanide Destruction
                      Organics and Cyanide in Water, Soils, and Sludges
Technology Description

This treatment  system uses  chlorine  dioxide,
generated on-site  by a patented process, to
oxidize organically contaminated aqueous waste
streams, and simple and  complex cyanide in
water or solid media.  Chlorine  dioxide is an
ideal oxidizing agent because it chemically alters
contaminants to  salts and  non-toxic  organic
acids. This technology is applicable to aqueous
wastes, soils, or  any teachable solid media
contaminated with organic compounds.  This
technology also is applicable to  ground water
contaminated  .with   pesticides  or  cyanide;
sludges containing cyanide, pentachlorophenol
(PCP)   or  other  organics;  and   industrial
wastewater similar to refinery wastewater.

Chlorine dioxide gas is generated by  reacting
sodium chlorite solution with chlorine gas, or by
reacting sodium chlorite  solution with  sodium
hypochlorite and  hydrochloric  acid.    Both
processes produce  at least  95  percent  pure
chlorine dioxide.

In  aqueous treatment systems  the  chlorine
dioxide gas is fed into the waste stream via a
venturi,  which  is  the  driving  force   for  the
generation  system.   The amount of chlorine
dioxide required depends on the contaminant
concentrations in the waste stream  and the
concentration of oxidizable compounds, such as
sulfides.

 In  soil  treatment applications,  the   chlorine
 dioxide may be applied in situ via conventional
 injection  wells  or   surface  flushing.    The
 concentration of chlorine dioxide would depend
 on the level of contaminants in the soil.

 Chlorine dioxide treatment systems have been
 applied to  drinking water  disinfection,   food
 processing  sanitation,  and  as  a  biocide  in
 industrial process water.  Since chlorine dioxide
 reacts   via  direct   oxidation   rather   than
 substitution (as does chlorine), the process does
 not form undesirable trihalomethanes.
                                                  Technology Performance

                                                  The SITE program has accepted two proposals
                                                  from Exxon Chemicals, Inc.  and  Rio Linda
                                                  Chemical Company to perform two  separate
                                                  demonstrations: one of cyanide destruction and
                                                  the other of organics treatment.  Site selection
                                                  for these demonstrations is currently underway.
                                                  Remediation Costs

                                                  Cost information is not available.


                                                  Contacts

                                                  EPA Project Manager:
                                                  Teri Shearer
                                                  U.S.  EPA
                                                  Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                                                  26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                                                  Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                                                  513/569-7949
                                                  FTS:  684-7949

                                                  Technology Developer Contact:
                                                  Tony Kurpakus
                                                  Exxon Chemical Company
                                                  4510 East Pacific Coast Highway
                                                  Mailbox 18
                                                  Long Beach, California 90805
                                                  213/597-1937
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundfable
                                                                                           31

-------
                                                                          Chemical Treatment
                     Combined Chemical Binding / Precipitation
                      and Physical Separation of Radionuclides
                   Radionuclides and Heavy Metals in Water, Sludges or Soils
 Technology Description

 This chemical binding and physical separation
 method involves rapid, turbulent, in-line mixing of
 a proprietary fine powder (RHM1000) containing
 complex  oxides  and  other  reactive binding
 agents.   RHM  1000 absorbs, adsorbs, and
 chemisorbs  most  radionuclides   and  heavy
 metals in water, sludges, or soils (pre-processed
 into slurry), yielding coagulating, flocculating and
 precipitating reactions.  The amount of  RHM
 1000 required for processing ranges from 0.1
 percent to less than 0.01 percent, depending on
 the  application. The pH, mixing dynamics, and
 processing rates are carefully chosen to optimize
 the  binding of contaminants.

 Water is  separated  from  the solids using a
 reliable, economical, two-stage  process based
 on two processes: (1) particle size and density
 separation,  using  clarifier  technology  and
 microfiitration of all particles  and  aggregates;
 and (2)  dewatering, using  a filter press,  to
 produce a 70 to 85 percent dry filter cake with
 the concentrated radionuclide(s), heavy metal(s),
 and other solids. The filter cake is collected and
 stabilized  for disposal.

 The process is designed for continuous through-
 put for water (50-1500 gal/min) or batch mode
 sludge and soil processing (300 tons per eight-
 hour day). This technology can accommodate
 trace  levels, naturally  occurring   radioactive
 materials  (NORM),  and low-level  radioactive
 wastes. The equipment is trailer-mounted for
 use  as a mobile field system. Larger capacity
 systems could be skid-mounted.

This  technology  can   be   used  for  most
 radionuclides and  heavy  metals   in  water,
 sludges, or soils: (1) cleanup and remediation of
water,  sludges, and soils  contaminated  with
 radium, thorium, uranium and heavy metals from
 uranium mining/milling operations; (2) cleanup of
water containing NORM and heavy metals from
                          oil  and  gas drilling;  and  (3)  cleanup and
                          remediation of man-made radionuclides stored in
                          underground tanks, pits, ponds, or barrels. This
                          technology is not applicable to water containing
                          tritium.
                          Treatment Performance

                          EPA accepted this technology into the SITE
                          Demonstration Program  in  July  1990.   The
                          Department of Energy (DOE) is working with EPA
                          to evaluate the TechTran's chemical binding and
                          physical separation process.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Annette Gatchett
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West  Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7697
                          FTS:  684-7697

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Tod S. Johnson
                          TechTran, Inc.
                          7705 Wright Road
                          Houston, Texas 77041
                          713/896-8205
32
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Thermal Treatment

-------

-------
             (3
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
                                  Centrifugal Reactor
                     Metals and Organic Compounds in Soils and Sludges
Technology Description

The Centrifugal Reactor is a thermal treatment
technology that uses heat from a plasma torch
to create a molten bath that detoxifies soils and
sludges   contaminated  with   metals   and
hard-to-destroy organic compounds. Developed
by Retech,  Inc.,  this technology  vaporizes
organic contaminants at very high temperatures
to form innocuous products. The technology
melts solids and incorporates  them into  the
molten bath. When cooled, the  result is a non-
leachable matrix that immobilizes the metals.

Contaminated soils enter the reactor through a
bulk feeder.  The interior  of the reactor (the
reactor well) rotates during waste processing.
Centrifugal  force  created  by  this  rotation
prevents waste and molten material from flowing
out of the reactor through  the bottom.  It also
helps  to transfer  heat and electrical  energy
evenly   throughout   the   molten   phase.
Periodically, a fraction of  the  molten slag  is
tapped and falls into the collection chamber to
solidify.

 Gases travel through the secondary combustion
 chamber,   where  they  remain  at  a  high
temperature for an extended period of time. This
 allows for  further thermal destruction of  any
 organics   remaining  in   the   gas  phase.
 Downstream  of the  secondary  combustion
 chamber, the gases pass through a series of air
 pollution control devices designed to  remove
 particulates and acid gases. In the event of a
 process upset, a surge tank has been installed
 to allow for the reprocessing of any off-gases
 produced.
Technology Performance

A demonstration is planned for late 1991  at a
Department of Energy research facility in Butte,
Montana. During the demonstration, the reactor
will process  approximately 4,000 pounds  of
waste at a feed rate of 100 pounds per hour. All
feed and effluent streams will be sampled  to
assess the performance of this technology.  A
report  on the  demonstration project will be
available after its completion.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7863
FTS: 684-7863

Technology Developer Contact:
 R.C. Eschenbach
 Retech, Inc.
 P.O. Box 997
 100 Henry Station Road
 Ukiah, California  95482
 707/462-6522
                          Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                                                                           33

-------
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
                               Circulating Bed Combustor
                       Halogenated and Non-Halogenated Hydrocarbons in
                                  Soils, Slurries, and Sludges
 Technology Description

 The Ogden  Circulating Bed Combustor (CBC)
 uses high velocity air to entrain circulating solids
 and create a highly turbulent combustion zone
 for  the  efficient   destruction  of   toxic
 hydrocarbons.     The CBC  technology   is
 applicable  to   soils,  slurries,   and  sludges
 contaminated  with  halogenated  and
 nonhalogenated hydrocarbons. This technology
 was recently applied  at two site remediation
 projects for  treating  soils contaminated with
 polychlorinated biphenyls  (RGBs) and fuel oil.
 The CBC is one of seven incinerators permitted
 to burn PCBs.

 The Ogden  CBC operates  by  feeding waste
 material and limestone into the  combustion
 chamber along  with  the  recirculating  bed
 material from the hot cyclone.  The limestone
 neutralizes acid gases. Hot gases produced
 during combustion pass through  a convective
 gas cooler and baghouse before being released
 to the  atmosphere.    The  treated  ash  is
 transported  out  of  the system  by an  ash
 conveyor for  proper disposal.

 The CBC technology operates at relatively low
 temperatures (approximately  1600° F),  thus
 reducing operation costs. The high turbulence
 produces a  uniform temperature around the
 combustion chamber, hot  cyclone, and return
 leg. It also promotes the complete mixing of the
 waste material during combustion. The effective
 mixing   and  relatively   low    combustion
 temperature also  reduce emissions of carbon
 monoxide and nitrogen oxides.
                          can attain a destruction and removal efficiency
                          (ORE) of 99.99 percent for hazardous waste and
                          99.9999 percent for PCB waste.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information

                          A test burn/treatability study of waste from the
                          McColl Superfund site was conducted in March
                          1989. EPA is currently  reviewing  results from
                          this pilot-scale demonstration.


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Joseph McSorley                ;
                          U.S. EPA
                          Air & Energy Engineering
                          Research Laboratory
                          Alexander Drive
                          Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
                          919/541-2920
                          FTS: 629-2920

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Brian Baxter
                          Ogden Environmental Services
                          10955 John J. Hopkins Drive
                          San Diego, California  92121
                          619/455-2613
Technology Performance

The commercial-size combustion  chamber (36
inches in diameter) at the McColl Superfund site
can treat up to 100 tons of contaminated soil
daily, depending on the heating value of the feed
material.  Ogden states that the CBC technology
34
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
             o
                                                                           Thermal Treatment
                      Desorption and Vapor Extraction System
                  Volatile and Semivolatile Organics and Volatile Inorganics in
                                Soils, Sediments, and Sludges
Technology Description

The  Desorption and Vapor Extraction System
(DAVES) uses a low-temperature, fluidized bed
to remove volatile  and semivolatile  organics,
including  polychlorinated  biphenyls  (PCBs),
poly nuclear  aromatic  hydrocarbons  (PAHs),
pentachiorophenol  (PGP),  volatile  inorganics
(tetraethyl lead), and some pesticides from soil,
sludge, and sediment. In general, the process
treats waste containing less than 5 percent total
organic contaminants  and 30 to  90 percent
solids/Nonvolatile inorganic contaminants (such
as metals) in the  waste feed do not inhibit the
process, but are not treated.

Contaminated materials are fed into a co-current,
fluidized bed, where they are well mixed with hot
air  (about 1,000 to 1,400°  F) from a gas-fired
heater.   Direct  contact between the waste
material and  the  hot air forces water and
contaminants from the waste into the gas stream
at  a relatively low  fluidized-bed temperature
(about 320 ° F). The heated air, vaporized water
and organics,  and entrained particles flow out of
the dryer to a gas treatment system.

The  gas  treatment  system removes  solid
particles,  vaporized water, and organic vapors
from the  air stream.  A cyclone separator and
baghouse remove most of the particulates in the
gas stream from the dryer.  Vapors from the
cyclone  separator are  cooled  in  a venturi
scrubber, counter-current washer, and chiller
section before they are treated in a vapor-phase
carbon adsorption system.  The liquid residues
from the system  are centrifuged, filtered, and
passed through  two  activated  carbon  beds
arranged in series.

 By-products from the DAVES treatment include:
 (1) approximately 96 to 98 percent of solid waste
feed as clean, dry solid;  (2) a small quantity of
 centrifuge sludge  containing organics; (3) a
 small  quantity of spent adsorbent carbon;  (4)
 wastewater that may need further treatment; and
(5) small quantities of baghouse and cyclone
dust.
Technology Performance

EPA is currently selecting a demonstration site
for this process. The wastes preferred for the
demonstration are harbor or  river  sediments
containing  at least  50  percent solids and
contaminated with  PGBs and other  volatile or
semivolatile   organics.     Soil   with   these
characteristics may also be acceptable.  About
300 tons of waste  are needed for a two-week
test. The demonstration may potentially be held
at the selected demonstration site or wastes may
be transported to  a facility  in Arizona that is
owned by the developer.  Major test objectives
are to evaluate feed handling, decontamination
of solids, and treatment of gases generated by
the process.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.

Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7863
FTS:  684-7863

Technology Developer Contact:
William C. Meenan
Recycling Sciences International, Inc.
30 South Wacker Drive
Suite 1420
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312/559-0122
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         35

-------
                           ' Qein Coine
                           Solidj
36
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------

             01
             C3
             T
                                                                           Thermal Treatment
                                     Flame Reactor
                              Volatile and Nonvolatile Metals in
                         Solids, Soils, Flue Dusts, Slags, and Sludges
Technology Description

This Flame Reactor process  is  a patented,
hydrocarbon-fueled, flash smelting system that
treats residues and wastes containing metals.
The Flame Reactor has been successfully tested
using  electric  arc  furnace  dust,  lead  blast
furnace slag,  iron residues, zinc plant  leach
residues and purification residues, and brass mill
dusts  and  fumes.    Metal  bearing wastes
previously  treated contained zinc (up to  40
percent), lead (up to 10 percent), cadmium (up
to 3 percent), chromium  (up to 3 percent), as
well as copper, cobalt, nickel and arsenic.

The reactor processes wastes with a very hot
(greater than 2000° C) reducing gas produced
from  the  combustion of  solid  or  gaseous
hydrocarbon fuels in oxygen-enriched air.  In a
compact,  low-capital cost reactor, the  feed
materials react rapidly, allowing a high  waste
throughput.   The end products are a  non-
leachable slag (a glasslike solid when cooled)
and a recyclable, heavy  metal-enriched  oxide.
The volume reduction achieved (of  waste to
slag) depends on the chemical and  physical
properties of the waste.

This   Flame   Reactor  technology  applies
specifically  to granular solids, soil, flue  dusts,
slags, and  sludges containing heavy metals.
The volatile metals are fumed and captured in a
product dust collection system, the nonvolatile
metals  are encapsulated in the slag.  At the
elevated temperature  of the Flame  Reactor
technology, organic compounds are destroyed.
In  general, the process  requires  that  wet
agglomerated wastes be dry enough (up to 15
percent total moisture) to be gravity-fed and fine
enough (less than 200 mesh) to react rapidly.
 Larger  particles (up  to 20  mesh)  can  be
 processed; however, a decrease in the efficiency
 of  metals recovery usually results.
Technology Performance

The  Flame  Reactor  demonstration  plant  at
Monaca, Pennsylvania, has a capacity of 1.5 to
3.0  tons/hour.    A  SITE  demonstration  is
scheduled  to  be conducted at the  Monaca
facility under a RCRA RD&D permit that will allow
the treatment of Superfund wastes containing
high concentrations of metals, but only negligible
concentrations of organics. The major objectives
of the SITE technology demonstration are to
evaluate:  (1) the levels of contaminants in the
residual slag and their  leaching potential; (2) the
efficiency and economics of processing; and (3)
the  reuse  potential for the  recovered  metal
oxides.  Approximately 120 tons of contaminated
materials are needed  for the test.  The most
likely candidate wastes include mine tailings or
smelting waste such  as  slag,  flue dust, and
wastewater  treatment sludges.   Pretreatment
may be required to produce a dryer feed and to
reduce the particle size.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Donald Oberacker and Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7510 and 513/569-7783
FTS: 684-7510 and FTS: 684-7783

Technology Developer Contact:
John F. Pusateri
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc.
300 Frankfort Road
Monaca, Pennsylvania 15061
412/773-2279
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         37

-------
              UI
              C3
                                                                           Thermal Treatment
                             Infrared Thermal Destruction
                         Organic Compounds, PCBs and Metals in Soil
 Technology Description

 This  electric  infrared  incineration technology
 (originally developed by Shirco Infrared Systems,
 Inc. of  Dallas,  Texas) is a  mobile thermal
 processing  system that is suitable for soils or
 sediments    contaminated   with   organic
 compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
 and metals.  Liquid  organic  wastes can be
 treated after mixing with sand or soil.

 This technology uses electrically-powered silicon
 carbide  rods  to  heat  organic  wastes  to
 combustion temperatures.    Any  remaining
 combustibles are incinerated in an afterburner.
 One  configuration  for this mobile system is
 comprised of  four components:   an  electric-
 powered infrared primary chamber, a gas-fired
 secondary combustion chamber, an emissions
 control system, and a control center.

 The infrared incineration  technology  process
 operates  by feeding  waste into  the  primary
 chamber  on a wire-mesh conveyor  belt and
 exposing the waste to infrared radiant heat (up
 to 1850° F)  provided by the horizontal rows of
 electrically-powered silicon carbide rods above
 the belt.   A  blower  delivers  air to  selected
 locations along the belt and  can be used to
 control the oxidation rate of the waste feed. The
 ash material that drops off the belt in the primary
 chamber  is quenched  using scrubber  water
 effluent.  The ash is then conveyed to the ash
 hopper, where it is removed to a holding area
 and analyzed for PCB content.

Volatile gases  from the primary chamber flow
 into the secondary chamber, which uses higher
temperatures, greaterresidencetime, turbulence,
 and supplemental energy (if required) to destroy
these  gases.    Gases  from  the  secondary
 chamber  are  ducted  through the emissions
control system. In the emissions control system,
the particulates  are  removed  in a  venturi
scrubber. Acid vapor is neutralized in a packed
tower scrubber. An induced draft blower draws
the cleaned gases from the scrubber into the
                          free-standing exhaust stack. An emergency stack
                          is installed prior to the venturi scrubber system
                          so that if the temperature control system and its
                          interlocks fail, the emissions control system will
                          not be melted by the hot gases.  The scrubber
                          liquid  effluent  flows  into  a  clarifier, where
                          scrubber  sludge settles out for  disposal, and
                          through an activated carbon filter for reuse or to
                          a publicly-owned treatment  work (POTW) for
                          disposal.
                         Technology Performance

                         EPA has conducted two Superfund Innovative
                         Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstrations for
                         the infrared thermal destruction technology. The
                         first demonstration was conducted at the Peak
                         Oil site  in Tampa, Florida and  the  second
                         demonstration was performed at  the  Rose
                         Township-Demode Road site in Michigan.  The
                         results of the two SITE demonstrations and eight
                         other case studies are summarized below:

                         •     In  both tests,  at  standard  operating
                               conditions,  PCBs were  reduced to  less
                               than   one ppm   in  the  ash,  with  a
                               destruction   and  removal   efficiency
                               destruction  and  removal efficiency (DRE)
                               for air  emissions  greater  than 99.99
                               percent (based on detection limits).

                         •     In  the  pilot-scale  demonstration,  the
                               Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
                               (RCRA) standard for paniculate emission
                               (180 mg/dscf) was achieved.   In  the full-
                              scale   demonstration,   however,   this
                              standard was not met in all runs due to
                              scrubber inefficiencies.

                         •    Lead was not immobilized; however, most
                              lead  remained  in the ash  and  only in
                              significant amounts were transferred to
                              the scrubber water  or emitted  to  the
                              atmosphere.
38
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
•     The pilot testing demonstrated satisfactory
      performance, with a high feed  rate and
      reduced power consumption, when fuel oil
      was added to the waste feed and the
      primary   chamber  temperature   was
      reduced.

•     The process is capable of meeting both
      RCRA and Toxic Substances Control Act
      (TSCA)   ORE  requirements  for  air
      emissions.   Operations  on waste feed
      contaminated with PCBs have consistently
      met the TSCA guidance level of two pprn
      in ash;

•     Improvements  in  the  scrubber system
      resulted in compliance with RCRA and
      TSCA paniculate emission standards.  In
      some cases, restrictions in chloride levels
      in  the waste and/or feed rate may be
      necessary to meet particulate emissions
      standards; and

Data  evaluated  during  the SITE Application
Analysis  suggest that additional preprocessing
may  be  needed to  meet suitable ranges for
various waste characteristics:

•     Particle size, 5 microns to 2 inches;

•     Moisture content, up to 50 percent (wt.);

•     Density, 30-130 Ib/cf;

•     Heating value, up to 10,000 Btu/lb;

•     Chlorine content, up to 5 percent (wt.);

•     Sulfur content, up to 5 percent (wt.);

•     Phosphorus, 0-300 ppm;

•     pH, 5-9; and

•     Alkali metals, up to 1 percent (wt.).


Remediation Costs

Economic analysis and observation of the test
results suggest a  cost range from $180/ton to
$240/ton  of  waste  feed,  excluding  waste
 excavation, feed  preparation,  profit, and  ash
disposal costs. Overall costs may be as high as
$800/ton.
General Site Information

EPA conducted two evaluations of the infrared
system.   EPA  conducted  a  full-scale  unit
evaluation from August 1 to 4, 1987, during a
removal action by Region IV at the Peak Oil site,
an  abandoned oil  refinery in Tampa, Florida.
During the cleanup, a nominal 100-ton per day
system treated nearly 7,000 cubic yards of waste
oil sludge containing PCBs and lead. A second
demonstration of the system, at pilot scale, took
place at the Rose Township-Demode Road site,
a National Priority  List (NPL) site in Michigan,
from November 2 to 11,  1987.   The pilot-scale
operation allowed the evaluation of performance
under varied  operating conditions.   Infrared
incineration was also used to remediate PCB-
contaminated  materials  at the  Florida Steel
Corporation  Superfund  site  and  the LaSalle
Electric NPL site in Illinois.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Howard O. Wall
U.S. EPA, RREL
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7691
FTS:  684-7691

Technology Developer Contact:
John Cioffi
Ecova Corporation
3820 159th Avenue, NE
Redmond, Washington 98052
206/883-1900

Technology Vendor Contacts:
George Hay
OH Materials Corporation
419/423-3526

Richard McAllister
Westinghouse Haztech, Inc.
404/593-3803
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         39

-------
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
                        Low-Temperature Thermal Stripping
                              Volatile Organic Compounds in Soil
 Technology Description

 Low-temperature  thermal  stripping  of  volatile
 organic compounds  (VOC) from soils removes
 volatile components such as chlorinated solvents
 and fuels.  It can be applied to contaminated
 soils associated with fire training pits, burn pits,
 spills, and lagoons. Contaminants having boiling
 points as high as 500  degrees Celsius have
 been removed from soils.

