Section 121 (b) of CERCLA mandates EPA to select remedies that "utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent practicable" and to prefer remedial actions in which
treatment that "permanently and significantly reduces the volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous substances, pollutants, and
contaminants is a principal element." Treatability studies provide data to support remedy selection and implementation. They
should be performed as soon as it becomes evident that the available information is insufficient to ensure the quality of the
decision. Conducting treatability studies early in the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) process should reduce
uncertainties associated with selecting the remedy and should provide a sound basis for the Record of Decision (ROD). Regional
planning should factor in the time and resources required for these studies.
This fact sheet provides a summary of information to facilitate the planning and execution of solvent extraction remedy
screening and remedy selection treatability studies in support of the RI/FS and the remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA)
processes. Detailed information on designing and implementing remedy screening and remedy selection treatability studies for
solvent extraction is provided in the "Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA: Solvent Extraction," Interim
Guidance, EPA/540/R-92/016a, August 1992.
S EZOA
ImI *1
United States	Office of	EPA/540/R-92/016b
Environmental Protection	Solid Waste and	August 1992
Agency	Emergency Response
Guide for Conducting Treatability
Studies under CERCLA:
Solvent Extraction
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response	QUICK REFERENCE FACT SHEET
Hazardous Site Control Division OS-220
INTRODUCTION
There are three levels or tiers of treatability studies:
remedy screening, remedy selection, and remedy design.
The "Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under
CERCLA: Solvent Extraction," Interim Guidance, discusses
all three levels of treatability studies. The solvent extraction
treatability guidance is one of a series of technology-
specific documents.
Remedy screening studies provide a quick and relatively
inexpensive indication of whether solvent extraction is a
potentially viable remedial technology. Remedy selection
studies provide data that permit evaluation of solvent
extraction's ability to meet expected site cleanup goals and
provide information in support of the detailed analysis of the
alternative (i.e., seven of the nine evaluation criteria
specified in EPA's RI/FS Interim Final Guidance Document,
EPA/540/G-89/004,1988. Remedy selection tests generally
have moderate costs and may require weeks to months to
complete. Remedy design testing provides quantitative
performance, cost, and design information for remediating
the operable unit. Remedy design studies are of moderate
to high costs and may require months to complete.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION AND PRELIMINARY
SCREENING
Technology Description
Solvent extraction is a separation technology which
uses a fluid to remove hazardous contaminants from
excavated soils, sludges, and sediments and/or
contaminated groundwater and surface water. The solvent
is chosen such that the contaminants have a higher affinity
for the solvent than for the contaminated material. Solvent
extraction does not destroy contaminants, it concentrates
them so that they can be recycled or destroyed more cost
effectively. When contaminants are not recycled, solvent
extraction must be combined with other technologies in a
treatment train to destroy the separated, concentrated
contaminants. Solvent extraction has limited application as
a treatment technology for inorganic contaminants.
Nevertheless, solvent extraction may affect inorganic
contaminants even when the process is designed to treat
organic contaminants. The discussions in this document
are primarily related to organic contaminants.
Solvent extraction processes can be divided into
three general types based upon the type of solvent used:
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
1

-------
standard solvents, near-critical fluids/liquefied gases, and
critical solution temperature (CST) solvents. Standard
solvent processes use alkanes, alcohols, or similar liquid
solvents typically at ambient pressure. Near-critical
fluid/liquefied gas processes use butane, isobutane,
propane, carbon dioxide (C02), or similar gases which have
been liquefied under pressure at ambient temperature.
Systems involving CST solvents use the unique solubility
properties of those compounds to extract contaminants at
one temperature where the solvent and water are miscible
and then separate the concentrated contaminants from the
water fraction at another temperature. Solvent is then
removed from the contaminants by evaporation.
Figure 1 is a general schematic of the solvent extraction
process.
Feed preparation (1) includes moving the material to the
process where it is normally screened to remove debris and
large objects. Depending upon the process vendor and
whether the process is semi-batch or continuous, the waste
may need to be made pumpable by the addition of solvent
or water. In the extractor (2), the feed and solvent are
mixed, resulting in the dissolution of organic contaminant
into the solvent. The extracted organics are removed from
the extractor with the solvent and go to the separator (3),
where the pressure or temperature is changed, causing the
organic contaminants to separate from the solvent. The
solvent is recycled (4) to the extractor, and the
concentrated contaminants (5) are removed from the
separator.