 During this process, a direct-fired boiler heats a
 heat transfer fluid. The heated fluid then  passes
 through the shaft and flights of an auger and
 through the trough jacket surrounding the auger.
 Contaminated soil is introduced to the auger and
 trough by a feed hopper that has a rotary valve
 to ensure air-tight operation. Preheated air or an
 inert gas is passed over the auger and sweeps
 the  volatilized contaminants to the treatment
 system.

 This method does, however, have a  number of
 limitations: this is a media transfer technique
 rather than a destructive technique; treatment of
 the gaseous effluent prior to discharge might be
 required,  depending  upon  local regulations;
 bench-scale evaluation should  be conducted
 before  pilot  testing  or  implementation;   the
 equipment for the bench-scale test is available
 and will fit in a standard  laboratory hood; lower
 explosive  limits must be considered  when
 treating soils contaminated  with flammable
 solvents; an inert gas such  as nitrogen might be
 considered as an alternative to air to reduce the
 risk of combustion or explosion; and since this is
 a tow-temperature method, metal contaminants
 will not be removed.
                          Remediation Costs

                          To treat a site containing 15,000 to 80,000 tons
                          of contaminated soil, the optimally sized process
                          costs would range from $74/ton to $160/ton,
                          respectively, without  flue gas  treatment.   If
                          afterburner  exhaust gases are treated prior to
                          discharge,  the respective  costs range  from
                          $87/tonto$184/ton.
                          General Site Information

                          A large-scale pilot test (>  10 drums)  was
                          conducted   at   Letterkenny   Army   Depot,
                          Chambersburg, PA.   The contaminants were
                          primarily trichloroethylene, and  xylene.  More
                          than 99.9 percent of the total volatile organic
                          compounds were removed from the soil. Bench-
                          scale  tests  were also  conducted  on soils
                          contaminated with JP-4 and No.2 fuel oil, but the
                          results from these tests are not yet available.
                         Contacts

                         Greg Mohrman
                         USATHAMA
                         AMXTH-TE-D
                         Aberdeen Proving  Ground, Maryland  21010-
                         5401
                         301/671-2054, Autovon 584-2054
Technology Performance

The results from this technology at Letterkenny
Army Depot were extremely positive in that more
than 99.9 percent of the total volatile organic
compounds were removed from the soil.
40
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
                    Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT )
                                JP-4 and Other VOCs in Soil
Technology Description

Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT3) is a
demonstrated  ex-situ  process  that  provides
evaporation of VOCs  from contaminated soil
without heating the soil matrix to combustion
temperatures.   The  primary  element is the
thermal processor,  an  indirect heat exchanger
used to dry and heat contaminated soils, thus
stripping the moisture and  VOCs from the soil.
A demonstration was designed to test the LT3
System by attempting to remove jet propulsion
fuel (JP-4) and chlorinated organic compounds,
such   as   triehloroethene   (TCE),   from
contaminated soil.  The only modification to the
basic LT3 was the addition of a scrubber system
to control acid gas  emissions.

The LT3  Process can  be  best described by
separating  the   system  into  three   main
components:  soil treatment, emissions control,
and water treatment. The soil treatment process
involves soil being fed into the thermal processor
(heat  is provided by the self-contained  hot-oil
system burner), where the VOCs in the soil are
vaporized and are  drawn by an induced-draft
fan. Water is sprayed  on the processed soil to
provide cooling and to minimize dust emissions.
Processed soil is stored in an enclosed dump
truck for transportation to a soil staging area.

The emission  control  system  involves several
steps.    A fabric  filter is used  to remove
particulates  from  the  vapor  drawn by the
induced draft fan. Particulates are removed from
the filter and added to the contaminated soils for
reprocessing.  An air-cooled condenser is used
to  remove  condensable  water  vapor  and
organics  from the  exhaust gas.  Condensed
liquid is pumped  into the water  treatment
system. The process gases from the condenser
pass through an afterburner to destroy organics
that remain  in the exhaust.    A continuous
emissions   monitoring   system   monitors
afterburner   exhaust   for  oxygen,  carbon
monoxide,   carbon   dioxide,   and   total
hydrocarbons. Gases entering the scrubber are
cooled to saturation temperature, and acidic
gases are neutralized.

Liquid exiting the condenser is collected  and
pumped  to  a   gravity   operated   oil/water
separator.  Light  organics are removed by a
skimmer; water is syphoned off.  Heavy liquids,
such as TCE, are syphoned with the water and
later filtered in the carbon system.  The organics
are stored  in 55 gallon drums for off-site
disposal.  The water is directed through  two
carbon adsorption units for removal of soluble
organics. After leaving this system, the water is
stored in a fresh water tank, to be used later in
dust control.  No water is discharged from the
LT3 system.
Technology Performance

Remedial investigation reports from the Tinker Air
Force Base site  in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
indicate that the contamination was extensive
and  varied  in  composition.   The feed  soil
contamination levels and cleanup goals identified
for some  contaminants  were:   average TCE
concentration - 743,270 ug/kg, cleanup goal - 70
ug/L;  average total xylenes - 13,044 ug/kg,
cleanup goal - 150 ug/L; and  average toluene
concentrations -  39,341 ug/kg, cleanup  goal -
330 ug/L.

The demonstration showed conclusively that the
LT3 technology was effective  in reducing the
concentration  of not only  JP-4  but  also all
compounds originally specified in the Test Plan.
All goal cleanup levels could be met by heating
the processed soil  above 215° F.  This was a
considerably lower temperature than anticipated.
As a result, all goal cleanup  levels were  met
while  processing soil  at rates 25  percent in
excess of the design capacity. The treatment
capacity was 18,000 - 20,000 Ibs per hour.

Although an evaluation of the effectiveness of
stripping   agents  in  the  removal  of  the
compounds was  an original objective, this  was
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        41

-------
not  accomplished.   The  demonstration  was
discontinued when polychlorinated  biphenyls
(PCBs)  were  discovered  in  the feed  and
processed soils  because the system was  not
designed to process PCBs. Although definitive
stack testing was not conducted to verify system
performance,  all  Federal, State,  and  local
emissions standards, as specified in the permit,
were believed to have been met.
Remediation Costs

The   unit   cost   for   processing   and
decontaminating soil with similar contaminants is
$86.00 per ton of soil at an average processing
rate of 8 tons per hour. Total estimated costs,
including  mobilization and demobilization, to
process 5,000 tons would  be $116.00 per ton.
Fixed  costs  for  mobilization,  start up,  and
demobilization are approximately $150,000.00.
General Site Information

This full-scale demonstration was conducted at
Tinker Air  Force  Base in  Oklahoma  City,
Oklahoma. The demonstration was conducted
between July 17 and August 18,1989. The feed
soils were excavated from the Landfill 3 sludge
dump area, which received waste oils and liquids
from industrial operations at Tinker Air Force
Base between 1961 and  1968.
                         Four types of materials were encountered in the
                         Landfill  3 sludge  area:   overburden,  or fill;
                         crumbled asphalt  mixed with  clay; a sludge
                         marbled with native clay; and a dry red clay. At
                         no time  was  water  or  a  saturated  layer
                         encountered at depths of less than 14 feet.  The
                         sludge/clay  layer  (with  a strong solvent odor)
                         was found to be the source of contamination.
                         This layer was found at a depth of 2 to 15 feet
                         below surface, and was 1  to 12 feet thick.  A
                         total of  3,000  cubic yards of material  was
                         excavated during the operation.
                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Roger K. Nielson               ;
                         U.S. EPA Region VI

                         USATHAMA - Aberdeen Proving Grounds:
                         Craig A. Myler - CETHA-TS-D
                         Aberdeen  Proving   Ground,   Maryland
                         21010-5401
                         301/671-2054

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Peter J.  Marks - Program Manager
                         Roy F. Weston, Inc.
                         One Weston Way
                         West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380
42
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
TI
£
(D
3D
(D
Q.
©'
I
O
O
6"
(Q
5'
(0
3D
O
0.
OJ
3T
ro

S
Contaminated
soil
storage
. <
riaocifior ^ Drag flight ^ Feed T to
"^ conveyor hopper
To atmosphere
weep gas A Hot oil burner off-gases
Q
r*«
Hot O
oil c
i ' \ <
Thermal
processor
i •• |^
Oversize

Fabric fitter
i '




„ Fuel/
air
Condenser
Hot "'I ^
B system Fuel/combustion air
ool
>il
Treated soil
Y Discharge ^ Truck feed 	
conveyor conveyor
^Processor
off-gases
Oil/water OfQanicsl 55-gatlon
4 *" separator j drum
1) 1 Water
Condensate B
Induced-
draft fan
\ '
Afterburner


Scrubber
V
212-2731 ^" Stack
Iwo-stage —
farhnn , , . ^ ¥Ve
adsorption "^ ta
unit
t
Filtration
unit
i ,
Slowdown

Enclosed
truck
o
1
e
c
o
o
In
Q
iter
nk


-------
             ul
             e>
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
                               Pyretron® Oxygen Burner
                      Hazardous Organics in Solids, Sludges, and Liquids
Technology Description

The  Pyretron® technology uses advanced fuel
injection  and  mixing  concepts to burn solid
wastes contaminated with hazardous organics.
Specifically, the Pyretron® oxygen-air-fuel burner
incinerates pure oxygen combined with air and
natural gas, destroying solid hazardous waste in
the process. The burner operation is .computer-
controlled to automatically adjust the amount of
oxygen to sudden changes in the heating value
of the waste.

The burner can be fitted onto any conventional
combustion unit for burning liquids, solids and
sludges.     Solids  and  sludges   can  be
co-incinerated when  the burner is used  in
conjunction  with  a  rotary  kiln  or  similar
equipment.    In  general, the  technology  is
applicable to any waste that can be incinerated.
However,  the  technology is  not suitable for
processing aqueous wastes, RCRA heavy metal
wastes, or inorganic wastes.
Technology Performance

This  technology  was tested  in  a  SITE
demonstration project  at  EPA's  Combustion
Research Facility using a mixture of 40 percent
contaminated soil from a Superfund site and 60
percent decanter tank  tar sludge from coking
operations.      Six   polynuclear   aromatic
hydrocarbon compounds were selected as the
principal organic hazardous constituents (POHC)
for  the   test   program:     naphthalene,
acetaphthylene,   fluorene,   phenanthrene,
anthracene,  and fluoranthene.

The Pyretron® technology achieved greater than
99.99   percent   destruction   and   removal
efficiencies (ORE) of all POHCs measured in all
test runs performed. Several promising results
were observed in the demonstration:

*     The Pyretron® technology, with oxygen
      enhancement, achieved double the  waste
                               throughput possible  with  conventional
                               incineration;

                         •     All  particulate emission  levels in the
                               scrubber   system   discharge   were
                               significantly below the hazardous waste
                               incinerator performance standard of 180
                               mg/dscm at seven percent oxygen;

                         •     Solid residues were contaminant-free;

                         •     There were no significant differences  in
                               transient carbon monoxide level emissions
                               between   air-only   incineration   and
                               Pyretron®  oxygen enhanced  operation;
                               and

                         •     Costs savings were able to be achieved in
                               many situations.

                         Field evaluations were conducted under the SITE
                         Demonstration   Program,   yielding   several
                         conclusions:

                         •     The Pyretron® burner system is a viable
                               technology for treating Superfund wastes;

                         •     The system is capable of  doubling the
                               capacity  of a conventional  rotary kiln
                               incinerator.   This  increase   is   more
                               significant for wastes with  low heating
                               values;

                         •     In situations where particulate carryover
                               causes   operational   problems,   the
                               Pyretron® system may increase reliability;
                               and                     i

                         •     The technology can be an economical
                               addition to an  incinerator when operating
                               and fuel costs are high, and-oxygen costs
                               are relatively low.

                         EPA  has  published  both  the  Technology
                         Evaluation  Report and Application  Analysis
                         Report for this technology.
44
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Remediation Costs
General Site Information
The capital costs for the Pyretron® system used
in the  SITE  demonstration was $150,000.   In
addition, $50,000 was spent  in  design  and
development work on the system.

Since this demonstration was done at a research
facility and not under actual field conditions, the
incremental effect that using the Pyretron® has
on the cost  of incinerating a ton of hazardous
waste cannot be directly determined. It is likely
that  the major factor  in determining the  cost
effectiveness of the Pyretron® will remain the
oxygen and  fuel.   These  costs  vary  widely
depending upon location and scale of operation.

The two major utility costs for the demonstration
were for auxiliary fuel (propane) and for oxygen.
Oxygen was supplied to the program by Big
Three Industries at no cost.  The demonstration
tests consumed about 36,800 sm3 (1,300 MSCF)
of oxygen.  At typical oxygen costs, between
$3,250  and  $4,875  worth   of  oxygen  was
consumed over the test program.

A total of 1,760 GJ (1,670 million Btu) of propane
was consumed over the demonstration test
program.  At typical  propane costs between
$5,000  and  $10,000  worth of propane  was
consumed during the oxygen enhanced test
program.  About 40 percent of the propane was
fired during the Pyretron® system tests.  The
remaining 60 percent was consumed during the
conventional incineration tests.
EPA conducted the demonstration project at its
Combustion  Research  Facility  in  Jefferson,
Arkansas,  using  a  mixture  of  40  percent
contaminated soil from the Stringfellow Acid Pit
Superfund site in  California and  60 percent
decanter tank tar sludge from coking operations
(RCRA listed waste K087).  The demonstration
began in November 1987 and was completed in
January 1988.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7863
FTS: 684-7863

Technology Developer Contact:
Gregory Gitman
American Combustion Technologies, Inc.
2985 Gateway Drive, Suite 100
Norcross, Georgia 30071
404/662-8156
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        45

-------
                                                                          Thermal Treatment
               Radio Frequency (RF) Thermal Soil Decontamination
                   Solvents and Volatile and Semi-volatile Petroleum in Soils
Technology Description

The  radio  frequency   (RF)   thermal   soil
decontamination  process  removes  volatile
hazardous waste materials through in situ radio
frequency heating of the soil and volatilization of
the hazardous substances. This technology can
be applied to fire training pits, spills, and sludge
pits containing solvents and volatile  and semi-
volatile petroleum.

Radio frequency heating is performed by the
application of electromagnetic  energy  in  the
radio frequency band.  The energy is delivered
by electrodes placed in holes drilled through the
soil.  The mechanism of heat  generation is
similar to that of a microwave oven and does not
rely on the thermal properties of the soil matrix.
The power source for the process is a modified
radio transmitter.   The   exact  frequency  of
operation is selected  after evaluation of  the
dielectric properties of the soil matrix and the
size of the area requiring treatment. The gases
and vapors formed in the soil  matrix can be
recovered  at  the  surface  or  through  the
electrodes  used  for  the heating  process.
Condensation and collection of the concentrated
vapor stream is used to capture the contaminant
above ground. The system is made  up of four
components: (1) RF energy deposition electrode
array; (2) RF power generation, transmission,
monitoring, and control system; (3) vapor barrier
and containment system; and (4) gas and liquid
condensate handling and treatment system.

This technology has a number of advantages:

•     Demonstrations  have shown higher than
      90  percent   reduction   of  jet   fuel
      components from soils;

•     Contaminants are recovered in a relatively
      concentrated  form  without dilution from
      large volumes of air or combustion gases;

•    This is an in situ method;
                          •    All equipment is portable; and

                          •    The soil does not have to be excavated.

                          Limitations of this technology include:

                          •    High  moisture or  presence of ground
                               water in the  treatment zone will  result in
                               excessive power requirements to heat the
                               soil; and

                          •    The  method  cannot be used  if large
                               buried metal objects are in the treatment
                               zone.


                          Technology Performance

                          The full-scale field demonstration at Volk Field Air
                          National  Guard  Base,   Camp  Douglas,  Wl
                          produced positive results:

                          •    94 to 99 percent decontamination of a 500
                               cubic  feet block of soil was achieved
                               during a 12-day period.  97 percent of
                               semivolatile hydrocarbons and 99 percent
                               of volatile aromatics and aliphatics were
                               removed;                 ;

                          •    Contaminant removal  at the 2 meter
                               depth,  the fringe  of the heated zone,
                               exceeded 95 percent;

                          •    The 70-76 percent contaminant reduction
                               in the  immediate area outside the heated
                               zone  indicates that there  was  no  net
                               migration of contaminant from the heated
                               area to the surrounding soil; and

                          •    Results show that substantial removal of
                               high   boiling  contaminants  can   be
                               achieved at  temperatures  significantly
                               lower than their boiling point. This occurs
                               due to the long residence time provided at
                               lower temperatures  and steam distillation
                               provided by the native moisture.
46
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Remediation Costs

It is estimated that the treatment cost will vary
between $28 to $60 per ton of soil. Based upon
the bench-scale tests,  it  is estimated that the
treatment  of a 3-acre site to a depth of 8 feet
containing 12 percent moisture  raised to  a
temperature of 170 degrees Celsius would cost
$42 per ton. The treatment of such a site would
require  about one year.   The initial capital
equipment investment for full-scale projects  is
estimated  to be  about $1.5 million.   Power
requirements are approximately 500  kwhr per
cubic yard  to  reach  a  temperature  of 150
degrees Celsius.
Contacts

Capt. Ed Marchand
HQ AFESC/RDVW
Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403-6001
DSN 523-6023

Lt. Col. Brady
HQ/AFEC/YE
Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403
904/283-6259, Autovon 423-6295
General Site Information

A bench-scale pilot test (volume < 20 drums)
has been conducted at ITT Research Institute
facilities.     A  full-scale  demonstration  was
completed at Volk Field  (ANGB), Wl during
October 1989. Full-scale implementation began
during the  Fall of 1990  at Kelly AFB, San
Antonio, Texas.
             RF Power
             Source
                                                          Vapor Barrier
               Exciter Electrodes

                             Ground Electrodes  8
                                                                  — Gas and Vapor
                                                                   Treatment System
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        47

-------
             s
                                                                         Thermal Treatment
                               Waste-to-Fuel Recycling
                             Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Sludges
Technology Description

This thermal treatment process is a mobile, low-
temperature, recycling process that produces
solid fossil fuel from otherwise hazardous, oily
petroleum sludges. A thick, sticky tar or waste
is converted into a light, organic liquid  and a
solid cake, that can be more easily handled.  A
screw flight  dryer (auger) dries the petroleum
sludges, resulting in a fossil fuel product.  Other
by-products  include  a light  hydrocarbon liquid
and water.  These by-products condense from
vapors emitted during the heating stages of the
process.  Hydrocarbons are recycled and the
water is treated before release.

This process is applicable to petroleum sludges.
The sludge must not have a low pH and must be
dewatered to a maximum of 50 to 60 percent
moisture.  The sludge must be screened to
prevent large debris from entering the dryer.
Technology Performance

Pilot scale  tests have  been  conducted  on
hazardous  petroleum  refinery sludges.   This
technology  was  accepted   into  the   SITE
Demonstration Program in June 1990.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Paul dePercin                  '.
                         U.S. EPA                      [
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7797
                         FTS: 684-7797

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         George Lane
                         Thermal Waste Management
                         237 Royal Street
                         New Orleans, Louisiana  70130   '.
                         504/525-9722
48
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
 \
            \
             o
                         Thermal Treatment
                X*TRAX™  Low-Temperature Thermal  Desorption
                                      Organics in Soil
Technology Description

The X*TRAX™ technology is a low-temperature
(200 to 900°  F)  thermal separation process
designed to remove organic contaminants from
soils, sludges, and other solid media. It is not
an incinerator or a pyrolysis system.  Chemical
oxidation and reactions are not encouraged, and
no combustion byproducts  are formed.   The
organic  contaminants  are  removed  as  a
condensed high BTU liquid, which must then be
either destroyed in a  permitted incinerator or
used as a supplemental fuel.  Because of lower
operating temperatures and gas flow rates, this
process is less expensive than incineration.

An  externally-fired rotary  dryer is used  to
volatilize the water and organic' contaminants
into an inert carrier gas stream.  The processed
solids are then cooled with condensed water.
The moisture content  is adjusted to eliminate
dusting and produce a solid that is ready to be
placed and compacted in its original location.
The feed rate, the dryer temperature, and the
residence time of  materials in the dryer can be
adjusted to control the degree of contaminant
removal.

The  organic contaminants  and  water vapor
driven from the solid are transported out of the
dryer  by an inert nitrogen  carrier  gas.  The
carrier gas flows  through  a duct to the  gas
treatment system, where organic vapors, water
vapors, and dust particles  are removed  and
recovered from the gas. The gas first passes
through a high-energy scrubber. Dust particles
and   10  to  30  percent   of  the  organic
contaminants are removed by the scrubber.  The
gas then passes through two heat exchangers in
series, where  it is cooled to less than 40°F.
Most of the remaining organic and water vapors
are  condensed   as  liquids   in  the  heat
exchangers.

The majority of the carrier gas passing through
the gas  treatment system  is  reheated  and
recycled to the dryer.   Approximately 5 to 10
percent of the  gas is  cleaned  by passing it
through a filter and two carbon  adsorbers,
before it is discharged to the atmosphere.  The
volume of gas released from this process vent is
approximately 100  to 200 times less than an
equivalent capacity incinerator.  This discharge
helps maintain a small negative pressure within
the   system   and    prevents   potentially
contaminated  gases   from   leaking.     The
discharge  also  allows makeup nitrogen to be
added to  the  system,   preventing   oxygen
concentrations from  exceeding  combustibility
limits.
Technology Performance

Chem-Waste Management currently has three
X*TRAX systems available: laboratory, pilot, and
full-scale.   There are  two  laboratory-scale
systems being used for treatability studies. One
system is operated by Chem Nuclear systems,
Inc.   in   Barnwell,   SC   for  mixed
(RCRA/Radioactive) wastes; and the other by
CWM RD&D at its facility in Geneva, IL, for RCRA
and Toxic Substances and Control Act (TSCA)
wastes.    More than 30  tests have  been
completed since January 1988.  Results from
these  laboratory-scale  tests  included  97.9
percent removal efficiency for soil contaminated
with 805 ppm polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

The  pilot-scale  system is in operation at the
CWM Kettleman Hills facility in California. During
1989-90, ten different PCB- contaminated soils
were processed under a TSCA RD&D permit
which  expired  in January  1990.    For  soils
containing 120 to 6,000 ppm PCBs, the removal
efficiency ranged from 97.2 to 99.5%.  Nine of
the ten soils were reduced to less than 25 ppm.

The first Model  200 full-scale  X*TRAX system
was completed in early 1990. The system will be
used  to  remediate  35,000  tons  of  PCB-
contaminated soil. EPA plans to conduct a SITE
demonstration during this remediation.
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        49

-------
This technology was developed primarily for on-
site remediation of organic contaminated soils.
The process can  remove and collect volatiles,
semivolatiles,  and   PCBs,  and   has  been
demonstrated on a variety of soils ranging from
sand to very cohesive clays.  Filter cakes and
pond  sludges  have also  been  successfully
processed. In most .cases, volatile organics are
reduced to below 1 ppm and frequently to below
the laboratory  detection  level.   Semivolatile
organics are typically reduced to less than 10
ppm  and  frequently below   1 ppm.   Soils
containing 120 to 6,000  ppm PCBs have been
reduced to 2 to 25 ppm.

This process is  not applicable to heavy metals,
with the  exception  'of  mercury.   However,
stabilization agents can be added to the feed or
treated   solids   before   cooling  for  metals
treatment.   Tars  and  heavy  pitches create
material handling problems.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Paul dePercin
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive ,'
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7797
                         FTS: 684-7797

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Carl Swanstrom
                         Chemical Waste Management, Inc.
                         Geneva Research Center
                         1950 S. Batavia
                         Geneva, Illinois 60134
                         708/513-4578
 50
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Vapor Extraction

-------

-------
                                                                           Vapor Extraction
                      Ground-Water Vapor Recovery System
                        Volatile Organic Compounds in Ground Water
Technology Description

In this treatment, injection and extraction wells
are placed outside and inside of an area of
contamination.  Positive pressure, from either
water or air, is placed on the injections wells.
Water is pumped from the extraction wells to a
thermal  aeration  system  to  drive  off  the
contaminants. Resulting vapors go to an internal
combustion engine.  If enough free product is
available in the ground water during the cleanup
process, waste hydrocarbons could be used to
power the engine without the need for additional
fuel.
Technology Performance

Full-scale  implementation  of  this system  is
scheduled  in 1991  at the Seal  Beach Navy
Weapons Station.  This method is applicable for
volatile   fuels  or   other  volatile   organic
compounds.  This treatment requires that the
contaminant be combustible.  Air permits are
required in some areas.
Remediation Costs

The capitol cost for purchasing and installing the
engine and wells  is  between  $70,000 and
$100,000.
Contacts

Vern Novstrup
Naval  Energy  and  Environmental   Support
Activity, Code 112E
Port Hueneme, California 93043
805/982-2636

Rebecca Coleman-Roush
Remediation Service, International
P.O. Box 1601
Oxnard, California 93032
805/644-5892
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       51

-------
                                                                             Vapor Extraction
                     In Situ Air Stripping with Horizontal Wells
                            TCE and PCE in Soil and Ground Water
Technology Description

In situ air stripping using horizontal wells is
designed to concurrently remediate unsaturate-
zone soils and ground water containing volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).  The  in  situ  air
stripping concept utilizes two parallel horizontal
wells: one below the water table and one in the
unsaturated (vadose) zone.  A diagram of the
technology has been provided. The deeper well
is used as a delivery system for the air injection.
VOCs are stripped from the ground water into
the injected vapor phase and are removed from
the subsurface by  drawing a vacuum on the
shallower  well  in  the  vadose  zone.   The
technology is based on Henry's Law, and the
affinity of  VOCs for the  vapor  phase.  The
technology is  probably  most effective  in  soils
with high permeability and likely  works best in
sandier units  with  no  significant  aquitards
between  the  injection  and  extraction wells.
Horizontal  wells  are utilized  because  they
provide more surface  area for injection  of
reactants and  extraction of contaminants and
they have  great utility for subsurface  access
under existing facilities.

First, a vacuum was drawn on the shallow well
for a period of two weeks.  Concentration and
temperature of  the  extracted   vapors were
measured at  least three times a  day.   Air
injection was then added at three different rates
and at two different temperatures. Each of the
operating regimes was operated for a minimum
of two weeks.  Helium  tracer tests  were also
conducted to learn more about vapor flow paths
and the heterogeneity of the system between the
two wells. To assist with analysis and  monitoring
of the demonstration, tubes of varying  lengths
were installed in both horizontal wells to monitor
pressure and concentrations along their entire
length.
                          Technology Performance

                          Almost 16,000 pounds of solvents were removed
                          during  the test  at  the U.S.  Department of
                          Energy's  (DOE)  Savannah  River  Site (SRS).
                          Extraction  rates  during  the vapor  extraction
                          phase averaged 110 pounds of VOCs per day.
                          The  extraction  flow rate   was  constant  at
                          approximately 580 scfm during the entire length
                          of the test. During the air injection periods with
                          medium (170 scfm) and high (270 ,scfm). rates,
                          approximately  130  pounds of VOCs  were
                          removed daily.

                          Concentrations of chlorinated solvents removed
                          during vapor extraction only decreased rapidly
                          during the first two  days of operation.   Initial
                          concentrations were  as high as  5,000 ppm but
                          stabilized at 200 to 300 ppm. Concentrations of
                          VOCs in the  ground water were  significantly
                          reduced in several of the monitoring wells. For
                          example, ground water from two monitoring wells
                          showed changes from 1600 and 1800 ug/L TCE
                          at the beginning of the test to 10 to 30  ug/L at
                          the end of the 20-weeks.   However,  ground
                          water  in  several  of the  wells  showed  no
                          significant change and ground  water in three
                          wells   actually  had trichlorethylene  (TCE)
                          concentrations   increase.     One  possible
                          explanation for this was that more contaminated
                          water at depth (below the monitoring point) was
                          being forced upward due to air injection.

                          The activity of indigenous microorganisms was
                          found to increase at least an order of magnitude
                          during the air injection periods. This activity then
                          decreased when the air injection was terminated.
                          It  is  possible that   simple  injection  of  air
                          stimulated  microorganisms   that   have   the
                          potential to degrade TCE. Injection of heated air
                          appeared to have no effect  on  the  amount of
                          contaminant extracted from the shallow well.
52
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Remediation Costs

The cost of the remediation project, not including
site   characterization   was  approximately
$300,000, or $20/pound of contaminant removal.
Site preparation costs, including well installation
were $300,000 to $450,000.  Equipment for this
demonstration  test  was   rented,   however
purchase of the vacuum blower and compressor
would be in the  range of $200,000.
General Site Information

This 20-week field demonstration  project was
conducted at the  U.S. Department of Energy's
(DOE)  Savannah  River Site (SRS)  in  Aiken,
South Carolina, between  July and December,
1990.     Trichloroethylene  (TCE)   and
tetrachloroethylene (PCE)  were used  at SRS as
metal degreasing solvents  for a number of years.
The in situ test was conducted  at the  SRS
Integrated Demonstration  Site  in  the M-Area,
along an abandoned process sewer line that
carried wastes to  a seepage basin which was
operated between 1958 and 1985. A ground-
water plume containing elevated levels of these
compounds exists over an  area greater than one
square mile. The  sewer line acted as a source
of VOCs as  it is known to have  leaked at
numerous locations along its length.  Because
the source of contamination was linear at this
particular  location within the  overall  plurne,
horizontal   wells   were   selected   as  the
injection/extraction system.

The Savannah River Site is located on the upper
Atlantic Coastal Plain. The site is underlain by a
thick wedge  of unconsolidated Tertiary  and
Cretaceous sediments that overlay the
basement, which consists of preCambrian and
Paleozoic metamorphic rocks and consolidated
Triassic sediments.  Ground-water flow at  the
site is controlled by hydrologic boundaries: flow
at and immediately below the water table is to
local tributaries; and flow in the lower aquifer is
to the Savannah  River or one of its  major
tributaries.   The water  table  is  located  at
approximately  135 feet.   Ground water in  the
vicinity  of  the process  sewer line  contains
elevated  concentrations of  TCE and  PCE to
depths of greater than 180 feet.
Contacts

Facility Contact:
Mike O'Rear
DOE Savannah River
Aiken, South Carolina
803/725-5541

Contractor Contacts:
Dawn S. Kaback
Westinghouse Savannah River Company
Aiken, South Carolina
803/725-5190

Brian B. Looney
Westinghouse Savannah River Company
Aiken, South Carolina
803/725-5181
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        53

-------
    Injection Point for Air
                     Extraction of Air Containing Volatile Compounds
                                     Ground Surface
                                   ""^ Slotted Casing
                                Contaminated Zone
                                                                           f13120-1
54
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                             Vapor Extraction
                                   In Situ Soil Venting
                        Fuels and Trichloroethylene in Unsaturated Soils
Technology Description

The in situ soil venting process removes volatile
contaminants such as fuels and trichloroethylene
from unsaturated soils.  This technology can be
applied to  fire  training  pits, spills and the
unsaturated zone beneath leach pits.   The
method is most applicable for contamination at
depths greater than 40 feet .in fairly permeable
soils.

Venting wells are placed in the unsaturated zone
and  connected to a manifold and blower.  A
vacuum is  applied to the manifold, and gases
are  extracted  from the  soil and fed to the
treatment system.  The air flow sweeps out the
soil  gas,  disrupting the equilibrium existing
between the contaminant adsorbed on the soil
and  its vapor phase.  This  results  in further
volatilization of the contaminant on the soil and
subsequent   removal  in   the   air  stream.
Depending  upon the  individual site  and the
depth of the  contaminated zone,  it might be
necessary to seal the surface to the throughput
of air.

This technology has a number of advantages.
Specifically, it is  inexpensive, especially  if the
emissions require no treatment. The equipment
is easily emplaced.  It is less expensive  than
excavation at depths greater than forty feet, and
the costs are similar for depths between 10 and
40 feet.    Operation is simple,  excavation  of
contaminated soil is not required, and the site is
not destroyed.

Despite  the advantages of this  technology,
limitations do exist. This process is a transfer-of-
media method - the waste is not destroyed.  At
depths of less than 10 feet,  excavation could be
less expensive,  depending upon the type  of
waste treatment required.  The  contamination
must be located in the  unsaturated zone above
the nearest aquifer. Prior bench-scale testing is
important in determining the effectiveness of the
method to  a specific site.  To date, few field data
exist  on  the  level  of  cleanup.    If  the
contamination includes  toxic volatile organic
carbons, then treatment  of the vented  gases
may be  required.   The  level  of  treatment  is
based upon local requirements.
Technology Performance

Analysis of the technology demonstration at Hill
Air Force Base (AFB) have shown the following
results:

•     Soil gas venting may provide oxygen for
      biodegradation;

•     Based on data from extracted gases, 80
      percent  of a 100,000-liter  fuel spill  was
      removed in 9 months of operation;

•     Soil analysis following a full-scale in situ
      field  test  indicated   an  average  fuel
      residual of less than 100 ppm in the soils;

•     At initial air flow rates of 250 cubic feet per
      minute,   the  full-scale   system   was
      removing 50 gallons per day of JP-4 from
      the  soil.   The venting rates were then
      increased  to over  1,000 cubic  feet per
      minute. After ten months of venting, over
      100,000   pounds   of  JP-4  had been
      removed.  Hill AFB continues to operate
      the  system  at a  reduced flow  rate to
      enhance  the in  situ  biodegradation of
      remaining hydrocarbons; and

•     Approximately 20-25 percent   of  the
      reduction  in  fuel  hydrocarbons   was
      caused by biodegradation.
Remediation Costs

The  costs   range  from  $15  per  ton  of
contaminated soil, excluding emission treatment,
up to approximately $85 per ton using activated
carbon emission treatment.  Estimated costs of
this technology for sandy soils is $10 a cubic
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         55

-------
yard. Catalytic incineration of VOCs can double
this  cost.   However,  at  Hill  AFB,  catalytic
incineration only cost $10 per cubic yard.
General Site Information

Operation  of  a full-scale in situ  soil-venting
system at a 27,000-gallon JP-4 spill at Hill AFB
began in  December 1988.  A full-scale in  situ
field test was completed in October 1989 at Hill
AFB, Utah.
                          Contacts

                          Hill Air Force Base Demonstration:
                          Capt. Edward G. Marchand
                          HQ AFESC/RDV
                          Tyndall AFB, Florida  32403-5001
                          504/283-4628
56
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                            Vapor Extraction
                                  In Siltu Soil Venting
                          Volatile Contaminants in Unsaturated Soil
Technology Description

This in situ soil venting process removes volatile
contaminants  from  unsaturated soils.   This
technology can be applied to fire training pits,
spills, and the unsaturated zone beneath leach
pits.   The  method  is  most  applicable  for
contamination at depths greater than 40 feet in
fairly permeable soils.

Venting wells are placed in the unsaturated zone
and connected to a manifold and blower.  A
vacuum is applied to  the manifold, and gases
are extracted from the  soil  and fed  to  the
treatment  system.     Depending  upon  the
individual site and depth of the contaminated
zone, it might be necessary to seal the surface
to prevent channeling. Air injection wells can be
used to increase the throughput of air.
General Site Information

This method has been implemented by the Army
at the Twin  Cities Army Ammunition Plant
(TCAAP) in Minnesota.
Contacts

Greg Mohrman
USATHAMA
AMXTH-TE-D
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland  21010
301/671-2054
Technology Performance

Pilot-scale  testing at  the  Twin  Cities  Army
Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) has removed 70 tons
of contaminants from the soil in one area, but
the absolute extent of cleanup has not yet been
determined.  This method is considered most
applicable for contamination at depths greater
than 40 feet in fairly permeable soils.
 Remediation Costs

 The costs for in situ soil venting can be as low
 as $15 per ton of contaminated soil, excluding
 emission  treatment.    If carbon  adsorption
 treatment is used, the costs  could be around
 $85 per ton.   Based upon the pilot study at
 TCAAP, the cost to treat a site contaminated to
 a depth of 20 feet was between $15 and $20 per
 cubic   yard,   including  carbon  adsorption
 treatment of  the  contaminated air  and  soil
 sampling.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        57

-------
              UI
              O
                                                                             Vapor Extraction
                         In Situ Steam/Air Stripping Process
                                         VOCs in Soil
Technology Description

The  two  main  components  of  the  Toxic
Treatments (USA) Inc. in situ steam/air stripping
process are the process tower and process train.
The process tower contains two counter-rotating
hollow-stem drills, each with a modified cutting
bit five feet in diameter, capable of operating to
a 27-foot  depth.    Each  drill  contains  two
concentric pipes.  The inner pipe  is used to
convey steam to the rotating cutting blades.  The
steam is supplied by an oil-fired boiler at 450°F
and 450 psig.  The  outer pipe conveys air at
approximately 300°F and 250 psig to the rotating
blades.

Steam is piped to the top of the drills  and
injected through the cutting blades.  The steam
heats the ground being remediated, increasing
the vapor pressure of the volatile contaminants
and thereby increasing the rate  at which they
can be stripped. Both the air and steam serve
as carriers to convey these contaminants to the
surface.  A metal box, called a shroud, seals the
process  area above the rotating cutter blades
from  the outside environment, collects  the
volatile contaminants, and  ducts them to  the
process train.

In the process train, the volatile contaminants
and the water vapor  are  removed from  the
off-gas stream by condensation. The condensed
water is  separated from the contaminants by
distillation, then filtered through activated carbon
beds and subsequently used as make-up water
for a wet cooling tower. Steam is also used to
regenerate the activated carbon beds and as the
heat   source  for   distilling   the  volatile
contaminants from the condensed liquid stream.
The recovered concentrated organic liquid  can
be recycled or used as a fuel in an incinerator.

This  technology  is  applicable  to  organic
contaminants,   such  as  hydrocarbons  and
solvents with sufficient vapor pressure in the soil.
The technology is not limited by soil particle size,
                          initial  porosity,  chemical  concentration,  or
                          viscosity.
                          Technology Performance

                          The SITE demonstration of the technology at the
                          Annex  Terminal  in   San  Pedro,  California
                          exhibited promising results:

                          •    Greater than 85 percent of the volatile
                               organic compounds  (VOCs) in the soil
                               were removed;

                          •    As  much  as 55 percent of semivolatile
                               organic compounds (SVOCs) in the soil
                               were removed;

                          •    Fugitive air emissions from the process
                               were very  low; and

                          •    No downward migration  of contaminants
                               occurred due to the soil treatment.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information

                          A SITE demonstration was performed the week
                          of September 18, 1989 at the Annex Terminal,
                          San Pedro, California. Twelve soil blocks were
                          treated for VOCs and SVOCs.  EPA collected
                          various  liquid samples and closely  monitored
                          and recorded operating procedures.  During the
                          demonstration EPA collected and analyzed post-
                          treatment  soil samples  of EPA 8240 and 8270
                          chemicals. In January  1990, six blocks, which
                          had been previously treated  in the saturated
                          zone, were analyzed for  EPA 8240  and 8270
                          chemicals. Currently, the Technology  Evaluation
                          Report  has  obtained   EPA  clearance  for
                          publication.  The Application Analysis Report is
                          being prepared.
58
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7797
FTS: 684-7797
Technology Developer Contact:
Phillip N. LaMori
Toxic Treatments (USA)  Inc.
151 Union Street
Suite 155
San Francisco, California 94111
415/391-2113

or

P.O.  Box 789
San Pedro, California 90733
213/514-0881
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        59

-------
            \
             tu
             a
                                                                           Vapor Extraction
            Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum Stripping
                               VOCs in Ground Water and Soil
Technology Description

The   integrated  AquaDetox/SVE   system
simultaneously  treats  ground water and soil
contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). The integrated system consists of two
basic  processes:   an  AquaDetox  moderate
vacuum stripping tower that uses low-pressure
steam to treat contaminated ground water, and
a  soil gas vapor extraction/reinjection (SVE)
process to treat contaminated soil.  The two
processes  form  a  closed-loop  system  that
provides simultaneous in situ remediation of
contaminated ground water and soil with no air
emissions.

This technology is suitable for removing VOCs,
including chlorinated hydrocarbons, in  ground
water  and soil.   AquaDetox is  capable of
effectively removing over 90 of the 110 volatile
compounds listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix
VIII.

AquaDetox is a high efficiency, countercurrent
stripping  technology   developed   by  Dow
Chemical Company.   A single-stage unit will
typically reduce up to 99.99 percent of VOCs
from water. The SVE system uses a vacuum to
treat a VOC-contaminated soil mass, inducing a
flow of air through the  soil and removing vapor
phase VOCs with the  extracted soil gas. The
soil gas is then  treated by  carbon beds to
remove additional VOCs and reinjected into the
ground. The AquaDetox and SVE system share
a  granulated  activated  carbon  (GAC)  unit.
Noncondensable  vapor  from the AquaDetox
system is combined with the vapor from the SVE
compressor and decontaminated  by the GAC
unit. By-products of the system are a free-phase
recyclable  product and treated water.  Mineral
regenerable carbon will  require disposal after
approximately three years..

A key component of the closed-loop system is a
vent  header  unit designed  to  collect  the
noncondensable  gases  extracted  from  the
ground water or air that may leak into the portion
                         of the process operating below  atmospheric
                         pressure.   Furthermore, the steam used  to
                         regenerate the carbon beds is condensed and
                         treated in the AquaDetox system.
                         Technology Performance

                         This system  is currently being used at an
                         aeronautical  systems  facility   in   Burbank,
                         California, to treat ground water contaminated
                         with as much  as 2,200 ppb of TCE and 11,000
                         ppb PCE,  and soil  gas with  a  total VOC
                         concentration  of  6,000 ppm.   Contaminated
                         ground water  is being treated at a rate of up to
                         1,200 gpm while soil gas is removed and treated
                         at a rate of 300 cfrri.  The system  occupies
                         approximately 4,000 square feet.  ;

                         This technology was also tested  in a SITE
                         demonstration in September 1990.   EPA  is
                         currently preparing  demonstration results and
                         expects to make these results available in early
                         1991.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         General Site Information

                         The AWD AquaDetox/SVE system is currently
                         being  used at  the  Lockheed  Aeronautical
                         Systems Company in Burbank, California.  In
                         addition, EPA conducted a SITE demonstration
                         of the technology in September 1990 as part of
                         an  ongoing remediation  effort  at  the San
                         Fernando Valley Ground-Water Basin Superfund
                         site in Burbank, California.