Solvent extraction has been used as a full-scale remedy
at two CERCLA sites: (1) the Treban PCB site in Tulsa, OK
and (2) the General Refining site in Garden City, GA.
However, the technology shows promise for treating a
variety of organic contaminants commonly found at
CERCLA sites. During fiscal year 1989, solvent extraction
was selected in combination with other technologies for
remediation of five Superfund sites having soils and
sediments contaminated with poly-chlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), polynucleararomatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
pentachlorophenol (PCP), and other organic compounds.
These sites are Norwood PCBs, MA; O'Conner, ME;
Pinette's Salvage Yard, ME; Ewan Property, NJ; and United
Creosoting, TX.
Prescreening Characteristics
The determination of the need for and the appropriate
tier of treatability study required is dependent on the
literature information available on the technology, expert
technical judgement, and site-specific factors. The first two
elements - the literature search and expert consultation -
are critical factors of the prescreening phase in determining
whether adequate data are available or whether a treatability
study is needed.
Information on the technology applicability, the latest
performance data, the status of the technology, and
sources for further information are provided in one of a series
of engineering bulletins being prepared by U.S. EPA's Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) in Cincinnati,
Ohio.
Contaminated Media
(pretreatment may"
be necessary)
Extraction
I
Solvent Make-up
Separation
(optional)
(2)
Solvent
with Organic
Contaminants
Clean
Solvent
Solvent
Recovery
(Distillation)
(4)
^Concentrated
Contaminants
Decontaminated
Solids plus
Residual Solvent
Desorption
(Raffinate
Stripping)
(3)
Clean
Solvent
Decontaminated
~ Solids
Figure 1. Generic Solvent Extraction Process
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
2

-------
A literature search should be performed to determine
the physical and chemical properties of the contaminants of
interest. The most important prescreening parameters are
the contaminant profile and concentration of contaminants.
Contaminant character-istics such as vapor pressure,
solubility, Henry's Law constant, partition coefficient, boiling
point, specific gravity, and viscosity may be important for
the design of remedy evaluation studies and related
residuals treatment systems. Tests for total organic carbon
(TOC) and total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons give an
estimate of equilibrium partitioning and contaminant
transport between soil and water and may be useful in
comparing results to other sites with different contaminants.
Particle size distribution and moisture are useful for
evaluating materials handling and pretreatment processes.
A discussion of other, less important parameters such as
pH, temperature, chemical oxygen demand (COD), and
contaminant toxicity is contained in the solvent extraction
guide.
If contamination exists in different soil strata or in
different media, a characterization profile should be
developed for each soil type or media. Available chemical
and physical data (including contaminant concentration
averages and ranges) and the volumes of the contaminated
soil requiring treatment should be identified. For "hot spots",
separate characteriiations should be done so they can be
properly addressed in the treatability tests. Solvent
extraction may be applicable to some parts of a site, but
not to other parts.
The quantity of large rocks, debris, and other oversize
screenable material that must be removed is an important
measurement. While this is not a "laboratory"
measurement, it is important to determine which treatment
method is most suitable for preparing the bulk soil or
sediment for entry into the solvent extraction process, i.e.,
screening to remove large rocks, stumps, debris, and
washing or crushing of oversize materials, etc. The quantity
of and degree of contamination of water is important for
design of ultimate treatment systems. The water could be
the media to be treated or could be associated with a
soil/sludge media.
Technology Limitations
Solvent extraction limitations may be defined as
characteristics that hinder cost-effective treatment of the
contaminated media with specific processes. The limitation
may be due to the contaminant (incompatibility with the
selected solvents or complex mix of contaminants), the
process, or the media. Several extraction stages may be
required in some cases to meet the site cleanup goals.
Difficulties may be encountered in recycling spent solvents.
Hydrophobic and hydrophilic contaminants may be difficult
to extract with the same solvent. The contaminated media
might require substantial pretreatment.