                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Managers:
                         Norma Lewis and Gordon Evans
60
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7665 and 513/569-7684
FTS: 684-7665 and FTS:  684-7684
Technology Developer Contact:
David Bluestein
AWD Technologies, Inc.
49 Stevenson Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, California 94105
415/227-0822
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         61

-------
              0
                                                                             Vapor Extraction
                         Terra Vac In Situ Vacuum Extraction
                                        VOCs in Soils
Technology Description

The  Terra  Vac in  situ  vacuum extraction
technology can be used to remove and treat
volatile organic compounds  (VOCs) from the
vadose or unsaturated zone of soils.   This
technology is applicable to organic compounds
that  are  volatile or  semivolatile  at  ambient
temperatures in soils and ground water.  Often,
these  compounds can  be removed from the
vadose zone before they contaminate ground
water.  Contaminants must have  a  Henry's
constant of 0.001 or higher for effective removal.

During the in situ vacuum extraction process, a
well is used  to extract soil  gas  containing
organic  contaminants  like  trichloroethylene
(TCE).   The  extracted  contaminant stream
passes through a vapor/liquid separator, and the
resulting off-gases  undergo treatment, before
being released into the atmosphere. Removing
VOCs from the vadose zone using a vacuum is
a patented process.

The technology does not require soil excavation
and is  not limited by depth. The technology
works best at sites that are contaminated by
liquids with high vapor pressures. The success
of the system  depends on site conditions, soil
properties, and the  chemical properties of the
contaminants.  The process works in soils of low
permeability (clays) if the soil has sufficient air-
filled porosity.  Depending on the soil type and
the  depth to  ground  water,  the  radius  of
influence of a single extraction well can range
from tens to hundreds of feet.

The technology uses readily available equipment
such   as  extraction  and  monitoring  wells,
manifold piping, a  vapor/liquid separator,  a
vacuum pump, and an emission control device,
such as an activated carbon canister.  Once a
contaminated  area  is completely  defined, an
extraction  well  is installed and connected by
piping to  a vapor/liquid separator device.  A
vacuum  pump  draws  the   subsurface
contaminants through the well, to the separator
                          device,  and  through  a  treatment  system
                          consisting of  activated  carbon or a catalytic
                          oxidizer before the air stream is discharged to
                          the atmosphere.  Subsurface vacuum and soil
                          vapor  concentrations  are  monitored  using
                          vadose zone monitoring wells.

                          Typical  contaminant recovery  rates  range
                          between 20 and 2,500 pounds per day, and are
                          a function of the degree of contamination at the
                          site.  Typically, the  more volatile the organic
                          compound, the faster the process works. The
                          process  is  cost-effective  at  sites   where
                          contaminated  soils are predominantly above or
                          below the water table; dual vacuum extraction
                          systems have been designed for both vapor and
                          ground-water recovery.
                         Technology Performance

                         An in situ vacuum extraction demonstration at
                         the Groveland Wells Superfund site used four
                         extraction wells to pump contaminants to the
                         process  system.  Four monitoring wells were
                         used to measure the impact of treatment on site
                         contamination.  During the SITE demonstration,
                         1,300 pounds of volatile organics, mainly TCE,
                         were extracted  during a  56-day  operational
                         period.  The volatiles were removed from  both
                         highly  permeable strata and low permeability
                         clays.  The process achieved nondetectable
                         levels of  VOCs in the soil at some locations at
                         the test area.  The VOC concentration in soil gas
                         was reduced 95 percent.

                         The Terra Vac system was also tested at several
                         other  Superfund and  non-Superfund  sites.
                         These   field   evaluations   yielded   several
                         conclusions:

                         •    The  process  represents   a   viable
                              technology  to fully  remediate   a  site
                              contaminated   with   volatile   organic
                              compounds. Cleanup to non-detectable
                              levels  in  soil  can  be achieved under
                              certain conditions;
62
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
     The two major considerations in applying
     this technology are the volatility of the
     contaminants (i.e., Henry's constant) and
     the site soil porosity;

     The process performed well in removing
     volatile organic compounds from soil with
     measured permeabilities  of 10"4 to 10"
     8 cm/sec;

     Pilot  demonstrations  are  necessary at
     sites with complex geology or contaminant
     distributions; and
Remediation Costs

Based on available  data, treatment  costs are
typically $40 per ton of contaminated soil, but
can  range between $10  and $150 per ton
depending upon  requirements for off-gas or
wastewater treatment.
General Site Information

EPA first applied this technology at a Superfund
site in Puerto Rico, where carbon tetrachloride
had leaked from an underground storage tank.
In situ vacuum extraction processes have been
used at more than 100 waste sites across the
United States,  such as  the  Verona  Wells
Superfund Site in Battle Creek, Michigan, which
contains trichloroethylene and contaminantsfrom
solvent storage and spills. The SITE Program
performed a field demonstration of the process
at the  Groveland  Wells  Superfund  site  in
Groveland,   Massachusetts, ' which   was
contaminated with TCE.   EPA published the
Technology Evaluation Report and  Applications
Analysis Report.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
908/321-6683
FTS: 340-6683

Technology Developer Contact:
James Malot
Terra Vac, Inc.
356 Fontaleza Street
P.O. Box 1591
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00903
809/723-9171
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         63

-------
                                                                             Vapor Extraction
                             Vacuum-Induced Soil Venting
                                 Gasoline in Unsaturated Soil
 Technology Description

 The vacuum-induced venting process provides
 in situ cleanup of gasoline contamination above
 and  below  the  water table.    It reduces
 contamination to levels low enough to eliminate
 further leaching  or desorption of gasoline into
 the  ground water.  This technology  can be
 applied to hydrocarbon fuels in unsaturated soil.

 A vapor/ground-water extraction well, and a well
 for monitoring the vacuum induced venting were
 installed  in the  gas  spill area.   The vapor
 extraction/monitor  wells  each   have  five
 individually screened intervals in the unsaturated
 zone and two screened intervals below the water
 table.  A  vacuum-extraction system with thermal
 oxldizer is installed using one well to remediate
 the spill  area.  The vacuum-extraction system
 operates with a vacuum of between 20-25 inches
 of mercury and with a flow rate of approximately
 60 cfm. The present system uses an open pipe
 at the top  of an air-driven  pump, which  is
 manually adjusted to follow the gasoline water
 interface.  Both  wells  are used for skimming
 gasoline.
Technology Performance

Results from testing the vacuum-induced soil
venting technology  at the  Department  of
Energy's (DOE)  Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL) are positive:

•     Approximately 100 gallons of free product
      have been removed with this system;

•     Approximately  5000  gallons of gasoline
      have  been removed through  vacuum-
      induced venting through the calendar year
      1989;

•     Over the calendar year 1989, total fuel
      hydrocarbon concentrations (measured at
      the inlet of the thermal  oxidizer),  have
      decreased from 16,000 ppm  in January
                                1989 to about 3,000-4,000 ppm at year
                                end; and

                                The thermal  oxidizer  that destroys the
                                gaseous  hydrocarbons  as  they  are
                                removed has operated with a 99.8 percent
                                destruction efficiency.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information

                          Prior to 1979, approximately 17,000 gallons of
                          regular gasoline leaked into the soil and ground
                          water from an underground fuel storage tank at
                          the   DOE's   Lawrence   Livermore   National
                          Laboratory.   Vacuum-induced  venting  was
                          demonstrated at this site as a method to clean
                          the gasoline contamination in situ.


                          Contacts

                          DOE, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
                          University of California
                          P.O. Box 808
                          Livermore, California  94550
64
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Soil Washing

-------

-------
             1
             o
                                                                                Soil Washing
                                BEST Solvent Extraction
              Hydrocarbons and Other Organic Containments in Soils and Sludges
Technology Description

This BEST process is a mobile solvent extraction
system  that uses  one or more  secondary or
tertiary  amines, usually triethylamine (TEA), to
separate hydrocarbons from soils and sludges.
This technology is  applicable for  most organics
or  oily  contaminants in  sludges  or soils,
including polychlorinated biphenyls (P.CBs) (see
Table 1).

Solvent  extraction  is  potentially effective in
treating the contaminants  by separating the
sludges into three fractions:  oil, water,  and
solids.  As the fractions separate, contaminants
are  partitioned  into  specific phases.   For
example,  PCBs  are  concentrated  in  the oil
fraction, while metals are  separated into the
solids fraction. The overall volume and toxicity of
the original  waste solids are thereby reduced
and the concentrated waste streams  can be
efficiently treated for disposal.

The BEST technology is based on the fact that
TEA  is  completely   soluble   in  water  at
temperatures  below 20°  C.  Because TEA is
flammable  in  the  presence of oxygen,  the
treatment system  must  be sealed from the
atmosphere and  operated  under  a nitrogen
blanket. Prior to treatment, it is necessary to
raise the pH of the waste material to greater than
10, creating an environment where TEA will be
effectively conserved for recycling through the
process.    This   pH  adjustment  may  be
accomplished by  adding  sodium  hydroxide.
Pretreatment  also  includes  screening  the
contaminated feed solids to remove cobbles and
debris for smooth flow through the process.

The  BEST  process  begins by mixing  and
agitating  the  cold solvent and waste  in  a
washer/dryer.  The washer/dryer is a horizontal
steam-jacketed vessel with rotating  paddles.
Hydrocarbons  and  water  in  the  waste
simultaneously  solvate with  the  cold  TEA,
creating a homogeneous mixture. As the solvent
breaks the oil-water-solid bonds in the waste, the
solids are released and  allowed  to  settle  by
gravity. The solvent mixture is decanted and fine
particles  are removed by  centrifuging.  The
resulting  dry solids  have  been  ciea'nsed  of
hydrocarbons but contain most of the  original
waste's  heavy  metals, thus  requiring further
treatment prior to disposal.

The  liquids  from  the washer/dryer  vessels,
containing the hydrocarbons and water extracted
from the waste, are heated.  As the temperature
of the liquids increases, the water separates from
the organics and solvent.  The organics-solvent
fraction  is decanted and sent to a  stripping
column, where the solvent is recycled and the
organics  are   discharged  for  recycling  or
disposal.  The water phase is  passed  to a
second stripping column, where residual solvent
is recovered  for recycling. The water is typically
discharged to a local wastewater treatment plant.
Technology Performance

The BEST technology is  modular, allowing for
on-site treatment.  Performance of the BEST
solvent extraction process can be influenced by
the presence of detergents and emulsifiers, low
pH materials and reactivity of the organics with
the solvent.   Based on  the  results of many
bench-scale treatability tests conducted at the
General Refining Superfund site,  the process
significantly  reduces   the  hydrocarbon
concentration in the solids.

Other advantages of the technology include the
production of dry solids, the recovery and reuse
of soil, and  waste  volume  reduction.   By
removing organic  contaminants,  the process
reduces the overall toxicity of the solids and
water  streams.    It  also concentrates  the
contaminants into a smaller volume, allowing for
efficient final treatment and disposal.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         65

-------
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


General Site Information

The first full-scale BEST unit was used  at the
General Refining Superfund site in Garden City,
Georgia.  This solvent extraction technology is
the selected remedial action at the Pinnete's
Salvage site in Maine and is  the preferred
alternative at the F. O'Connor site in Maine. The
demonstration  of the BEST  process under the
SITE  Program is pending  selection  of an
appropriate site.
                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Edward Bates
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7774
                         FTS: 684-7774

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Paul McGough
                         Resources Conservation Company
                         3006 Northup Way
                         Bellevue, Washington  98004
                         206/828-2400
                                         TABLE 1
                        SPECIFIC WASTES CAPABLE OF TREATMENT
                               USING SOLVENT EXTRACTION
  RCRA Listed Hazardous Wastes
             Creosote-Saturated Sludge
             Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF) Float
             Slop Oil Emulsion Solids
             Heat Exchanger Bundle Cleaning Sludge
             API Separator Sludge
             Tank Bottoms (Leaded)
  Non-Listed Hazardous Wastes
             Primary Oil/Solids/Water Separation Sludges
             Secondary Oil/Solids/Water Separation Sludges
             Bio-Sludges
             Cooling Tower Sludges
             HF Alkylation Sludges
             Waste FCC Catalyst
             Spent Catalyst
             Stretford Unit Solution
             Tank Bottoms
             Treated Clays
66
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                               Soil Washing
                         Biogenesis Soil Cleaning Process
                                    Hydrocarbons in Soil
Technology Description

The BioGenesis™ process uses a specialized
truck, gravity and cyclone separators, and a
bioreactor to  wash hydrocarbon-contaminated
soil.     The   wash   rate  for  hydrocarbon
contamination up to 5,000 ppm is 25 tons per
hour; higher contamination levels require slower
wash rates. After the first wash, 100 to 200 ppm
of the residuals remain. A second wash reduces
residuals even further. A single wash removes 95
to 99 percent of hydrocarbon concentrations up
to 16,000 ppm. One or two additional washes
are used for concentrations up to 45,000 ppm.

The residuals biodegrade at an accelerated rate
due to contact with BioVersal™, a light, alkaline,
organic   formula   used  to  reduce   oil
contamination. Twenty-five tons of contaminated
soil are dumped into a  mixture of water  and
BioVersal™.  For 15 to 30 minutes, aeration
equipment agitates the mixture, washing the soil
and   encapsulating  oil  molecules  with
BioVersal™.

After washing, the liquid  products are recycled
or treated, and the soil is  dumped out of the soil
washer. The bioreactor processes the minimal
amount of wastewater produced  by the  soil
washer.  Recovered  oils are  recycled.   PCBs,
metals,  and  other  hazardous  materials  are
extracted in the same manner, then processed
using specific treatment methods. All equipment
is mobile, and treatment is normally on-site.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Diana Guzman
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7819
FTS:  684-7819
Technology Developer Contact:
Mohsen C. Amiran
BioVersal USA, Inc.
1703 Victoria Drive
Suite 303
Mount Prospect, Illinois  60056
708/228-7316

or

Charles L. Wilde
10626 Beechnut Court
Fairfax Station, Virginia  22039
703/250-3442
Technology Performance

This technology is used commercially in Europe.
It is applicable to soil contaminated with volatile
and nonvolatile hydrocarbons.  These  include
asphaltenes, polychlorinated biphenyis (PCBs),
polycylic hydrocarbons, and epichlorhydrin.

This technology  was  accepted  into the SITE
Program in July 1990.
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        67

-------
             \
                                                                                Soil Washing
                             Biotrol Soil Washing System
             Wood Preserving Wastes, Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Pesticides, PCBs,
                            Industrial Chemicals, and Metals in Soil
Technology Description

The Biotrol Soil Washing System is a patented,
water-based, volume  reduction  process  for
treating excavated soil contaminated with wood
preserving wastes,   petroleum  hydrocarbons,
pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
various industrial  chemicals, and metals.  This
soil washing technology may be used to treat
fine grained soils (silt, clay,  and soil organic
matter) and coarse  grained  soils (sand and
gravel).  The  objective of the process  is to
concentrate the  contaminants  in  a smaller
volume of material separate from a washed soil
product, with the goal that this soil product meet
appropriate cleanup standards.

After debris is removed, soil is mixed with water
and subjected  to   various  unit operations
common to the  mineral  processing industry.
Process steps can include mixing trommels, pug
mills,  vibrating screens,  froth  flotation   cells,
attrition scrubbing  machines,  hydrocyclones,
screw   classifiers,  and  various  dewatering
operations.  The core of the process is a multi-
stage,   counter-current,  intensive  scrubbing
circuit   with  interstage  classification.    The
scrubbing action disintegrates soil aggregates,
freeing contaminated fine  particles  from the
coarser sand and gravel.  In  addition, surficial
contamination  is  removed from the coarse
fraction by the abrasive scouring action of the
particles themselves.  Contaminants may also be
solubilized  as   dictated   by   solubility
characteristics or partition coefficients.

The efficiency of soil washing  can be improved
using surfactants,  detergents,  chelating agents,
pH adjustment,  or  heat.    In  many  cases,
however, water alone is insufficient to achieve
the desired level of  contaminant removal  while
minimizing  cost.    The  volume of  material
requiring  additional  treatment  or  disposal is
reduced significantly  by separating the washed,
coarser soil components from the process water
and  contaminated   fine  particles.     The
                          contaminated residual products can be treated
                          by other methods.   Process water is normally
                          recycled after biological or physical treatment.
                          Options for the contaminated fines can include
                          off-site disposal, incineration, stabilization, or
                          biological treatment.

                          This technology was initially developed to clean
                          soils contaminated with wood preserving wastes
                          such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and
                          pentachlorophenol   (PCP).     However,  the
                          technology  is   also   applicable   to   soils
                          contaminated with   petroleum  hydrocarbons,
                          pesticides, polychlorinated  biphenyls (PCBs),
                          various industrial chemicals,  and metals.
                          Technology Performance

                          During the SITE demonstration of this technology
                          at the MacGillis & Gibbs Superfund site, a pilot-
                          scale unit with a treatment capacity  of 500
                          pounds per hour was operated 24 hours per day
                          during the demonstration.   Feed  for the first
                          phase of the demonstration (two days) consisted
                          of soil contaminated with 170 ppm PCP and 240
                          ppm total PAHS.   During  the second  phase
                          (seven days), soil containing 980 ppm PCP and
                          340 ppm total PAHs was fed to the system.

                          Contaminated process water from soil washing
                          was treated biologically in  a fixed film  reactor
                          and recycled.  A three-stage, pilot-scale EIMCO
                          Biolift™ reactor system, supplied by the EIMCO
                          Process  Equipment Company,  was used to
                          biologically treat a portion of the contaminated
                          fines generated during soil washing.

                          Preliminary demonstration results showed that
                          PCP levels in the washed soil were reduced by
                          91 to 93 percent. Biological treatment reduced
                          PCP levels in the process  water by 89 to 94
                          percent.  Removal efficiencies increased  as the
                          test proceeded. Near the completion of the test,
                          PCP removal was about 92 percent, while PAH
                          removal ranged from 86 to 99 percent.
68
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


General Site Information

EPA conducted the SITE demonstration of this
soil washing technology from September 25 to
October 27, 1989 at the  MacGillis  & Gibbs
Superfund site in New Brighton, Minnesota. EPA
expects to release the demonstration reports in
the first quarter of 1991.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey  08837
908/321-6683
FTS: 340-6683

Technology Developer Contact:
John K. Sheldon
BioTrol, Inc.
11 Peavey Road
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
612/448-2515
Fax: 612/448-6050
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       69

-------
v
.m.
                                                      Soil Washing
                               Debris Washing System
                            Hazardous Chemicals in Solid Debris
Technology Description

EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering  Laboratory
(RREL) staff and PEI Associates, Inc. developed
the  Debris  Washing  System   (DWS)  to
decontaminate  debris  currently  found  at
Superfund sites throughout the  country.   The
DWS can be applied on-site to various types of
debris (metallic, masonry, or other solid debris)
contaminated with hazardous chemicals such as
pesticides,  polychlorinated  biphenyls (PCBs),
lead, and other metals. EPA demonstrated the
Debris Washing System under EPA's Innovative
Technology  Program and PEI Associates, Inc.
will commercialize the technology.

The DWS consists of 300-gallon spray and wash
tanks, surfactant and rinse water holding tanks,
and an oil/water separator. The decontamination
solution   treatment  system   includes   a
diatomaceous earth filter, an activated carbon
column, and an ion exchange column. The DWS
unit is transported on  a 48-foot semitrailer. At
the treatment site, the DWS unit is assembled on
a 25 by 24 foot concrete pad and enclosed in a
temporary shelter.

The DWS process operates by placing a basket
of debris in the spray tank with a forklift where it
is sprayed with an aqueous detergent solution.
An array  of high   pressure water jets  blast
contaminants  and   dirt  from   the  debris.
Detergent  solution   is  continually  recycled
through a filter system that cleans the liquid.

The wash and rinse tanks are  supplied  with
water at 140° F, at 60 psig.  The contaminated
wash solution is collected and treated prior to
discharge. An integral part of the technology is
treatment of the process detergent solution and
rinse  water  to   reduce  the   contaminant
concentration  to  allowable discharge levels.
Process water treatment consists of particulate
filtration, activated carbon  adsorption and  ion
exchange. Approximately 1,000 gallons of liquid
are used during the  decontamination process.
                         Technology Performance

                         During the first pilot-scale testing at the Region
                         V  Carter  Industrial  Superfund  site,  PCB
                         reductions averaged 58 percent in  batch 1 and
                         81 percent in batch 2.   RREL and PEI then
                         incorporated design changes and tested these
                         changes on the unit, prior to additional field
                         testing.

                         Field-testing of the upgraded pilot-scale  DWS
                         unit conducted at a Region IV Superfund site
                         yielded promising results.  PCB levels on the
                         surfaces of metallic transformer casings  were
                         reduced to less than or equal to 10 micrograms
                         PCB/100 cm2. All 75 contaminated transformer
                         casings on-site were  decontaminated  to U.S.
                         EPA acceptable cleanup criteria and sold to a
                         scrap metal dealer.