Complex mixtures of contaminants in the waste media,
such as a mixture of metals, non-volatile organics, semi-
volatile organics, etc. may make the design or selection of
a suitable solvent extraction system that will remove all the
different types of contaminants difficult. Organically bound
metals can co-extract with the target organic pollutants and
restrict disposal and recycle options. The presence of
emulsifiers and detergents can adversely affect the
extraction performance by competing with the extraction
solvent for retention of the organic pollutants. High moisture
can interfere with the efficiency of some solvents, limiting
the application of certain solvent extraction processes.
Advantages and disadvantages exist among the various
types of solvent extraction processes. The primary
differences include the following: ability to handle fines or
high clay content, ability to handle a wide variety of organic
contaminants, the ease of phase separation after extraction,
and the energy requirements.
THE USE OF TREATABILITY STUDIES IN REMEDY
EVALUATION
Treatability studies should be performed in a systematic
fashion to ensure that the data generated can support the
remedy evaluation process. The results of these studies
must be combined with other data to fully evaluate the
technology.
There are three levels or tiers of treatability studies:
remedy screening, remedy selection, and remedy design.
Some or all of the levels may be needed on a case-by-case
basis. The need for and the level of treatability testing are
management-based decisions in which the time and cost of
testing are balanced against the risks inherent in the
decision (e.g., selection of an inappropriate treatment
alternative). These decisions are based on the quantity and
quality of data available and on other decision factors (e.g.,
state and community acceptance of the remedy, new site
data).
Technologies may be evaluated first at the remedy
screening level and progress through the remedy selection
to the remedy design level. A technology may enter,
however, at whatever level is appropriate based on
experience with the technology, contaminants of concern,
and site-specific factors. Figure 2 shows the relationship of
three levels of treatability study to each other and to the
RI/FS process.
Remedy Screening
Remedy screening, the first tier of testing, is used to
determine the ability of a technology to treat a contaminated
soil using simple laboratory tests. Approximately 5 kg of
sample are extracted for several hours in a rotary shaker or
other device using a hydrophilic solvent such as acetone or
methanol. The residual solids are then extracted in a
hydrophobic solvent such as hexane or kerosene. The mean
contaminant concentration in the solids or water fraction is
determined from duplicate samples before and after
extraction. These studies are generally low cost (e.g., <
$30,000) and usually require one or more days to complete.
Remedy screening tests are generic and can be performed
at any laboratory with the proper equipment and qualified
personnel. This tier is occasionally skipped for evaluation of
solvent extraction.
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
3

-------
Remedy Selection
Remedy selection, the second tier of testing, is used to
evaluate the technology's performance on a contaminant
specific basis for an operable unit. A total of 5 kilograms or
more of sample are extracted, typically using vendor
specific solvents and equipment. The test design is based
on remedy screening tests or information from the
prescreening search. Normally, triplicate samples are taken
from both the solvent and the extracted medium (soil, water,
etc.) These studies generally have moderate costs (e.g.,
$20,000 to $120,000) and may require several months or
more to plan, obtain samples, and execute. They yield data
that verify the technology's ability to meet expected cleanup
goals and provide information in support of the detailed
analysis of alternatives in the CERCLA Feasibility Study
(FS).
The remedy selection tier of solvent extraction testing
consists of bench-scale tests and/or pilot tests. Typically,
these tests will be vendor-specific. Sufficient experimental
controls are needed such that a quantitative mass balance
can be achieved. The key question to be answered during
remedy selection testing is whether the treated media will
meet the cleanup goals for this site. The exact removal
efficiency or acceptable residual contaminant level specified
as the goal for the remedy selection test Is site-specific.
Typically, a remedy design study would follow a successful
remedy selection study, after the ROD.
Remedy Design
Remedy design testing is the third tier of testing. In this
tier, pilot tests provide quantitative performance data to
confirm the feasibility of solvent extraction based on target
cleanup goals. These tests also produce information to
refine cleanup time estimates and cost predictions and to
design a full-scale system. This testing also produces the
remaining data required to optimize performance. Specific
information includes the identification of pretreatment
requirements and material handling concerns and
determining the number of extraction sequences required.