                         The  unit  also was  field  tested  at  a  site
                         contaminated  with Dicamba and  benzonitrile.
                         During the test, fifty-five gallon drums were cut
                         into sections,  placed in the DWS,  and carried
                         through the decontamination process.  Results
                         from this study are currently being prepared.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         General Site Information

                         RREL performed the first pilot-scale testing at the
                         Region V Carter  Industrial Superfund site  in
                         Detroit, Michigan.  RREL field  tested the unit
                         using the upgraded pilot-scale DWS unit at a
                         Region IV PCB-contaminated Superfund Site in
                         Hopkinsville, Kentucky, during December 1989.
                         RREL also field tested the unit  at the Shaver's
                         Farm site in Walker County, Georgia.
70
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Naomi Barkley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7854
FTS:  684-7854

Technology Developer Contact:
Michael L. Taylor
PEI Associates, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
513/782-4801
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
71

-------
              ul
              O
                                                                                 Soil Washing
                               Ghea Associates Process
                          Inorganic and Organic Contaminants in Soil
Technology Description

The Ghea Associates process uses selected
surfactants (detergent-like chemicals) in a water
solution to extract both inorganic and organic
contaminants from the soil.  The technology is
applicable to   mixtures  of  widely  varying
compositions,   including  organic,   inorganic,
volatile, and  nonvolatile contaminants.   The
resulting mixture is purified by separating out the
surfactant/contaminant complex and splitting it
into a surfactant fraction, which is recovered for
repeated use and a contaminants fraction.

The cleaning power of surfactants comes from
the presence of both hydrophilic ("water-liking")
and lipophilic ("oil-liking") groups on the same
molecule.  Therefore, surfactants can link an oily
contaminant with the  water, pulling  it from its
matrix the way laundry soap (a detergent) pulls
soil from cloth into the wash water.  Surfactants
enable  water  to hold  large  quantities of oil
contaminants by forming "micelles," tiny capsules
of surfactant filled with the contaminant.

A variation of the process called "foam flotation,"
uses surfactants to form stable bubbles, which
can lift heavy particles to the top of the solution.
This process  combines "foam flotation"  with
ultrafiltration to achieve complete recovery of the
surfactants  from  the  surfactant/contaminant
complex and the reduction of dissolved metals.

After extraction, solids  are  filtered  out of the
washing solution. These solids are  rinsed and
disposed of after they are confirmed to be pure.
The temperature  or   pH of  the  solution  is
changed  so  that the  surfactant/contaminant
separates from the water.  The water is again
treated  and recycled  through the  system or
discharged to  the sewer.   The surfactant  is
separated  from the  contaminants  and  also
recycled.   The  contaminated  fraction will be
disposed of according to federal regulations.
                          This process uses the appropriate surfactant or
                          surfactant mixtures to separate the contaminants
                          of  interest.  Dosages,  mixing time,  and  the
                          precise means of separating the fraction of the
                          wash water will vary with the situation.
                          Technology Performance

                          Treatability tests conducted by Ghea Associates
                          have been  promising.  When tested with tar-
                          contaminated soil,  the process  was able  to
                          remove more than  99 percent of the organic
                          materials and 65 to  85 percent of some metallic
                          contaminants from the matrix.  Other treatability
                          tests using BTX in water, trinitrotoluene in water,
                          and gas and diesel fuel in soil have been equally
                          successful.                     ;
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          General Site Information        :

                          EPA accepted the technology into the SITE
                          Emerging Technologies Program in July 1990.
                          The developer is preparing the work plan and
                          quality  assurance project plan for U.S.  EPA
                          approval.


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Annette Gatchett
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                          513/569-7697
                          FTS:  684-7697
72
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Technology Developer Contact:
Itzhak Gotlieb
New-Jersey Institute of Technology
Department of Chemical Engineering
Newark, New Jersey  07102
201/596-5862
                       Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
73

-------
                                                                               Soil Washing
                            Soil Treatment with Extraksol
                                Organic Contaminants in Soil
Technology Description

The Sanivan Group has developed Extraksol, a
mobile  solvent  extraction  technology  which
extracts organic contaminants from solids. It has
been  successfully tested in a number of pilot
projects on a range of contaminants, including
polychlorinated   biphenyls   (PCBs),
pentachlorophenol   (PGP),   polyaromatic
hydrocarbons   (PAHs),   monoaromatic
hydrocarbons  (MAHs),  pesticides,  oils,  and
hydrocarbons.   The  process extracts  these
contaminants   from   the  soil   by   using
nonchlorinated, non-persistent organic solvents,
which are regenerated  by  distillation.   The
contaminants are concentrated in the distillation
residues.

The three treatment steps - soil washing, soil
drying, and solvent  regeneration - occur on a
flatbed trailer.  The  extraction fluid (solvent) is
circulated  through  the  contaminated  matrix
within  a  tumbling  vat to  wash the  soil.
Controlled temperature and  pressure optimize
the washing procedure.  Hot inert gas dries the
soil.  The gas vaporizes the residual extract fluid
and   carries  it from  the tumbling vat to a
condenser, where the solvent is again separated
from  the  gas.   The now solvent-free  gas is
reheated and reinjected into the soil as required
for complete drying.  After the drying cycle, the
decontaminated  soil may be returned  to its
original location.

Distillation of the contaminated solvent achieves
two   major objectives:   (1)  it  minimizes the
amount  of solvent  required to  perform the
extraction by regenerating it in  a closed  loop,
and  (2) ft significantly reduces the volume of
contaminants requiring further treatment or off-
site disposal by concentrating them in the still
bottoms.

The  Extraksol  process  has  several soil
restrictions:
                        •    Maximum clay fraction, 40 per cent;

                        •    Maximum water content, 30 per cent;

                        •    Maximum particle size if porous material,
                              2 inches; and

                        •    Maximum  particle  size  if   non-porous
                              material, 1-2 feet.


                        Technology Performance

                        This technology was accepted into  the  SITE
                        program in June 1990.   Plans are currently
                        underway to demonstrate this technology at a
                        Superfund  site located in the northeastern part
                        of Maine in late Summer 1991.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         Contacts:

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Mark Meckes
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268              \
                         513/569-7348
                         FTS: 684-7348

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Peter Z. Colak
                         Sanivan
                         7777 Boulevard L.H. Lafontaine
                         Anjou  (Quebec)
                         H1K4E4
                         514/355-3351
 74
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
I
              u>
              (9
                                                                                 Soil Washing
                                    Solvent Extraction
                  Organics, Oil, and Grease in Wastewater, Soils, and Sludges
Technology Description

-This technology uses liquified gas solvent to
extract organics, oil, and grease from wastewater
or contaminated sludges and soils. Specifically,
this technology  can be  applied to  waste
containing hydrocarbons, carbon tetrachloride,
chloroform, benzene, naphthalene,  gasoline,
vinyl acetate, furfural, butyric acid, higher organic
acids, dichloroethane, oils and grease, xylene,
toluene,   methyl   acetate,  acetone,   higher
alcohols,  butanol,  propanol, phenol, heptane,
polychlorinated biphenyls  (PCBs) and  other
complex organics.

In this solvent extraction system, carbon dioxide
is the  gas used for  aqueous solutions, while
propane and/or butane is  used for sediment,
sludges   and   soils   (semisolids).      First,
contaminated solids, slurrys or wastewaters are
fed into the extractor. Solvent  (gas condensed
by  compression)  is  also fed to the  extractor,
making nonreactive  contact with the  waste.
Typically,  more than 99 percent of the organics
are separated from the feedwaste.

Following  phase separation of the solvent and
organics,  treated water is removed  from  the
extractor  while the  mixture  of  solvent  and
organics  passes  to the separator through a
valve, where pressure is partially reduced. In the
separator, the solvent is vaporized and recycled
as fresh solvent.  The organics are drawn off
from  the   separator, and  either reused  or
diposed.

The extractor design is different for contaminated
wastewaters and semisolids. For wastewaters,
a tray tower contactor is  used, whereas for
semisolids a  series of  extractor/decanters
operating  countercurrently is employed.
Technology Performance

This technology was demonstrated concurrently
with dredging studies managed  by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers. The CF Systems Pit
Cleanup Unit  treated contaminated sediments
using a liquified propane and butane mixture as
the extraction solvent.

The following test results include the number of
passes  made  during  each  test  and  the
concentration  of PCBs before and after each
test:

Extraction efficiencies were high, despite some
operating difficulties during the tests. The use of
treated sediment  as feed to the  next pass
caused cross-contamination in the system.  Full
scale  commercial  systems  are  designed to
eliminate problems associated with the  pilot
plant design.

The following conclusions were drawn from this
series of tests  and  other data:

•     Extraction  efficiencies  of  90-98% were
      achieved  on  sediments   containing
      between 350 and 2,575 ppm PCBs. PCB
      concentrations were as low as 8 ppm  in
      the treated sediment;

•     In the laboratory, extraction efficiencies of
      99.9% have been obtained for volatile and
      semivolatile  organics  in  aqueous  and
      semi-solid wastes;

•     Operating problems included solids being
      retained in  the system  hardware  and
      foaming in receiving tanks. The vendor
      identified corrective measures that will be
      implemented in the full-scale commercial
      unit; and

•     Projected costs for PCB  cleanups  are
      estimated at  approximately $150 to $450
      per ton,  including material handling  and
      pre-  and post-treatment costs.    These
      costs are highly sensitive to the utilization
      factor and job size,  which may result in
      lower costs for large cleanups.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         75

-------
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


General Site Information

EPA tested the pilot-scale system on PCB-laden
sediments  from  the  New   Bedford
(Massachusetts)  Harbor  Superfund  site  in
September  1988.   PCB concentrations in the
harbor ranged from 300  ppm to 2,500 ppm.
EPA published the Technology Evaluation Report
(TER) in early 1990 (EPA/540/5-90/002).

Commercial systems have been sold to Clean
Harbors  in  Braintree,   Massachusetts,  for
wastewater cleanup; and to Ensco in Little Rock,
Arkansas, for incinerator pretreatment.  A unit is
in operation at Star Enterprise in Port Arthur,
Texas, treating API separator  sludge  to meet
Best Demonstrated and  Available Technology
(BOAT) standards for organics.
                        Contacts

                        EPA Project Manager:
                        Laurel Staley
                        U.S. EPA
                        26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                        Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                        513/569-7863 or FTS: 684-7863

                        Technology Developer Contact:
                        Chris Shallice
                        CF Systems Corporation
                        140 Second Avenue
                        Waltham, Massachusetts  02154
                        617/890-1200 (ext. 158)
Test2
Tests
Test 4
PCB
Passes
9
3
6
Concentration
Before
360 ppm
288 ppm
2575 ppm
After :
8 ppm
82 ppm
200 ppm ,
 76
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Solidification /Stabilization

-------

-------
             1
             (9
                                                                     Solidification/Stabilization
                   Chemfix Solidification / Stabilization Process
                                Solid Waste in Soil and Sludge
Technology Description

This solidification/stabilization process involves
an inorganic system in which soluble silicates
and silicate setting agents react with polyvalent
metal ions  and other waste components to
produce a chemically and physically stable solid
material.    This  technology  is  suitable  for
contaminated  soil,  sludge,  and other  solid
wastes.  It can also be used for base, neutral, or
acid extractable  organics  of high  molecular
weight, such as refinery wastes, creosote, and
wood-treating wastes. Additionally, solidification/
stabilization  can  be applied, to electroplating
wastes, electric arc furnace dust, and municipal
sewage sludge containing heavy metals such as
aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium,  iron, lead,  manganese,
mercury,  nickel, selenium, silver, thallium,  and
zinc.

The  Chemfix solidification/stabilization process
operates by  blending feed waste in the reaction
vessel with certain reagents that are dispersed
and  dissolved  throughout the aqueous phase.
The  reagents react with polyvalent ions in the
waste.    Inorganic  polymer chains  (insoluble
metal silicates) form throughout the aqueous
phase and physically entrap the organic colloids
within the microstructure of the  product matrix.
The  water-soluble  silicates  then  react with
complex  ions  in  the  presence of  a siliceous
setting agent,  producing amorphous, colloidal
silicates (gels) and silicon dioxide, which acts as
a precipitating agent.  Most of the heavy metals
in the waste become part of the silicate.  Some
of the heavy  metals precipitate with the structure
of the  complex  molecules.    A  very small
percentage  (estimated to  be  less  than  one
percent)   of the  heavy  metals  precipitates
between  the silicates  and is  not  chemically
immobilized.

Because  some organics  may be contained in
particles larger than the colloids, all of the waste
is pumped  through  processing  equipment,
creating sufficient shear to emulsify the organic
constituents.   Emulsified  organics  are then
solidified and discharged to  a prepared area,
where the gel continues to set.  The resulting
solids,  though  friable,  encase  any  organic
substances  that   may   have   escaped
emulsification.

The system  can  be operated at 5 to 80 percent
solids in the waste feed; water is added for drier
wastes.  Portions of the water contained in the
wastes are  involved  in three reactions after
treatment:   (1)  hydration, similar to  that  of
cement reactions;  (2)  hydrolysis reactions; and
(3) equilibration through evaporation.  There are
no side streams or discharges from this process.
Technology Performance

From fall  1989 through winter 1990, Chemfix
Technologies,   Inc.'s   subsidiary,   Chemfix
Environmental Services, Inc.  (CES),  applied a
high solids CHEMSET®
reagent protocol approach to the treatment of
about  30,000 cubic yards of  heavy  metal-
contaminated waste.  The technology met  the
goal of reducing leachable hexavalent chromium
to below 0.5 ppm in the Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP), as well as the goal
of producing a synthetic clay cover material with
low permeability (less than 1  x 10~6 cm/sec).
The technology also met the production goal of
exceeding  400 tons per day.   This included
production during many subfreezing days in
December, January, and March.

The  CES  technology  was also  effective  in
reducing the concentrations of lead and copper
in the TCLP extracts. The concentrations in  the
extracts from the treated wastes were 94 to 99
percent less than  those  from the  untreated
wastes.  Total lead concentrations in the raw
waste approached 14 percent.

The  CES  solidification/stabilization technology
performed well in several areas:
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtabie
                                         77

-------
     The volume  of  the excavated  waste
     material increased from 20 to 50 percent
     as a result of treatment;

     In the durability tests, the treated wastes
     showed little or no weight  loss after 12
     cycles of wetting and drying or freezing
     and thawing;

     The unconfined compressive strength of
     the wastes varied between 27 and 307 psi
     after 28 days. Permeability decreased by
     more than one order of magnitude;

     The air monitoring data suggest there was
     no  significant  volatilization  of
     polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)  during
     the treatment process; and

     The treated waste matrix displays good
     stability, a high melting point, and a friable
     texture. The matrix may be similar to soil,
     depending upon the water content of the
     feed waste.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.
                         General Site Information

                         The  technology was demonstrated  in March
                         1989  at  the  Portable  Equipment  Salvage
                         Company  site  in  Clackamas, Oregon.   EPA
                         published  the  preliminary results in the  SITE
                         Demonstration Bulletin (October 1989), and also
                         released a single draft report describing the
                         demonstration  and  future  application  of this
                         technology.     EPA   released   the   final
                         demonstration report in early 1990.  During the
                         summer of 1990, CES engaged in another high
                         solids project involving lead.

                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Edwin Barth
                         U.S.  EPA
                         Center for  Environmental Research Information
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7669
                         FTS: 684-7669

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Philip N. Baldwin, Jr.
                         Chemfix Technologies, Inc.
                         Suite 620,  Metairie Center
                         2424 Edenborn Avenue
                         Metairie, Louisiana  70001
                         504/831-3600
78
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
             01
             O
                                                                     Solidification/Stabilization
                   iM-TECH Solidification / Stabilization Process
             Organic Compounds, Heavy Metals, Ore and Grease in Soil and Sludge
Technology Description

The IM-TECH solidification/stabilization process
immobilizes contaminants  in soil or sludge by
binding them into a concrete-like, leach-resistant
mass.  This treatment technology is suitable for
soil  and  sludge contaminated  with organic
compounds,  heavy  metals,  oil  and grease.
These  wastes  can  be  treated  together or
individually.

Contaminated soil or sludge can be excavated
and/or treated in situ.  If excavated, the waste is
screened for oversized material and fed into a
field blending  unit.   The  blending  unit  may
consist of  concrete ready-mix trucks or huge
batch plants capable of blending 100 tons per
hour.

The solidification/stabilization  process  mixes
hazardous wastes, cement or flyash, water, and
a  patented  additive  called  Chloranan  that
encapsulates organic and inorganic molecules.
First, the Chloranan and water are added to the
blending unit. Next, the waste is added and the
ingredients mixed for about one minute. Finally,
the cement or  flyash is added and the whole
mass mixed for a final minute. After 12 hours,
the treated output hardens into a concrete-like
mass   that  binds   and  immobilizes  the
contaminant.
 Technology Performance

 The comparison of results from the seven-day,
 28-day, nine month, and 22-month soil sample
 tests  at  Douglassville,   Pennsylvania,  are
 generally favorable.  The physical test results
 were very good,  with unconfined compressive
 strength between 220 to 1570 psi.  Very low
 permeabilities were recorded, and the porosity of
 the treated wastes was moderate. Durability test
 results showed no change in physical strength
 after the wet/dry  and freeze/thaw cycles.  The
 waste volume increased by about 120 percent.
 However, refinements on the technology now
restrict volumetric increases to the 15-25 percent
range.  Using less additives reduces strength,
but toxicity reduction is  not  affected.   There
appears to be an inverse relationship between
physical  strength  and  the  waste  organic
concentration.

The results of the leaching tests were mixed.
The Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) results of the stabilized wastes were very
low;  essentially  all  values  of metals,  volatile
organics and semivolatile organics  were below
one   ppm.    Lead  leachate  concentrations
dropped by a factor of 200 to below 100 ppb.
Volatile and semivolatile organic concentrations,
however, did not change from the untreated soil
TCLP.  Oil  and  grease concentrations were
greater in the treated waste TCLPs than in the
untreated waste, from less than two ppm up to
four ppm.

The    IM-TECH   solidification/stabilization
technology performed well in several areas:

•     It solidified contaminated  material with
      high concentrations (up to 25 percent) of
      organics; however, organic contaminants,
      including   volatiles   and  base/neutral
      extractables, were not immobilized to any
      significant extent;

•     It immobilized heavy  metals  - in many
      instances,  leachate   reductions  were
      greater than 100 fold;

•     The  physical properties of  the  treated
      waste   exhibited  high   unconfined
      compressive strengths, low permeabilities,
      and good weathering properties; and

•     The volume of treated soil increased.
Remediation Costs

The process, based on tests at Douglassville,
Pennsylvania,   was  economical,  with  costs
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         79

-------
 ranging  from $40-60 per ton for processing
 heavy metals waste, and between $75-100 per
 ton for wastes with heavy organic content.
 General Site Information

 The technology was demonstrated in October
 1987 at a former oil  reprocessing  plant in
 Douglassville, Pennsylvania. The site contained
 high levels of oil and grease  (25 percent) and
 heavy metals (2.2 percent lead), and low levels
 of VOCs (100  ppm) and PCBs (75 ppm).  A
 Technology Evaluation Report (September 1988)
 and Applications Analysis Report (May  1990)
 describing  the  completed  demonstration  are
 available from EPA's Center for Environmental
 Research Information (CERI).  A report on long-
 term monitoring will be available by 1990.

 Since the  demonstration, the technology has
 been used to  remediate a  sludge  with 85
 percent  oil from a refinery lagoon in Alaska,
 several organic sludges for refineries on the Gulf
 Coast,   and  a   California   Superfund  site
 contaminated with  very high  levels  of heavy
 metals.
                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Paul R. dePercin
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7797
                          FTS: 684-7797

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Ray Funderburk
                          IM-TECH
                          Route  1, Box 250
                          Oakwood, Texas  75855
                          1-800-227-6543
80
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
             o
                                                                    Solidification/Stabilization
                    In Situ Solidification / Stabilization Process
                Inorganic and Organic Compounds in Soil, Sediment, and Sludge
Technology Description
                 i                     .
This in  situ solidification/stabilization process
immobilizes organic and inorganic compounds in
wet or dry soil,  using  reagents (additives) to
produce a cement-like mass.  This technology
can be applied to soil, sediments, and sludge-
pond   bottoms  contaminated  with  organic
compounds and metals. The process has been
laboratory-tested  on   soil   containing
polychlorinated   biphenyls   (PCBs),
pentachlorophenol,  refinery   wastes,   and
chlorinated and nitrated hydrocarbons.

There  are  two   basic  components  of  this
technology:   (1) Geo-Con's deep  soil  mixing
system (DSM), a system to  deliver and mix the
chemicals with the soil in  situ; and  (2) a batch
mixing plant to supply the  International Waste
Technologies'   (IWT)   proprietary  treatment
chemicals.  The  DSM system can  be used  in
almost any  soil type;  however,  mixing time
increases with fineness.  It can be used below
the water table  and in soft  rock  formations.
Large obstructions must be  avoided.

The   IWT  additives  generate  a complex,
crystalline,  connective  network  of inorganic
polymers.    The  structural bonding  in  the
polymers  is  mainly  covalent.    The process
involves a two-phased reaction  in which the
contaminants are first compiexed in a fast-acting
reaction,  and  then  in a  slow-acting reaction,
where the building of macromolecules continues
over a long period of  time.  The amount of
additives used varies for each type of waste.
Treatability tests are recommended.

The DSM  system involves  mechanical  mixing
and injection. The system consists of one set of
cutting blades and two sets of mixing blades
attached to a vertical drive auger, which rotates
at approximately 15 rpm.  Two conduits in the
auger are used to inject the additive slurry and
supplemental water.  Additive injection occurs on
the downstroke; further mixing takes place upon
auger withdrawal. The treated soil columns are
36 inches in diameter, and are positioned in an
overlapping  pattern of alternating primary and
secondary soil columns.
Technology Performance

Testing  of the technology's performance at a
PCB-contaminated site  in  Hialeah,  Florida,
indicated promising results:

»     Immobilization of PCBs appears likely, but
      could  not be confirmed because of low
      PCB concentrations in the untreated soil.
      Leachate tests on  treated and untreated
      soil samples showed mostly undetectable
      PCB levels.  Leachate tests performed one
      year later on treated soil samples showed
      no  increase   in   PCB   concentrations,
      indicating immobilization.