These studies are of moderate to high cost (e.g., $100,000
to $500,000) and require several months to complete the
testing. As with the other tiers, planning, analysis, and
report writing will add to the duration of the study. For
Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
Identification
of Alternatives
Scoping
- the -
RI/FS
Literature
Screening
and
Treatability
Study Scoping
Site
Characterization
and Technology
Screening
REMEDY
SCREENING
to Determine
Technology Feasibility
Record of
Decision
(ROD)
Remedy
Selection
Remedial Design/
Remedial Action -
(RD/RA)
Evaluation
of Alternatives
REMEDY SELECTION
to Develop Performance
and Cost Data
Implementation
of Remedy
REMEDY DESIGN
to Develop Scale-Up, Design,
and Detailed Cost Data
Figure 2. The Role of Treatability Studies in the RI/FS and RD/RA Process
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy	4

-------
complex sites (e.g., sites with different types or
concentrations of contaminants in different media such as
soil, sludges, and water), longer testing periods may be
required, and costs will be higher. Remedy design tests
yield data that verify performance to a higher degree than
remedy selection and provide detailed design information.
They are performed during the remedy implementation
phase of the site cleanup, after the ROD and evaluation of
alternatives.
TREATABILITY STUDY WORK PLAN
Carefully planned treatability studies are necessary to
ensure that the data generated are useful for evaluating the
validity or performance of the technology. The Work Plan
sets forth the contractor's proposed technical approach to
the tasks outlined in the RPM's Work Assignment. It also
assigns responsibilities, establishes the project schedule,
and estimates costs. The Work Plan must be approved by
the RPM before work begins. A suggested organization of
the solvent extraction treatability study Work Plan is
provided in the "Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Solvent Extraction".
Test Objectives and Goals
The overall solvent extraction treatability study
objectives must meet the specific needs of the RI/FS. There
are nine evaluation criteria specified in the EPA's RI/FS
Interim Final Guidance Document. Treatability studies can
provide data from which seven of these criteria may be
evaluated.
Treatability study goals are the specific cleanup
standards or removal rates designed to meet the test
objectives. Setting goals for the treatability study is critical
to the ultimate usefulness of its results. These goals must
be well defined before the study is performed. Each tier or
phase of the treatability study program requires appropriate
performance goals. For example, remedy screening tests
could answer the question, "Will solvent extraction reduce
contaminants to the cleanup level, if known, or by a
sufficient percentage (e.g., 50 to 70 percent)? The remedy
selection tests measure whether the process could reduce
contamination to below the anticipated performance criteria
to be specified in the ROD. In the absence of specific
cleanup goals, an arbitrary reduction (e.g., 90 to 99 percent)
may be chosen to indicate potential usefulness.
Laboratory-scale tests are used for remedy screening.
Remedy screening goals should simply require that the
contaminant of interest shows a reduction in concentration
in the soil of approximately 50 to 70 percent. The goal is to
show solvent extraction has the potential to work at the site.
Occasionally, sufficient information exists about soil
conditions and contaminant solubility in various solvents so
that remedy screening tests will not be necessary.
Bench-scale tests for remedy selection can determine
if ultimate cleanup levels can be met. When solvent
extraction is the primary treatment technology, the
suggested cleanup goals are typically set by the ARARs.
Pilot-scale testing occasionally is used during remedy
selection. Pilot-scale tests usually involve the operation of
a mobile treatment unit onsite for a period of 1 to 2 months.
For more complex sites (e.g., sites with different types of
contaminants in separate areas), longer overall testing
periods may be required. The goal of pilot-scale testing is to
confirm that the cleanup levels and treatment times
estimated for site remediation are achievable.
Experimental Design
Careful planning of experimental design and procedures
are required to produce adequate treatability study data.
The experimental design must identify the critical
parameters and determine the number of replicate tests
necessary. System design, test procedures, and test
equipment will vary among vendors. The information
presented in this section provides an overview of the test
equipment and procedures as these relate to each type of
test.
Screening tests can be rapidly performed in onsite or
offsite laboratories using standard laboratory glassware or
specially designed laboratory-scaie extractors to evaluate
the potential performance of solvent extraction as an
alternative technology. Typically, one or more hydrophobic
and one or more hydrophilic solvents are tested. At this
level of testing the experimental design should not be
vendor-specific. Contaminant characteristics to examine
during remedy screening include solubility in various
solvents. Vapor pressure and Henry's Law constants are
useful for evaluating solvent recovery methods. Observe
whether an emulsion forms, either at the top or the bottom.
Observe and time the solids settling rate and depth. The
rate and the relative volume of the settling material will
provide some indication of the potential for solids
separation. Removal efficiency can be estimated by
analyzing the separated solids for selected indicator
contaminants of concern. It is usually not cost-effective to
analyze for all contaminants at this level of testing. Check
for other contaminants later in the solids or water fraction
from remedy selection tests.
A remedy selection test design should be geared to the
type of system expected to be used in the field (i.e.,
standard solvents, near-critical fluids/liquefied gases, or
CST solvents). Solvent-to-solids ratios should be planned
using the results from the laboratory screening tests, if they
were performed. Remedy selection tests may use the same
equipment as the remedy screening tests or may require
that additional equipment be available, depending upon the
process being evaluated. The tests are run under more
controlled conditions than the remedy screening tests. The
removal efficiency is measured under variable extraction
conditions, which can include the addition of several
solvents or an entrainer, heated solvents, pH adjustment,
and use of supercritical or near-critical conditions. More
precision is used in weighing, mixing, and phase
separation. There is an associated increase in QA/
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
5

-------
QC costs. Wet soils and sediments may require dewatering
before treatment. Chemical analyses are frequently
performed on the solvent fraction as well as on the cleaned
solids fraction. Concentration measurements should be
taken after each cycle or batch so that the cost of each
cycle versus the percentage removal can be calculated and
the impact of process variables on extraction efficiency can
be quantified. This series of tests is considerably more
costly than remedy screening tests, so only samples
showing promise in the remedy screening phases should be
carried forward into the remedy selection tier.
Bench-scale testing is usually sufficient for remedy
selection, but there are instances where additional pilot-
scale testing is warranted. If foaming problems occurred
during remedy screening or bench-scale testing, pilot-scale
testing should be used to solve any problems before
full-scale remediation. Pilot-scale testing may be necessary
in order to obtain community acceptance. A pilot-scale or
short-term run with full-scale equipment may be used for
large sites in order to better define cost estimates for the
complete remediation.
The decision on whether to perform remedy selection
testing on hot spots or composite samples is difficult and
must be made on a site-by-site basis. Hot spot areas
should be factored into the test plan if they represent a
significant portion of the waste site. However, it is more
practical to test the specific waste matrix that will be fed to
the full-scale system over the bulk of its operating life. If the
character of soils or sediments change radically (e.g., from
clay to sand) over the depth of contamination, then tests
should be designed to separately study system
performance on each soil type.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
The Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) consists of two
parts-the Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and the Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP). The RI/FS requires a SAP
for all field activities. The SAP ensures that samples
obtained for characterization and testing are representative
and that the quality of the analytical data generated is
known and appropriate. The SAP addresses field sampling,
waste characterization, and sampling and analysis of the
treated wastes and residuals from the testing apparatus or
treatment unit. The SAP is usually prepared after Work Plan
approval.
Field Sampling Plan
The FSP component of the SAP describes the sampling
objectives; the type, location, and number of samples to be
collected; the sample numbering system; the equipment
and procedures for collecting the samples; the sample
chain-of-custody procedures; and the required packaging,
labeling, and shipping procedures.
Quality Assurance Project Plan
The QAPjP should be consistent with the overall
objectives of the treatability study.
At the remedy screening level the QAPjP need not be
overly detailed. The intended purpose of remedy screening
tests is to determine if the contaminant concentration
decreases by approximately 50 to 70 percent. Accurate
calibration of the gas chromatograph with the target
compounds is required. Duplicate tests are normally
required at the remedy screening level to assure the
reproducibility of the data.
The purpose of the remedy selection treatability study
is to determine whether solvent extraction can meet cleanup
goals and provide information to support the detailed
analysis of alternatives (i.e., seven of the nine evaluation
criteria). A higher level of QA/QC is required because the
consequences of an incorrect decision are more serious at
this level. Concentrations of the target contaminants in the
soil should be verified by employing triplicate samples to
provide a measure of data reproducibility. Recovery of
contaminants from the sample is estimated by using matrix
spikes. The QAPjP should address the measurement of
critical variables, including the concentrations of target
compounds in the initial and treated soil.
The methods for analyzing the treatability study
samples are the same as those for chemical
characterization of field samples. Preference is given to
methods in "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,"
SW-846, 3rd. Ed., November 1986. Other standard methods
may be used, as appropriate. Methods other than gas
chromatography/mass specstroscopy (GC/MS) techniques
are recommended to conserve costs when possible.