•     Sufficient data were  not available to
      evaluate the performance of the system
      with regard to metals or other  organic
      compounds.

•     Each of the test  samples showed  high
      unconfined  compressive  strength,  low
      permeability, and  low  porosity.   These
      physical  properties   improved   when
      retested orie  year later,  indicating  the
      potential for long-term durability.

«     The bulk density of the soil increased 21
      percent after treatment.  This  increased
      the volume of treated soil by 8.5 percent
      and caused a  small ground rise of one
      inch per treated foot of soil.

«     The unconfined  compressive  strength
      (DCS)  of the treated soil was satisfactory,
      with values up to 1,500 pounds  per
      square inch (psi).

«     The permeability of the treated soil was
      satisfactory, decreasing four orders of
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        81

-------
      magnitude compared to the untreated soil,
      or 10"6 and 10~7 compared to 10~2 cm/sec.

•     The wet/dry weathering  test on treated
      soil was satisfactory.   The  freeze/dry
      weathering  test  of  treated  soil  was
      unsatisfactory.

•     The microstructural analysis, scanning
      electron  microscopy  (SEM),   optical
      microscopy, and x-ray diffraction (XRD),
      showed that the treated  material  was
      dense,  non-porous, and homogeneously
      mixed.

*     The Geo-Con DSM equipment operated
      reliably.

This  technology  demonstration   site  was
composed primarily of unconsolidated sand and
limestone.  The demonstration yielded several
conclusions   about  the  performance  of  the
technology:

•     Microstructural analyses of the treated soil
      indicated  a   potential  for  long-term
      durability.  High unconfined compressive
      strengths and  low permeabilities were
      recorded.

•     Data provided  by IWT  indicate some
      immobilization of volatile and semivolatile
      organics.    This  may  be  due  to
      organophilic clays present  in the  IWT
      reagent.  There  are insufficient  data to
      confirm this immobilization.

•     Performance data are. limited  outside of
      SITE demonstrations.    The  developer
      modifies the binding  agent for different
      wastes. Treatability studies should be
      performed for specific wastes.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Remediation costs for this process are estimated
                         at $194 per ton of contaminated soil for the one-
                         auger machine used in the demonstration, and
                         $111  per  ton for a  commercial four-auger
                         operation.
                         General Site Information

                         EPA conducted a SITE demonstration at a PCB-
                         contaminated site  in Hialeah, Florida, in April
                         1988.  Two 10 x 20-foot test sectors of the  site
                         were treated, one to a depth of 18 feet, and the
                         other to a depth of 14 feet. Ten months after the
                         demonstration,   EPA   performed   long-term
                         monitoring  tests on the treated  sectors.   EPA
                         published the Technology Evaluation Report and
                         Applications Analysis Report.
                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Mary K. Stinson
                         U.S. EPA,  RREL
                         Woodbridge Avenue
                         Edison, New Jersey 08837
                         908/321-6683

                         Technology Developer Contacts:
                         Jeff P.  Newton
                         International Waste Technologies
                         150 North Main Street, Suite 910
                         Wichita, Kansas  67202
                         316/269-2660

                         Brian Jasperse
                         Geo-Con,  Inc.
                         P.O. Box17380
                         Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
                         412/856-7700
82
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                   Solidification/Stabilization
                         Soil-Cement Mixing Wall (S.M.W.)
                      Metals and Semivolatile Organic Compounds in Soil
Technology Description

The   Soil-Cement   Mixing   Wall  (S.M.W.)
technology  involves  the   in  situ   fixation
stabilization  . and   solidification  of   soil
contaminated  with  metals  and  Semivolatile
organic  compounds,  including   pesticides,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), phenols, and
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).  Multi-axis
overlapping hollow stem augers, mounted on a
crawler-type   base   machine,   inject
solidification/stabilization agents and blend them
with the contaminated soil in situ.

The machine can treat 90 to 140 cubic yards of
soil per eight-hour shift at depths up to 100 feet.
The in situ solidification/stabilization technology
produces  a  monolithic  block  down  to the
treatment depth.  The volume increase ranges
from 10 to 30 percent, depending on the nature
of the soil matrix and the amount of  fixation
reagents and water required for treatment.

This  technique  has  been used  in mixing soil,
cement, or chemical grout for  more than 18
years  on   various  construction  applications,
including cutoff walls and soil stabilization.
Technology Performance

This project  was  accepted  into the
Demonstration Program in  June  1989.
selection is currently underway.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
S. Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7507
FTS: 684-7507

Technology Developer Contact:
David S. Yang
S.M.W. Seiko, Inc.
100 Marine Parkway
Suite 350
Redwood City, California 94065
415/591-9646
SITE
 Site
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        83

-------
              o
                                                                     Solidification/Stabilization
                              Solidification / Stabilization
                      Organics and Inorganics In Soil, Sludge, and Liquid
Technology Description

This solidification/stabilization technology applies
proprietary bonding agents to soil, sludge, and
liquid wastes containing volatile or semi-volatile
organic  and  inorganic  contaminants  to  fix
pollutants within the wastes. The treated waste
is then  mixed with cementitious materials and
placed  in  a  stabilizing matrix.  The specific.
reagents used are custom-selected based on the
particular waste to  be treated.  The resultant
material   is  a  high-strength,  non-leaching
monolith that can be placed into the ground.
This process uses  standard  engineering and
construction equipment.   Since the type and
dose of  reagents   depend  on the  waste's
characteristics,  treatability studies and  site
investigations must be conducted to determine
the proper reagent  mix.   The process begins
with a  front end loader  and/or  a backhoe
excavating the waste material.

Material containing large pieces of debris must
be prescreened.  The waste is then placed, in
measured quantities,  into  a pug mill or  other
mixer, where it is mixed with a controlled amount
of water and reagent.  From there, the waste-
reagent mixture is transferred  to the cement
batcher, where it is mixed  with dry  blends of a
pozzolanic mixture.   The  operation does not
generate waste byproducts.
                          Remediation Costs

                          Cost information is not available.


                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Terry Lyons
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7589
                          FTS: 684-7589
                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          E. Benjamin Peacock
                          Wastech, Inc.
                          P.O. Box 1213
                          114TulsaRoad
                          Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
                          615/483-6515
Technology Performance

EPA is in the process of selecting a site for the
technology  demonstration.    To  date, this
technology has treated a wide variety of waste
streams consisting of soil,  sludge,  and raw
organic streams, such as lubricating oil, aromatic
solvents, evaporator bottoms, chelating agents,
and ion exchange  resins,  with contaminant
concentrations  ranging from  parts  per million
(ppm)  levels to 40 percent  by volume.  The
technology can also be applied to mixed wastes
containing  radioactive  materials along  with
organic and inorganic contaminants.
84
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
I
             o
                                                                     Solidification/Stabilization
              Solidification / Stabilization with Silicate Compounds
                  Organics and Inorganics in Ground Water, Soil, and Sludge
Technology Description

This technology uses silicate compounds to fix
and solidify soil and sludge contaminated with
metals, cyanide, fluorides, arsenates, ammonia,
chromates,   and   selenium   in  unlimited
concentrations. This technology also removes
organics from  contaminated water.   Higher
weight organics .in ground water, soil, and
sludge,  including halogenated,  aromatic, and
aliphatic compounds, can also be treated by this
process.    However, the  process  is not  as
successful for low molecular weight organics
such as alcohols, ketones, glycols, and volatile
organics.   For  soil  and  sludge, proprietary
silicate reagents selectively adsorb organic and
inorganic  contaminants before the  waste is
mixed with a cement-like material to form a high-
strength, non-leaching cement block (monolith).
For water, the same  reagents can be used in
conjunction with granular  activated carbon to
remove  organics from the ground water. The
resulting waste material is then solidified  by the
first technology.

In this combined technology, the type and dose
of reagents depend on the waste characteristics.
Treatability studies and site investigations  are
conducted to determine reagent formulations.

The process begins with  pretreatment  of  the
contaminated waste material. Coarse material is
separated from fine material and sent through a
shredder or crusher to reduce the material to the
size required for the solidification technology.
The waste is then loaded into  a batch  plant,
weighed, and the proportional amount of silicate
reagent is added. This mixture is conveyed to a
concrete mixing truck, pug mill or other mixing
equipment where water is added and the mixture
is thoroughly blended.  The treated material is
then placed in a confining pit on-site for curing,
or cast into molds for transport and disposal off-
site.
A self-contained mobile filtration pilot facility  is
used  to  treat organic-contaminated ground
water.   The  contaminated • water is passed
through a column filter containing the silicate
reagent to separate the high molecular weight
organics from the water. The effluent from this
column filter is then passed through a second
column filter containing  granulated  activated
carbon  to  remove the low  molecular weight
organics.
Technology Performance

A  demonstration  of  this  technology  was
scheduled to occur during October or November
1990  at a  wood  treating  site  near Fresno,
California.   Contaminants  at the site include
pentachlorophenol,  chromium,   copper,  and
arsenic.  Results are currently unavailable.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.


Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Edward R. Bates
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7774
FTS: 684-7774

Technology Developer Contact:
Steve Pegler
Silicate Technology Corporation
Scottsdale Technology Center, Suite B2
7650 East Redfield Road
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
602/941-1400
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        85

-------
SB
              o
                                                                    Solidification/Stabilization
                  Soliditech Solidification / Stabilization Process
                      Organic and Inorganic Compounds, Metals, Ore and
                                  Grease in Soil and Sludge
Technology Description

This   solidification/stabilization   process
immobilizes  contaminants, particularly organic
compounds, metals, inorganic compounds, and
oil and grease, in  soil  and sludge by binding
them  in a concrete-like, leach-resistant matrix.
Wastes treated during the demonstration were
soil, filter  cake, and oily wastes from  an old
storage tank. These wastes were contaminated
with  petroleum hydrocarbons, polychlorinated
biphenyls  (PCBs), other organic chemicals, and
heavy metals. Batch mixers of various capacities
are available to treat different volumes of waste.

Contaminated waste materials are collected,
screened  to  remove oversized material, and
introduced to the batch  mixer.   The  waste
material   is   then  mixed  with:   (1)  water;
(2) Urrichem, a proprietary chemical reagent; (3)
proprietary additives; and (4) pozzolanic material,
kiln dust, or cement; cement was used for the
demonstration.   Once  thoroughly  mixed, the
treated waste is discharged from the mixer.
Technology Performance

The Soliditech demonstration at the Imperial Oil
Company/Champion  Chemical  Company
Superfund  site  in  Morganville,  New Jersey,
presented several key findings:

•     Chemical  analyses  of  extracts  and
      leachates  showed  that  heavy  metals
      present in the  untreated  waste were
      immobilized;

•     Solid and liquid wastes with high organic
      content (up to 17 percent) as well as oil
      and grease were solidified;

•     Volatile organic compounds in the original
      waste were not detected  in the treated
      waste;
                                                     Treated  waste is a solidified mass with
                                                     significant   unconfined   compressive
                                                     strength, high stability, and a rigid texture
                                                     similar to that of concrete. Physical test
                                                     results  of  the solidified  waste samples
                                                     showed:   (1) unconfined compressive
                                                     strengths ranged from 390 to 860 psi; (2)
                                                     very little weight loss after .12 cycles of
                                                     wet/dry and freeze/thaw  durability  tests;
                                                     (3) low permeability of the treated waste;
                                                     and (4)  increased density after treatment;

                                                     The solidified  waste increased in volume
                                                     by an average of 22 percent.  The bulk
                                                     density of the waste material increased by
                                                     approximately   35  percent   due   to
                                                     solidification;

                                                     Semivolatile organic compounds (phenols)
                                                     were detected in the treated  waste and
                                                     the   Toxicity   Characteristic   Leaching
                                                     Procedures (TCLP)  extracts  from  the
                                                     treated  waste but not in the untreated
                                                     waste or its TCLP extracts. The presence
                                                     of these compounds is believed to  result
                                                     from  chemical  reactions  in  the waste
                                                     treatment mixture;

                                                     Oil and grease content of the untreated
                                                     waste ranged from 2.8 to 17.3  percent
                                                     (28,000 to 173,000 ppm).  Oil and grease
                                                     content  of the TCLP extracts of the
                                                     solidified waste ranged from 2.4 to 12
                                                     ppm;

                                                     The pH of the solidified waste ranged from
                                                     11.7 to  12.0.  The pH of the untreated
                                                     waste ranged from 3.4 to.7.9;!

                                                     PCBs were not detected in any extracts or
                                                     leachates of the treated waste; and
86
                     Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
•     Visual  observation of  solidified  waste
      showed dark inclusions approximately 1
      mm in diameter. Ongoing microstructural
      studies are expected to confirm that these
      inclusions are encapsulated wastes.

A Technology Evaluation Report was published
in  February 1990 in  two volumes:   Volume  I
(EPA/540/5-89/005A)  is  the  report itself  and
Volume II (EPA/540/5-89/005B) contains the data
that accompanies the report.  An Applications
Analysis Report was scheduled for publication in
late November 1990.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Walter E. Grube, Jr.
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513/569-7798
FTS:  684-7798

Technology Developer Contact:
Bill Stallworth
Soliditech, Inc.
1325 S. Dairy Ashford,  Suite 385
Houston, Texas  77077
713/497-8558
General Site Information

EPA demonstrated the Soliditech process in
December  1988  at   the  .Imperial  Oil
Company/Champion   Chemical  Company
Superfund site in Morganville, New Jersey. This
location  formerly   contained  both  chemical
processing and oil reclamation facilities.
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       87

-------
             C3
                                                                    Solidification/Stabilization
                                 Stabilization with Lime
                            Hydrocarbons and Organics in Sludge
Technology Description

This technology uses  lime to stabilize  acidic
sludge   containing  at  least   five  percent
hydrocarbons (typical of sludge produced  by
recycling lubricating oils).  The technology can
also stabilize waste containing up to 80 percent
organics.  The process tolerates low levels of
mercury and moderate levels of lead and other
toxic metals.  No hazardous materials are used
in the process. The lime and other chemicals
are specially prepared to significantly improve
their reactivity and other key characteristics.

Sludge  is  removed  from a waste pit  using
conventional earthmoving equipment and mixed
with lime in a separate  blending pit.   The
temperature of the material in the blending  pit
rises for a brief time to about 100° C, creating
some steam. After 20 minutes, almost all of the
material is fixed, however, the chemicals mixed
in the sludge continue to react with the waste for
days. The volume of the waste is increased by
30 percent by adding lime.

The fixed material  is stored in a product pile until
the waste pit has been cleaned. The waste is
then returned to  the  pit  and compacted to a
permeability of 10~10cm/sec.
                         Technology Performance

                         EPA is seeking a suitable site to demonstrate
                         this  technology.   A  SITE demonstration  is
                         planned for the spring or summer of 1991.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Cost information is not available.


                         Contacts                       !

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Walter Grube
                         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7798
                         FTS:  684-7798

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Joseph DeFranco
                         Separation and Recovery Systems, Inc.
                         1762 McGaw Avenue
                         Irvine, California 92714
                         714/261-8860
 88
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Other Physical Treatment

-------

-------
             1
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
             Carver-Greenfield  Process for Extraction of Oily Waste
                     Oil-Soluble Hazardous Compounds in Sludge and Soil
Technology Description

The Carver-Greenfield Process® is designed to
separate materials into their constituent solid, oil
(including oil-soluble  substances), and water
phases.  It is primarily intended for soils and
sludges contaminated with oil-soluble hazardous
compounds. The technology uses a food-grade
"carrier  oil"  to   extract   the  oil-soluble
contaminants.  Pretreatment is  necessary  to
achieve particle sizes less than 3/8-inch.

The carrier oil, with a boiling  point of 400° F,
typically is mixed with waste  sludge or soil and
the mixture is placed in the evaporation system
to remove any water.  The oil serves to fluidize
the mix and  maintain a  low  slurry viscosity to
ensure efficient heat transfer, allowing virtually all
of the water to evaporate.

Oil-soluble contaminants are  extracted  from the
waste by the carrier oil.   Volatile compounds
present in the waste are also stripped in this
step and condensed with the  carrier oil or water.
After the water is evaporated from the mixture,
the resulting dried slurry is sent to a centrifuging
section that removes most of the carrier oil from
the solids.

After centrifuging, residual carrier oil is removed
by a process known as hydroextraction.  The
carrier oil is recovered by evaporation and steam
stripping.    The hazardous  constituents  are
removed from the carrier oil by distillation.  This
stream can be incinerated or reclaimed.  In some
cases,  heavy metals in  the solids  will  be
complexed with hydrocarbons  and will also be
extracted by the carrier oil.
Technology Performance

The process has been successfully tested in a
pilot plant on refinery "slop oil," consisting of 72
percent water, and on a mixed refinery waste
consisting of dissolved air flotation sludge, API
separator bottoms, tank bottoms, and biological
sludge.  EPA has identified the PAB  Oil site in
Louisiana as a potential site for demonstrating
this technology.   The PAB  oil site contains
petroleum wastes and contaminated-soils, and a
demonstration  was  tentatively   planned  for
January 1991.

The Carver-Greenfield process can be used to
treat  sludge,  soil, and  other water-bearing
wastes  containing  oil-soluble   hazardous
compounds, including PCBs, PNAs, and dioxins.
The process has been  commercially applied to
municipal wastewater sludge, paper mill sludge,
rendering waste, pharmaceutical plant sludge,
and many other wastes.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
513-569-7863
FTS: 684-7863

Technology Developer Contact:
Thomas C. Holcombe
Dehydro-Tech Corporation
6 Great Meadow Lane
East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
201-887-2182
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         89

-------
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
                               Catalytic Decontamination
                      Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Ground Water
Technology Description

This catalytic decontamination process  is  a
closed  system  that treats  volatile  organic
compounds  in   ground  water   producing
innocuous end  products. This technology can
be  useful when cross media transfer of the
contamination,  which may  occur with other
processes,   such  as   air   stripping,    is
unacceptable.  This technology  is primarily  a
ground-water restoration technique,  although
surface water can be treated as well.  It  is
especially applicable for highly  contaminated
waters such as  leachates.

The ULTROX system used in the pilot study
consists of two "loops." The first loop consists of
air drying, ozone generation, and injection of the
ozone  into the  vapor-liquid contact tank.  Air
effluent passes  through  a catalytic destruction
unit and  returns to the air drier.  The second
loop is open and consists of a water inlet from
the  ground-water   source,   pretreatment,
introduction into the vapor-liquid contact tank,
and discharge.   The water pretreatment might
consist of filtering, water softening, iron removal,
or defoaming.

This technology has a number of advantages:

•    The process is closed circuit, .i.e., there  is
      no air effluent;

•     It operates at negative air pressure, thus,
      reducing  the   risk  of   accidental
      contamination due to leaks; and

•     It is  a destructive, rather  than  a cross
      media transfer technique.

Despite these advantages, this technology also
has limitations:

•    The method might not be cost effective
     with  respect to methods that have air
      effluents;
                               When  treating  high concentrations,  a
                               potentially large consumption of ozone will
                               result;

                               When treating anoxic leachates, reduced
                               metal compounds are likely to be present;
                               These  reduced  metal  compounds  will
                               react  with  the  ozone  and  can form
                               insoluble precipitates as well as result in
                               large ozone consumption;

                               The  metal  precipitates  could  require
                               extensive system cleaning;

                               The method requires considerable energy
                               for the generation of UV light, dry  air,
                               ozone, pumps, and blowers; and

                               Biofouling can  occur on  the  UV  light
                               tubes.
                         Technology Performance

                         The  results  from  a  small-scale  pilot  test
                         conducted at Fort Dix, New Jersey were  both
                         positive and negative:

                         •     Although   total   organic   carbon
                               concentration was  not  reduced,   the
                               concentration of  volatile   halogenated
                               organics  (VHO)  was  reduced up to 90
                               percent; and

                         •     Without the  inclusion of UV light in the
                               treatment, the VHO  concentration  was
                               reduced,  but methylene chloride was not
                               affected and dichloroethanes were not
                               reduced below detection limits.
                         Remediation Costs

                         Based on  limited  experience  to date,  the
                         operating and maintenance costs of this method
90
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
have  not  been developed  in  detail,  but are
expected to be in the range of $1 to $8 per
1,000 gallons, depending upon the concentration
of  the  contaminants  and  the  amount  of
pretreatment required. Uninstalled equipment for
treating  50,000  gpd of ground water, with an
organic halide concentration in the range of 75
to 100 g/L, would cost in the range of $150,000
to $200,000.
General Site Information

A small-scale  pilot testing (1 to 10 drums)  has
been conducted at Fort Dix, New Jersey.
Contacts

Steve Maloney
USACERL
P.O. Box 4005
Champaign, IL  61820
217/373-6740
                       Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       91

-------
              o
                                                                      Other Physical Treatment
                               Catalytic Ozone Oxidation
             Organfcs and Inorganics in Soil, Solid, Sludge, Leachates, Ground Water
Technology Description

This technology is designed to treat soils with
organic  and  inorganic  contaminants.    The
technology  is a two-stage  process:  the first
stage extracts the contaminants from the soil,
and the second stage oxidizes contaminants
present in the extract.  The extraction is carried
out  using  ultrapure  water and  ultrasound.
Oxidation involves ozone, ultraviolet  light, and
ultrasound.   The treatment products of this
technology  are decontaminated soil and  inert
salts.

After excavation, contaminated soil is passed
through a 1-inch screen.  Soil particles retained
on the screen are crushed using a hammermill
and sent back to the screen.  Soil  particles
passing through the screen are sent to a soil
washer,  where  ultrapure water  extracts the
contaminants from the screened soil. Ultrasound
acts as  a catalyst to  enhance soil washing.
Typically,  10 volumes of water are added per
volume of soil, generating a slurry of about 10-20
percent solids.  This slurry is  conveyed to a
solid/liquid separator, such  as  a centrifuge" or
cyclone,  to  separate the decontaminated soil
from  the   contaminated  water.      The
decontaminated soil can be  returned  to its
original location or disposed of appropriately.

After the solid/liquid separation, any oil present
in the contaminated water is recovered using an
oil/water separator.  The contaminated water is
ozonated prior to oil/water separation to aid in oil
recovery. The water then flows through a filter to
remove any fine particles. After the particles are
filtered, the water flows through a carbon filter
and a deionizer to reduce the contaminant load
on the multi-chamber reactor.

In the  multi-chamber  reactor,  ozone  gas,
ultraviolet light, and ultrasound are applied to the
contaminated  water.     Ultraviolet  light  and
ultrasound   catalyze   the   oxidation   of
contaminants by ozone.   The treated  water
(ultrapure water) flows  out of the reactor to a
                          storage tank and is reused to wash another
                          batch  of soil.  If makeup water is required,
                          additional ultrapure water is generated on-site by
                          treating tap water with ozone and ultrasound.

                          This treatment system is also equipped with a
                          carbon filter to treat the off-gas from the reactor.
                          The carbon  filters are biologically activated to
                          regenerate the spent carbon in-situ.

                          System capacities range from one cubic foot of
                          solids per hour, with a water flow rate of one
                          gallon per minute, to 27 cubic yards'of solids per
                          hour, with a water flow rate of 50 gallons per
                          minute.   The treatment units  available for the
                          SITE demonstration can treat 1 to 5 cubic yards
                          of solids per hour.
                          Technology Performance

                          This technology was tentatively scheduled for a
                          demonstration in late 1990.  This technology can
                          be applied to soil, solid, sludge, leachates and
                          ground water containing organics such as PCB,
                          PCP, pesticides and herbicides, dioxins, and
                          inorganics, including cyanides. The technology
                          could   effectively  treat   total  contaminant
                          concentrations  ranging from 1  ppm to  20,000
                          ppm.  Soil  and solids greater than 1 inch in
                          diameter need to be crushed prior to treatment.
                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Norma Lewis
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513-569-7665                    :
                          FTS:  684-7665
92
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
Technology Developer Contact:
Lucas Boeve
Excalibur Enterprises, Inc.
314 West 53rd Street
New York, N.Y.  10019
212-484-2699
Florida Office:
3232 S.W. 2nd Avenue
Suite 107
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33315
305-763-9507
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       93

-------
             4
             ul
             CJ
                                                                    Other Physical Treatment
                      Chemtact™ Gaseous Waste Treatment
                          Organics and Inorganics in Waste Streams
Technology Description

The Chemtact™  system uses  gas scrubber
technology to remove gaseous organic  and
inorganic  contaminants through efficient gas-
liquid contacting.  This technology can be used
on  gaseous waste streams containing a wide
variety of organic or inorganic contaminants, but
is best suited for  volatile  organic compounds.
The system is applicable for use with source
processes  that  generate  a  contaminated
gaseous exhaust, such as air stripping of ground
water or leachate, soil aeration, or exhausts from
driers or incinerators.

Droplets of a controlled chemical solution are
dispersed  by atomizing  nozzles  within  the
scrubber chamber.   Very small droplet sizes
(less  than  10 microns),  along  with a longer
retention time than traditional scrubbers, results
in a once-through system that  generates low
volumes of liquid residuals. These residuals are
subsequently  treated   by   conventional
techniques.

Gas scrubbing is a volume reduction technology
that transfers contaminants from the gas phase
to a liquid phase.  The selection of absorbent
liquid is based on the chemical characteristics of
the  contaminants.
                         Two mobile pilot units are currently available: a
                         two-stage,  800 cubic feet per minute  (cfm)
                         system; and  a one-stage, 2,500 cfm system.
                         This equipment is trailer-mounted  and can be
                         transported to waste sites.
                         Technology Performance

                         EPA is currently locating a  suitable  site to
                         demonstrate this technology.
                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         Ronald Lewis
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513-569-7856
                         FTS: 684-7856                   :

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Harold J. Rafson
                         Quad Environmental Technologies Corporation
                         3605 Woodhead Drive, Suite #103
                         Northbrook, Illinois  60062
                         312-564-5070
94
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                      Other Physical Treatment
                                   Freezing Separation
                         Organics and Inorganics in Aqueous Streams
Technology Description

This freeze crystallization technology will remove
both organics and inorganics from contaminated
aqueous streams.  It  works on  both surface
water and ground water, as well as directly on
process  wastes and   mixed (radioactive  and
hazardous) wastes.  Freeze technologies can
process all contaminant types in a single, stage.
It is also capable of concentrating residuals to
higher   concentrations  than   other  liquid
separation  processes.

This  process  is applicable to  free  liquids,
whether the liquid is water or an organic solvent.
It  can  be  used  in   conjunction with other
processes  to  treat  wastes  contained in non-
aqueous media.  For  example,  contaminated
soils can be washed to  transfer the contaminant
into a liquid medium. The low concentrations in
the  washing  medium  are concentrated  by
freezing to allow by-product recovery or more
economical final destruction.

The freeze crystallization process operates on
the principle that when water freezes, the crystal
structure   that   forms   naturally   excludes
contaminants from the water molecule matrix. In
this freeze  crystallization process, refrigerant is
injected directly into the feed, thus,  removing
heat until a phase change from liquid  to solid is
achieved.  Pure crystals of solute and solvent
form separately  and are separated from each
other by gravity.  The crystals are recovered and
washed with melt-water to remove any adhering
contaminants and then melted in a heat pump
cycle before being discharged from the plant.

Mixed liquid waste enters the system through the
feed heat exchanger, where it is cooled within a
few degrees of  its freezing temperature.  The
cooled feed then enters the crystallizer, where it
is  mixed directly with boiling refrigerant.   The
water molecules are crystallized in the stirred
solution and  are maintained at  a uniform  ice
concentration by continuous removal of ice slurry
(a combination of ice crystals and liquid) from
the crystallizer.   The  slurry is  pumped to a
eutectic separator (also called a growth tank)
where gravity segregates the crystal of solvent
and solute into  different  streams.   A heat
pump/refrigeration  cycle  removes  refrigerant
vapor from the crystallizer and compresses it so
that it will give  up its heat to  melt the purified
crystals.

Ice slurry from the growth tank is pumped to the
crystal separator,  where  ice  crystals form a
porous pack.   The liquid from  the slurry is
drained by gravity from the wash  column via
screened openings, and is then returned to the
growth tank to transport more ice.  Hydraulic
forces generated by the flow of liquid to  the
screens in the middle of the ice pack propel the
ice pack upward in the crystal separator. Melted
product  is used to  transport  the ice  to a
melter/condenser, where the slurry is melted and
where hot refrigerant gas is condensed.
All  refrigerants  are  soluble  in water to some
degree. Consequently, decanters and strippers
are used to remove this refrigerant from the melt,
the concentrate, and  any other liquid phases
produced   from  the  process  prior  to  their
discharge from the plant. The strippers operate
under  a vacuum and contain  heaters  that
generate  low-pressure  steam   to  enhance
refrigerant removal, if necessary.
Technology Performance

This  project was  accepted  into  the  SITE
Demonstration Program in July 1988. Treatability
studies have been completed. A demonstration
of this technology was scheduled for early 1991
at the Stringfellow Superfund Site in Glen Avon,
California.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         95

-------
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
S.Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7507
FTS: 684-7507

Technology Developer Contact:
James A. Heist
Freeze Technologies Corporation
2539-C Timberlake Road
P.O. Box 40968
Raleigh, North Carolina  27629-0968
919-850-0600
96
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
             ul
             (9
      PROt
£
                                                                    Other Physical Treatments
                                    Geosafe  Process
                                Inorganics in Soils and Sludges
Technology Description

The Geosafe in situ vitrification (ISV) process can
be used to destroy  or remove organics and/or
immobilize inorganics in contaminated soils  or
sludges. Geosafe has performed more than 90
tests  of  various  scales  applying  ISV  on
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) wastes, industrial
lime  sludge, dioxins, metal plating wastes and
other solid combustibles and liquid  chemicals.
The ISV process uses  an electrical  network  to
melt soil or sludge  at temperatures  of 1600  to
2000° C; thus, destroying organic pollutants by
pyrolysis.  Inorganic pollutants are incorporated
within the vitrified mass, which has properties of
glass.

The vitrification process begins by inserting large
electrodes  into contaminated zones containing
sufficient soil to support the formation of a melt.
An array (usually square)  of four electrodes is
placed  to the desired  treatment  depth  in the
volume to be treated. Because soil typically has
low conductivity,  flaked  graphite and  glass frit
are placed on the soil surface  between the
electrodes to provide a starter path  for electric
current. The electric current passes through the
electrodes and begins to melt soil at the surface.
As power is applied, the melt continues to grow
downward, at a  rate of  one to two  inches per
hour. Individual settings (each single placement
of electrodes) may grow to encompass a total
melt mass of 1000 tons and a maximum width of
30 feet.  Single  setting depths as great as 30
feet are considered  possible.  Depths of 17 feet
have  been achieved to date with the existing
large-scale ISV equipment.  Adjacent settings
can be  positioned to fuse to each other and  to
completely process the desired volume at a site.
Stacked settings to reach deep  contamination
are also possible.

Both  the  organic   and  inorganic  airborne
pyrolysis byproducts are captured in a hood,
which draws  the contaminants into  an off-gas
treatment system that removes particulates and
other pollutants of concern. Air flow through the
                                       hood  is  controlled  to  maintain  a negative
                                       pressure.   An ample supply  of  air provides
                                       excess oxygen for combustion  of any pyrolysis
                                       products and organic vapors from the treatment
                                       volume. The off-gases,  combustion products,
                                       and air are drawn from the hood (by induced
                                       draft blower) into the off-gas treatment system,
                                       where they are treated  in  several ways:   (1)
                                       quenching; (2) pH  controlled  scrubbing;  (3)
                                       dewatering (mist elimination);  (4) heating (for
                                       dewpoint control); (5) patticulate filtration; and
                                       (6) activated carbon adsorption (Figure 2).

                                       Because the void volume present in particulate
                                       materials  (20-40  percent for  typical soils) is
                                       removed during processing, a. corresponding
                                       volume reduction  occurs.   Volume is  further
                                       reduced as some materials  present in the soil,
                                       such as humus and organic contaminants, are
                                       removed   as  gases  and   vapors   during
                                       processing.

                                       The ISV system is mounted on three semi-trailers
                                       for transport to a site.  Electric power is  usually
                                       taken  from  a  utility distribution  system  at
                                       transmission voltages of 125  or 138 kilovolts
                                       (kV); power may also be generated on-site by a
                                       diesel generator.  The electrical supply  system
                                       has an isolated  ground   circuit  to  provide
                                       appropriate operational safety.

                                       In  saturated   soils  or  sludges,  the  initial
                                       application of the electric current must  reduce
                                       the moisture  content before  the  vitrification
                                       process can  begin.   This increases  energy
                                       consumption  and  associated   costs.    Also,
                                       sludges must  contain a sufficient  amount of
                                       glass-forming   material   (non-volatile,    non-
                                       destructible solids)  to produce  a molten mass
                                       that  will   destroy  or  remove organic  and
                                       immobilize inorganic pollutants. The ISV process
                                       is limited:  (1) individual void volumes  cannot
                                       exceed 150 cubic feet; (2) rubble cannot exceed
                                       10 percent by weight;  and (3) combustible
                                       organics in the soil or sludge cannot exceed 5-
                                       10 weight  percent, depending  upon the  heat
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                                                               97

-------
value. These limitations must be addressed for
each site.
Technology Performance

Based on  tests conducted by the technology
vendor, the large-scale ISV system melts soil at
a rate of four to six tons per hour.  After cooling,
the process results in the formation of a vitrified
silicate  glass  monolith  with a microcrystalline
structure.  This monolith possesses excellent
structural and environmental properties.
Remediation Costs

Cost information is not available.
                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Teri Shearer
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                          513/569-7949
                          FTS:  684-7949   '                i

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          James E. Hansen
                          Geosafe Corporation
                          303 Park Place, Suite 126
                          Kirkland, Washington 98033
                          206/822-4000
General Site Information

ISV technology has been selected as part of a
Record of Decision (ROD) or equivalent for use
at eight sites within the U.S.  and one  site in
Europe.   EPA's SITE Program  is planning a
technology demonstration at an unspecified site.
                                Contaminated
                                Soil Region

                                (1)
                                                            Vitrified Monolith
                        (2)
(3)
98
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                    Other Physical Treatments
                                    In Situ Vitrification
                        Organics, Inorganics, and Radionuclides in Soils
Technology Description

The in situ vitrification (ISV) process fixes fission
products and immobilizes or destroys hazardous
chemicals in soils at  mixed hazardous waste
sites.    This technology can be applied to
radionuclides, heavy  metals,  and  hazardous
organic-contaminated soil.

ISV is the conversion of contaminated soil into a
durable glass and crystalline waste form through
melting the soil by joule heating.  Contaminants
are destroyed by or immobilized in molten glass
(melted soil). Soil is melted by electrical energy
from electrodes that are placed in the ground.
Off-gas   from this  process  is treated  by
conventional off-gas treatment methods.

This technology  has a  number of  benefits.
Specifically, ISV may safely immobilize or destroy
both  radioactive  and  hazardous  chemicals
before they impact the ground water or other
ecosystems.     It  is  applicable   to  soils
contaminated with fission products, transuranics,
hazardous  metals, and hazardous organics.  It
reduces the risk to the public by immobilizing or
destroying  radioactive and hazardous materials
in the soil.  Finally, in situ treatment poses a
lower potential risk to workers than traditional
treatments   because  contaminants   are  not
brought  to the  surface.   This technology,
however, has not yet been  demonstrated at
depths beyond twenty feet.
Technology Performance

A small-scale ISV test at DOE's Hanford Nuclear
Reservation produced the following conclusions:

•     Injection  of a  conductive  glass frit  and
      sodium silicate slurry into the rocky layer
      below the crib enhances the downward
      penetration of the ISV melt;

•     Wood pyrolysis rates calculated from the
      small-scale test results indicate that the
      increased heat load to the off-gas system
      from the  wooden timbers in the crib will
      raise the off-gas temperature to about 300
      degrees Celsius, well within the operating
      limits of the off-gas system and hood;

A full-scale field demonstration at Hanford was
also successful:

•     The  product  passed  the  TCLP and
      reduced  the risk  to workers and the
      public;

•     Waste  volume was  reduced   by  25
      percent;

•     ISV can treat 100 tons of soil per day;

•     Residual  wastes include  scrub solution
      from off-gas treatment (approximately 0.25
      gallons per ton of waste), treated waste is
      a delistable glass  and  crystaline  block;
      and

•     Obsidian-like glass and crystalline product
      will not require long term monitoring.
Remediation Costs

Approximately $150 to $350 per ton of soil.


General Site Information

A field demonstration at DOE waste tanks was
conducted at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation,
Washington.  A one  meter diameter by one
meter tall  instrumented underground tank was
melted  in  September  1990.    Hazardous
constituents of the tank, the tank itself and soil
beneath the tank were converted to a  30 ton
block which passes the TCLP leach rate criteria.
A 6000 gallon tank will be vitrified by summer
1991.
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                         99

-------
The 116-B-6A CRIB full-scale field demonstration
was conducted at the 100-B  Area in Hanford
between 1988 and 1991.  The site in the crib
contained approximately 900 mCi of Strontium-
90, 150 mCi of Cesium-137, and a mixture of
other   hazardous   constituents   including
chromium and lead.
                         Contacts

                         Sydney S. Koegler
                         Pacific Northwest Laboratory
                         P.O. Box 999
                         Richland, Washington  99352
                         509/376-0492
                         FTS: 444-0492

                         W.F. Bonner
                         Manager Vitrification Programs
                         M.S. P7-44 Battelle
                         P.O. Box 999
                         Richland, Washington  99252
                         509/376-5207
100
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
             Ill
             a
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
                                Membrane Microfiitration
           Organic, Inorganic, and Oily Wastes in Ground Water, Wastewater, and Soil
Technology Description

This rnicrofiltration system is designed to remove
solid particles from liquid wastes, forming filter
cakes typically ranging from 40 to 60  percent
solids. The system can be manufactured as an
enclosed  unit, requires  little  or no attention
during operation, is mobile, and can be trailer-
mounted.

This treatment  technology is  applicable to
hazardous waste suspensions, particularly liquid
heavy metal- and cyanide-bearing wastes (such
as  electroplating  rinsewaters);  ground  water
contaminated   with   heavy   metals;   landfill
leachate;  and process wastewaters containing
uranium.   The technology is  best suited for
treating wastes with solid concentrations less
than 5,000 parts per million; otherwise, the cake
capacity and handling become limiting factors.
The developers claim the system can treat any.
type of solid, including inorganics, organics, and
oily wastes with a wide variety  of particle sizes.
Moreover,  because the unit  is  enclosed, the
system is said to be capable of treating liquid
wastes containing volatile organics.

The DuPont/Oberlin rnicrofiltration system uses
Oberlin's automatic pressure filter combined with
DuPont's  special Tyvek filter material (Tyvek T-
980). made of spun-bonded olefin.  The filter
material is a thin, durable plastic fabric with tiny
openings  (about one ten-millionth of a meter in
diameter)  that allow water or other liquids, along
with solid  particles smaller than the openings, to
flow through. Solids in the liquid stream that are
too  large to pass  through   the  openings
accumulate on  the  filter, and  can be  easily
collected for disposal.

The automatic pressure filter has two chambers:
an upper chamber for feeding waste through the
filter,  and  a  lower chamber for collecting the
filtered  liquid  (filtrate). At  the start of a filter
cycle, the upper chamber is lowered to form a
liquid-tight seal against the filter. The waste feed
is then pumped into the upper chamber and
through the filter.  Filtered solids accumulate on
the Tyvek surface, forming a filter cake,  while
filtrate is collected in the lower chamber.  Air is
fed into the upper chamber at about .45 pounds
per square inch,  and used  to further dry the
cake and remove any liquid remaining  in the
upper chamber. When the cake is considered to
be dry, the upper  chamber is lifted and the filter
cake is automatically discharged.  Clean filter
material is then drawn from a roll into the system
for the next cycle. Both the filter cake and the
filtrate can be collected and treated further prior
to disposal if necessary.
Technology Performance

The  DuPont/Oberlin microfiltration system was
recently demonstrated at the Palmerton  Zinc
Superfund site in Palmerton, Pennsylvania. The
system was tested for treating a shallow aquifer
contaminated with dissolved heavy metals (such
as cadmium, lead, and zinc).  Pilot  studies on
ground water at this site  have shown that the
microfiltration system can produce a 35  to 45
percent-solids filter cake, and a filtrate with non-
detectable levels of heavy metals.

During this demonstration the  DuPont/Oberlin
microfiltration system the  results were positive:

•     Zinc and total suspended solids removal
      efficiencies  ranged from  99.75 to  99.99
      percent;

•     Solids in the filter cake ranged from 30.5
      to 47.1 percent;

•     Dry filter cake in all test runs passed the
      RCRA permit filter liquids test;

•     Filtrate  met  the  applicable  National
      Pollution  Discharge Elimination System
      standard for zinc, but  exceeded the
      standard for pH; and
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        101

-------
 •    A composite filter cake sample passed the
      EP Toxicity and TCLP tests for metals.

 EPA   prepared   a   Demonstration  Bulletin
 summarizing the  results of the demonstration in
 August 1990  and  is currently  finalizing a
 Technology Evaluation  Report,  Applications
 Analysis Report, and video of the demonstration.
General Site Information

This technology was demonstrated over a four-
week period in  April  and  May  1990 at the
Palmerton Zinc Superfund  site  in Palmerton,
Pennsylvania.
                         Contacts

                         EPA Project Manager:
                         John F. Martin
                         U.S. EPA
                         Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                         26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                         Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                         513/569-7758
                         FTS: 684-7758

                         Technology Developer Contact:
                         Ernest  Mayer                  :
                         E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company
                         Engineering Department L1359
                         P.O. Box 6090
                         Newark, Delaware 19714-6090
                         302/366-3652
102
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
               Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering
                        Heavy Metals, Oil and Grease, Bacteria in Water
Technology Description

This technology is applicable to water containing
heavy  metals,  pesticides,  oil  and  grease,
bacteria, suspended solids, and constituents that
can be precipitated into  particle sizes greater
than 0.1 micron. The system can handle waste
streams  containing up to 5% (50,000  ppm)
contaminant, producing a filtrate with less than
1.0 ppm  and a  semi-dry  cake  of 40-60%.
Nonvolatile organics and solvents can also  be
treated by adding powdered adsorbents.  Soils
and sludge can be decontaminated through acid
leaching of the metals followed by precipitation
and microfiltration. Lime sludges from municipal,
industrial, and power plant clarifiers can also be
treated using this process.

In the first step of this process, heavy metals are
chemically precipitated. The precipitates, along
with all particles down  to 0.2 - 0.1  micron, are
filtered  through  a unique  fabric  crossflow
microfilter (EXXFLOW). The concentrated stream
is then dewatered in an automatic tubular filter
press of the same fabric  material (EXXPRESS).
EXXPRESS filter cakes of up to 60 percent solids
(weight per weight) are possible.