TREATABILITY DATA INTERPRETATION
To property evaluate solvent extraction as a remediation
alternative, the data collected during remedy screening and
remedy selection phases must be compared to the test
goals and other criteria that were established before the
tests were conducted. In remedy screening treatability
studies the contaminant concentration In the solids or water
fraction before extraction is compared to the contaminant
concentration in the same fraction after extraction. A
removal of approximately 50 to 70 percent of the
contaminants during the test indicates additional treatability
studies are warranted. Before and after concentrations can
normally be based on duplicate samples at each time
period. The mean values are compared to assess the
success of the study. Contaminant concentrations can also
be determined for water and solvent fractions. However,
these additional analyses add to the cost of the treatability
test and may not be needed.
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
6

-------
Remedy screening tests can sometimes be skipped
when information about the contaminant solubilities in the
selected solvent is sufficient to decide whether remedy
selection studies will be useful. This information should be
solvent- and contaminant-specific and may or may not be
applicable to other sites.
In remedy selection, contaminant concentrations in the
contaminated matrix before and after solvent extraction are
typically measured in triplicate. Contaminant levels after
treatment which meet site cleanup standards indicate
solvent extraction has the potential to remediate the site. A
reduction in the mean concentration to cleanup levels, if
known, or by approximately 90 to 99 percent indicates
solvent extraction is potentially useful in site remediation. A
higher QA level is required with this tier of testing. A number
of other factors must be evaluated before deciding to
proceed with this technology to the evaluation of
alternatives.
The design parameters for the solvent extraction
process include material throughput and optimum solvent
usage in gallons per dry ton of solids or gallons of water. It
is important to estimate the volume and physical and
chemical characteristics of each fraction to design
treatment systems and estimate disposal costs. The ability
to cost effectively recover used solvent is also important for
cost and performance estimates. Removal efficiency
measured as a function of the number of extraction stages
can be used to determine the stages required to reach
cleanup levels.
The final concentration of contaminants in the recovered
(clean) solids fraction, in the solvents, in solvent distillation
bottoms, and in water fractions are important to evaluating
the feasibility of solvent extraction. The selection of
technologies to treat the solvent or solvent still bottoms and
water fraction from soil/sludges depends upon the types and
concentrations of contaminants present. The amount of
volume reduction achieved in terms of contaminated media
is also important to the selection of solvent extraction as a
potential remediation technology.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Additional literature and consultation with experts are
critical factors in determining the need for and ensuring the
usefulness of treatability studies. A reference list of sources
on treatability studies is provided in the "Guide for
Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA: Solvent
Extraction."
It is recommended that a Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) be used. This committee includes experts on the
technology who provide technical support from the scoping
phase of the treatability study through data evaluation.
Members of the TAC may include representatives from EPA
(Region and/or ORD), other Federal Agencies, States, and
consulting firms.
OSWER/ORD operate the Technical Support Project
(TSP) which provides assistance in the planning,
performance, and/or review of treatability studies. For further
information on treatability study support orthe TSP, please
contact:
Mr. Michael Gruenfeld
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Release Control Branch
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Ave.
Building 10, 2nd Floor
Edison, NJ 08837
(908) 321-6625
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
In addition to the contacts identified above, the
appropriate Regional Coordinator for each Region located in
the Hazardous Site Control Division/Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response or the CERCLA Enforcement
Division/Office of Waste Programs Enforcement should be
contacted for additional information or assistance.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This fact sheet and the corresponding guidance
document were prepared for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development
(ORD), Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL),
Cincinnati, Ohio by Science Applications International
Corporation (SAIC) under Contract No. 68-C8-0062. Mr.
Dave Smith served as the EPA Technical Project Monitor.
Mr. Jim Rawe was SAIC's Work Assignment Manager and
the primary author. Mr. George Wahl of SAIC assisted in
writing these documents. The authors are especially grateful
to Mr. Mark Meckes of EPA, RREL who contributed
significantly by serving as a technical consultant during the
development of this document.
Many other Agency and independent reviewers have
contributed their time and comments by participating in the
expert review meetings and/or peer reviewing the guidance
document.
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
7
*U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992-648-080/60083

-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
EPA/540/R-92/016b
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
Word-Searchable Version - Not a true copy
8

-------