Microfiltration  involves  a  proprietary  woven
polyester  array  of tubes.   Waste  effluent is
pumped  into the tubes and forms a dynamic
membrane, which produces a high quality filtrate
removing all particle sizes below 0.2 - 0.1 micron.
The membrane is continually cleaned by the flow
velocity,  thereby  preventing  flux  reduction.
Metals are removed via precipitation by adjusting
the pH in the EXXFLOW feed tank.  The metal
hydroxides  or   oxides  form  the  dynamic
membrane with any other suspended  solids.
The concentrated stream will contain up to 5
percent solids for discharge to the EXXPRESS.
Water recoveries are above 90 percent in most
cases.

Other constituent removals are possible, using
seeded slurry methods  in EXXFLOW:  hardness
can be removed using lime; oil and grease can
be removed using adsorbents; and nonvolatile
organics and solvents  can be removed using
seeded,   powdered   activated   carbon   or
powdered  ion  exchange  adsorbents.   The
concentrate stream  produced  by  EXXFLOW
enters EXXPRESS  with  the  discharge valve
closed.  A semi-dry cake up to 1/4 inch thick is
formed on the inside of the tubular cloth. When
the discharge valve is opened, rollers on the
outside  of  the tubes  move to form  a venturi
within the tube. The venturi creates an area of
high velocity within the tubes, which aggressively
cleans the cloth and discharges the cake in chip
form onto a wedge wire screen.  The discharge
water is recycled back to the feed tank.  In cases
where the  solids  in the raw  feed  water  are
extremely high, EXXPRESS can be used first,
with  EXXFLOW acting as a final polish for the
product water.

In special circumstances, chelating  agents can
also be used to remove a particular metal. The
leached slurry containing the solubilized metals
is separated  by an automatic cake discharge
tubular filter  press.   The  resulting  filtrate is
chemically  treated  to  precipitate  the  heavy
metals in hydroxide form.

Residual organic contamination in this precipitate
can be removed with activated carbon. Heavy
metals in the precipitate  are separated and
concentrated   by   microfiltration,   using   an
innovative and flexible woven textile material that
can separate  particles as small as 0.1 microns.
The  process is  capable  of  handling widely
varying incoming solids concentrations.
The demonstration unit is transportable and is
skid-mounted.  The unit is designed to process
approximately 30 pounds of solids per hour.
Technology Performance

Bench-scale tests of this technology have been
conducted.  The first application was scheduled
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       103

-------
in late 1990 on acid mine drainage at the Iron
Mountain  Mine  Superfund  Site  in  Redding,
California.
Contacts

EPA Project Manager:
S. Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
FTS: 684-7507

Technology Developer Contact:
Ray Groves
EPOC Water,  Inc.
3065 Sunnyside, #101
Fresno, CA 93727
209-291-8144
104
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
                                   Rotary Air Stripping
                            Volatile Contaminants in Ground Water
Technology Description

A  rotary  air stripper  is a  vapor and liquid
contactor which uses centrifugal force to push
contaminated water  through packing material
while air is pushed counter current to the flow of
water.  The centrifugal force results  in a high
mass transfer rate of the contaminant from the
water to  the air.  The main advantage of this
rotary air stripper is the reduction of the height of
the stripping equipment.  Large, tall towers are
inherent  in  conventional  packed column  air
stripping.
Technology Performance

In the  first tests with a  rotary  air stripper
conducted at  the Traverse  City Coast  Guard
Station, a 100-gpm rotary air stripper showed
removal of the contaminant as a function of the
liquid to gas ratio and the  speed (rpm) of the
spinning  rotor.   The  data showed that the
removal efficiency increased with an increase in
the gas-to-liquid ratio up to a value of about 30
(vol/vol). Above this value, minimal increases in
removal efficiencies were realized with increased
gas-to-liquid ratios.  A similar phenomenon was
observed when assessing the effect bf the rotor
speed on the removal efficiency.  Increasing the
rotation above approximately 600 rpm produced
minimal changes  in the removal efficiency. In  all
the tests, high removal  efficiencies (greater than
99 percent) were achieved with the highly volatile
contaminants,  while   relatively   low removal
efficiencies were  observed  for the less volatile
contaminants.  In these tests, only one size and
type of packed rotor was used, and only influent
and effluent data could be taken.
In the  second tests, conducted at Elgin AFB,
three different sizes of rotors and two different
types of packing materials were used, along with
an  internal sampling  mechanism..  Using the
different  packed rotors, data was obtained  to
develop and  compare equations for predicting
the mass transfer  pressure  drops, and power
consumption  of the rotary  air stripper.   The
equations can be  used to  design  the size,
rotating speed, air-to-water ratios, and energy
necessary for a rotary air stripper to meet site
specific performance requirements.

The only limitation noted was  that plugging
occurred due to mineral deposits in the rotors at
one site where the ground water has a very high
iron content (approximately 9 ppm).
General Site Information

Field tests have been conducted at Elgin AFB
and at the U.S. Coast Guard Station at Traverse
City, Michigan.
Contact

Capt. Edward G. Marchard
AFESC
Tyndall AFB,  Florida 32403-6001
(904) 283-2942
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                        105

-------
                                      INFLUENT AIR
                                                  EFFLUENT AIR
                                                      	t
                                                 ROTATING PACKING
                                          EFFLUENT  WATER
                                        INFLUENT WATER
                                    X-VALVE
                                   -*- DIRECTION OP
106
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                   Other Physical Treatment
          Treatment with  Ultra Violet, Hydrogen  Peroxide, and Ozone
                              Trichloroethene in Ground Water
Technology Description

This oxidation process uses ozone,  ultraviolet
radiation,  and  hydrogen   peroxide  for  the
treatment  of ground  water  contaminated with
trichloroethene (TCE).
Technology Performance

Results from the full-scale, advanced oxidation
process tested  at the DOE Kansas City  plant
were mostly inconclusive:

•     The plant is effective in the destruction of
      individual volatile organic compounds but
      seems  to reach a plateau for  gross
      parameters such as total organic carbon
      and total chlorinated hydrocarbons;

•     The  plant has been out of service  for
      maintenance and repair approximately 30
      percent of the time;

•     The flow rate has averaged approximately
      15 percent of the design flow rate, so the
      determination   of   costs   has   been
      inconclusive; and
      An evaluation of the true plant capacity
      indicates that it can accommodate twice
      the rated flow rate.
Remediation Costs

Actual  costs  are  not  available; however, the
costs are competitive with other processes.
General Site Information

A full-scale,  advanced oxidation process was
tested at the DOE Kansas City Plant.
Contacts

Sidney B. Garland II
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P.O. Box 2008
Oak Ridge, Tennessee  37831-6317
615/574-8581 or (FTS) 624-8518
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       107

-------
                                                                     Other Physical Treatment
                                       Ultrafiltration
                                 Toxic Metals in Ground Water
Technology Description

This  combination   chemical-ultrafiltration
treatment process is intended for use on toxic
metals in ground water.  Ultrafiltration has thus
far been applied exclusively to the removal of
colloidal solids and fairly large molecules. This
technology may potentially be used to separate
toxic heavy metals such as cadmium, chromium,
lead, mercury, selenium, silver and barium (as an
in-situ formed  precipitate) from ground water
generated at Superfund sites.  Other inorganic
and organic materials present as suspended and
colloidal solids may also be removed.

Ultrafiltration can be applied in combination with
chemical treatment  to  selectively   remove
dissolved  metal ions  from  dilute  aqueous
solutions.  A  high molecular weight chelating
agent is added to the incoming waste solutions
to form macromolecular complexes.  The metal
ions can then  be easily removed.

Usually, each  chelating polymer is marked  for
one metal or for a group of similar cations.
Once the polymer  is  added, the solution  is
processed through  an  Ultrafiltration membrane
system  that   collects   the   macromolecular
complexes (retentate)  on the membrane,  but
allows  uncomplexed  ions such as  sodium,
potassium, calcium, chloride, sulfate, and nitrate,
to pass through as filtered  water (permeate).
The filtered water can be recycled or discharged
depending   upon  the   metal   removal
requirements.  A removal efficiency approaching
100 percent can be achieved for metal ions in
ground water.

The retentate, which constitutes about 5 to  20
percent  of  the  feed  volume,  contains the
separated heavy metal ions and must be treated
further.   The  retentate is either solidified  to
prevent the  release  of toxic metals back to the
environment or recycled through the treatment
process for further volume reduction.
                          Because  many simple and  non-toxic ions are
                          allowed to pass through the membrane as per-
                          meate, they are not concentrated together with
                          the metal ions. The retentate will have a smaller
                          volume and the solidified product will be more
                          resistant  to leaching,  due to its smaller salt
                          content and the  presence  of chem-icals that
                          retard the migration of toxic metals.
                          Technology Performance

                          Results  of  bench-scale  tests  showed  the
                          following removal rates:  cadmium and mercury,
                          up to 99 percent; lead, 90 percent; and arsenic,
                          10 to 35 percent. Arsenic is an anionic species,
                          and is not as effectively removed as the other
                          metals. Separation of non-arsenic metals was
                          found to be more efficient in alkaline conditions.
                          This research also indicated that Ultrafiltration,
                          unlike conventional precipitation technologies,
                          does not require the production of large particles
                          and,  thus, may  be  more applicable to  feed
                          streams   with  high  variability  in  metals
                          concentration.
                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          John F. Martin
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          (513) 569-7758
                          FTS 684-7758

                          Technology Developer Contact:
                          Leo P.  Buckley
                          Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
                          Waste  Management Technology Division
                          Chalk River Nuclear Labs
                          Chalk River, Ontario KOJ IJO
                          Canada
                          (613)584-3311
108
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
                                                                    Other Physical Treatment
                           Ultraviolet Ftadiation / Oxidation
                             Toxic Organic Compounds in Water
Technology Description

This ultraviolet (UV) radiation/oxidation process
uses UV radiation, ozone (O3), and hydrogen
peroxide  (H2O2)  to  destroy toxic  organic
compounds,  particularly  chlorinated
hydrocarbons in water.  Contaminated ground
water,  industrial wastewaters  and  leachates
containing   halogenated  solvents,   phenol,
pentachlorophenol, pesticides, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), and other organic compounds
are suitable for this  treatment process.   The
process oxidizes compounds  that are toxic or
refractory (resistant to  biological oxidation) in
concentrations of parts per million (ppm) or parts
per billion (ppb).

The Ultrox system  consists of a reactor module,
an air compressor/ozone generator module, and
a hydrogen peroxide feed system.   It  is skid-
mounted  and  portable, and  permits  on-site
treatment of a wide variety of liquid wastes, such
as  industrial wastewater,  ground water,  and
leachate. The expected wastewater flow rate and
the necessary hydraulic retention time  to treat
the contaminated  water determine the reactor
size.     Pilot-scale   studies  determine  the
approximate  UV  intensity, and  ozone  and
hydrogen peroxide doses.

Influent to the reactor is simultaneously exposed
to UV radiation, ozone, and hydrogen peroxide
to oxidize the organic compounds. Off-gas from
the reactor passes through an ozone destruction
(Decompozon) unit, which reduces ozone levels
before air venting.  The  Decompozon unit also
destroys gaseous volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) stripped off in the reactor. Effluent from
the  reactor are tested  and  analyzed  before
disposal.
Technology Performance

The test program was designed to evaluate the
performance  of the Ultrox System for several
combinations  of five  operating  parameters:
(1) influent  pH, (2)  retention time,  (3) ozone
dose, (4) hydrogen peroxide dose, and (5) UV
radiation intensity. Contaminated ground water
treated  by  the Ultrox system at a San Jose,
California hazardous waste  site met regulatory
standards at the following operating conditions:

•     Retention time - 40 minutes;
•     Influent pH - 7.2 (unadjusted);
•     O3 dose -110 mg/L;
•     H2O2 dose -13 mg/L; and
•     UV lamps - all 24 operating at 64 watts
      each.

Out of 44 VOC samples, three were chosen to
be used as indicator parameters.   The VOC
removal efficiencies  at  these conditions  are
presented in Table 1.

Removal efficiencies for trichloroethylene (TCE)
were about  99 percent.  Removal efficiencies for
1,1-DCA and  1,1,1-TCA were about 58 percent
and   85  percent,  respectively.     Removal
efficiencies  for total  VOCs  were  about  90
percent.  For some compounds,  removal from
the water phase  was  due to .both  chemical
oxidation and stripping.  Stripping accounted for
12 to 75 percent of the total removal for 1,1,1-
TCA and 5 to 44 percent for 1,1 -DCA.  Stripping
was  less than  10 percent  for TCE and vinyl
chloride, and  was negligible for  other VOCs
present.

The  Decompozon unit  reduced  ozone to less
than 0.1  ppm (OSHAstandards), with efficiencies
greater than 99.99 percent. VOCs present in the
air within the treatment system, at approximately
0.1 to 0.5 ppm, were not detected after passing
through the Decompozon unit. Very low TOG
removal  was  found,   implying   that  partial
oxidation of organics occurred without complete
conversion  to CO2  and H2O.   The  average
electrical energy  consumption was about 11
kW/hour of  operation.
                        Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                       109

-------
 General Site Information

 EPA completed a field-scale demonstration in
 March 1989 at a hazardous waste site in San
 Jose, California. EPA published the Technology
 Evaluation Report in January 1990 (EPA/540/A5-
 89/012).   EPA  published the  Applications
 Analysis Report in December 1990.
                          Contacts

                          EPA Project Manager:
                          Norma Lewis
                          U.S. EPA
                          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                          26 West Martin Luther King Drive  >
                          Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                          513/569-7665
                          FTS:  684-7665

                          Technology  Developer Contact:
                          David B. Fletcher
                          Ultrox International
                          2435 South Anne Street
                          Santa Ana, California 92704
                          714/545-5557




Run 9
TCE
1,1-DCA
1,1,1-TCA
Total VOCs
Run 12
TCE
1,1-DCA
1,1,1-TCA
Total VOCs
Run 13
TCE
1,1-DCA
1,1,1-TCA
Total VOCs

PERFORMANCE
Mean Influent
fao/U

65
11
4.3
170

52
11
3.3
150

49
10
3.2
120
TABLE 1
DATA FOR REPRODUCIBLE RUNS
Mean Effluent
fcra/U

1.2
5.3
0.75
16

0.55
3.8
0.43
12

0.63
4.2
0.49
20



Percent Removal

98
52
83
91

99
65
87
92

99
58
85
83
110
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable

-------
\
                                                                    Other Physical Treatment
                              Wetlands-Based Treatment
                                  Metals in Influent Waters
Technology Description

This  constructed  wetlands-based  treatment
technology  uses  natural  geochemical  and
biological  processes inherent in a man-made
wetland ecosystem to accumulate and remove
metals from influent waters. The wetlands-based
treatment  process  is suitable  for acid mine
drainage from metal or coal  mining activities.
These wastes  typically  contain  high  metals
concentrations and are acidic  in nature.

Wetlands treatment has been applied with some
success to wastewater in the eastern regions of
the United States. The process may have to be
adjusted to account for differences in geology,
terrain, trace metal composition, and climate in
the metal mining regions  of the western United
States.   The  treatment  system  incorporates
principal  ecosystem  components  found  in
wetlands,  including  organic  soils,  microbial
fauna, algae, and vascular plants.

Influent waters,  which  contain  high  metal
concentrations  and have low pH levels, flow
through the aerobic and anaerobic zones of the
wetland ecosystem.   Metals  are  removed by
filtration, ion exchange, adsorption, absorption,
and  precipitation  through geochemical and
microbial oxidation and reduction.  In filtration,
metal flocculates and metals that are adsorbed
onto fine sediment particles settle in quiescent
ponds, or are filtered out as the water percolates
through  the soil or the  plant canopy.   Ion
exchange occurs as metals in the water come
into  contact  with  humic or  other  organic
substances   in   the  soil   medium.
Oxidation/reduction reactions  that occur in the
aerobic/anaerobic  zones, respectively,  play  a
major role in removing metals as hydroxides and
sulfides.
 Technology Performance

 EPA  approved  second-year funding for the
 project  under  the  Emerging  Technologies
                                                 Program. A pilot-scale system has been built to
                                                 assess the effectiveness of constructed wetlands
                                                 in treating the effluent from the Big Five Tunnel
                                                 near Idaho Springs, Colorado. After two years of
                                                 operation, the pilot study is yielding optimum
                                                 results:

                                                       pH raised from 2.9 to 6.5;
                                                       Copper reduced to below detection limit;
                                                       Zinc reduced by 97 percent;
                                                       Iron reduced by 80 percent;
                                                       Aluminum, Cadmium, and Lead decreased
                                                       90-100 percent;
                                                 •     Cobalt and Nickel decreased 50 percent;
                                                       and
                                                 •     Biotoxicity  to  fathead   minnows  and
                                                       Ceriodaphnia reduced by factors of 4 to
                                                       20.
                                                 General Site Information

                                                 EPA has selected this technology for the SITE
                                                 Demonstration   Program.      A  full-scale
                                                 demonstration site has not yet been selected,
                                                 but candidate sites  include  mineral  mining
                                                 facilities.
                                                 Contacts

                                                 EPA Project Manager:
                                                 Edward R. Bates
                                                 U.S. EPA
                                                 Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                                                 26 West Martin Luther King Drive
                                                 Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                                                 513/569-7774
                                                 FTS: 684-7774

                                                 Technology Developer Contact:
                                                 Thomas Wildeman
                                                 Colorado School of Mines
                                                 Golden, Colorado  80401
                                                 303/273-3642
                         Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
                                                                                        111

-------

-------
              INNOVATIVE REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY
                  INFORMATION REQUEST FORM
         INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING AN ABSTRACT
The following is the suggested format for submitting a remedial technology abstract for
inclusion in the Synopses of Federal Demonstration Projects for Innovative Hazardous
Waste Treatment Technologies. The format has been divided into five sections, each
designed to gather specific information for the abstract. These five sections are:

       •       Technology Description;

       •       Technology Performance;

       •       Remediation Costs;

       •       General Site Information; and

       •       Contacts.

Although a form has been provided for your convenience, you may submit abstract
information without use of this form, or you may attach additional information to this form,
as necessary. If possible, this information should be presented in the same order as it
appears in this example. It is understood that many abstracts will contain only partial
information, as the projects are still being tested; however, please submit as much
information as possible, as this will assist others in better understanding the innovative
treatment technology.

Abstract information, comments, and questions relating to this project should be directed
to:

              Daniel M. Powell
              Technology (novation Office
              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              401 M Street, S.W., OS-110
              Washington, D.C.  20460

-------
                    INNOVATIVE REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGY
                        INFORMATION REQUEST FORM
                        1. TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
Type of Technology and Exact Technology Name (e.g., Bioremediation: Aerobic Biodegradation of
Trichloroethylene):
Waste Description (e.g., RGB's in sludge):
Media Contaminated (e.g., groundwater, soil, surface water):
Targeted Contaminants and Concentrations (e.g., RGB's at 500 ppm):
Description of Treatment Process:
Description of Preliminary or Secondary Treatment, If Any:
Summary of Monitoring Results (e.g., air emissions, waste water discharge):
Limitations of Technology (e.g., weather, soil type, depth of water table):
                                 *  *  Page 2 * *

-------
                        2. TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE
 Overall Attainment of Clean-Up Goals (e.g., residual contamination):
Summary of Data Used to Evaluate Technology Effectiveness:
Treatment Capacity (e.g., gallons per day, tons per day):
Types and Amounts of Residual Wastes (e.g., ash, steam, wastewater):
Ultimate Disposal Options (e.g., landfilling of ash):
Malfunctions and Disruptions Encountered:
Interfering Compounds:
Description and Length of Future Maintenance and Monitoring Required:
Additional Comments:
                                  * *  Page 3 * *

-------
                                 3. REMEDIATION COSTS
Total cost of Remediation Project, Not Including Site Investigations:
Cost of Remediaiton Project per Unit of Waste,
Not Including Site Investigations (e.g., dollars per ton):
Design Costs:
Time Required for Design:
Site Preparation:
Equipment Costs:
Start-up and Fixed Costs (e.g., transportation, insurance, shakedown, training):
Labor Costs (e.g., salaries and living expenses):
Consumables and Supplies (e.g., chemicals, cement):
 Utilities (e.g., fuel, electricity):
 Effluent Treatment and Disposal:
 Residuals/waste shipping and handling:
 Analytical Services:
 Maintenance and Modification:
 Demobilization:
 Projected Costs of Future Maintenance and Monitoring per Year:
 Estimated Time Required for Operation and Maintenance:
                                           Page 4  * *

-------
                          4. GENERAL SITE INFORMATION
Site Name:
Site Location:
Time Period Covered by the Project:
Scale of Project (i.e., treatability study, bench scale, pilot test, field demonstration or full-scale
remediation):
Site Characterization Data (to the extent that it affects the treatment process):
Volume of Area Contaminated:
Facility's Current and Previous Uses:
Facility Contact:
                                               Remedial Action Contractor:
Contractor Contact:
                                               Other Contacts:
                                     *  *  Page 5  *
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUNTING OmCE:1S01-S4B-ie7/S5(>31

-------

-------
                                        Suggestions

If you know of additional projects that should be included in this compendium, or if you are often in need
of this type of information and don't know how to find it, please make a note on this page.  This is a self-
addressed mailer - just add postage, and drop it in the mail.

-------
fold here
               Daniel Powell
               Environmental Protection Specialist
               Technology Innovation Office
               U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
               401 M Street, SW, OS-110
               Washington, D.C.  20460
fold here

-------