EPA/540/R-97/502
December 1996
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
Technology Profiles
Ninth Edition
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
I
I
1
1
1
il
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
-------
NOTICE
The development of this document was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under
Contract No. 68-C5-0037, Work Assignment No. 0-9, to PRC Environmental Management, Inc. The
document was subjected to the Agency's administrative and peer review and was approved for publication
as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use at any particular hazardous waste site.
11
-------
I
===^^== I
FOREWORD B
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's
land, air, and waste resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, EPA strives to formulate •
and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of the m
natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet these mandates, EPA's research program is providing
data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science knowledge base •
necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and •
prevent or reduce environmental risks hi the future.
The National Risk Management "Research Laboratory (NRMRL), is EPA's center for investigating •
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the
environment. The focus of NRMRL's research program is on methods for preventing and controlling •
pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protecting water quality in public water systems; m
remediating contaminated sites and groundwater; and preventing and controlling indoor air pollution. The
goal of this research effort is to catalyze development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective •
environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to support |
regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure effective
implementation of environmental regulations and strategies. •
This document has been produced as part of NRMRL's strategic long-term research plan. It is published
and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user community and to link
researchers with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
I
in
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
ABSTRACT
I
The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program, now in its eleventh year, is an integral
part of EPA's research into alternative cleanup methods for hazardous waste sites around the nation. The
SITE Program was created to encourage the development and routine use of innovative treatment and
monitoring and measurement technologies. Under the program, EPA enters into cooperative agreements
with technology developers. These developers research and refine their innovative technologies at bench-
or pilot-scale and then, with EPA's support, demonstrate them at hazardous waste sites. As a result, the
SITE Program provides environmental decision-makers with data on new, viable treatment technologies
that may have performance or cost advantages compared to traditional treatment technologies.
This document, prepared between August 1996 and December 1996, is intended as a reference guide for
those interested hi technologies participating in the SITE Demonstration, Emerging Technology, and
Characterization and Monitoring Programs. The two-page profiles are organized into two sections for
each program, completed and ongoing projects, and are presented in alphabetical order by developer name.
Reference tables for SITE Program participants precede the sections and contain EPA and developer
contacts. Inquiries about a SITE technology evaluation or the SITE Program should be directed to the
specific EPA project manager; inquiries on the technology process should be directed to the specific
technology developer.
Each technology profile contains (1) a technology developer and process name, (2) a technology
description, including a schematic diagram or photograph of the process, (3) a discussion of waste
applicability, (4) a project status report, and (5) EPA project manager and technology developer contacts.
The profiles also include summaries of demonstration results, if available. The technology description and
waste applicability sections are written by the developer. EPA prepares the status and demonstration
results sections.
A Trade Name Index and Applicability Index and are also included in the back of this document. The
Applicability Index is organized by 11 media categories, 19 waste categories, and 14 technology type
categories.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
NOTICE u
FOREWORD "i
ABSTRACT iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xiii
I
I
I
SITE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1 —
SITE PROGRAM CONTACTS 6 |
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM 7
Completed Demonstration Program Projects "
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc.
(Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction3171 and Catalytic Oxidation) 20 •
American Combustion, Lac. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22 •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Lac. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center •
(In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction Process) 28
Billings and Associates, Lac. •
(Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System [SWS®]) 30 |
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc.
(BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) 32 •
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 |
BioTrol® (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
BioTrol® (Soil Washing System) 38 •
Brice Environmental Services Corporation (Soil Washing Process) 40 |
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies
(perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation Technology) 42 _
CF Systems Corporation |
(Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) 44
Chemfix Technologies, Lac. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
COGNIS, Lac. (TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System) 48 •
Commodore Environmental Services, Lac. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) 50
Dehydro-Tech Corporation _
(Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, and
Oberlin Filter Company (Membrane Microfiltration) 54
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56 •
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
EnviroMetal Technologies Lac. (In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic •
Degradation of Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater) 64
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
Completed Demonstration Program Projects (Continued)
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) 66
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Colloid Polishing Filter Method®) 68
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
General Environmental Corporation
(CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment System) 74
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
GISXSolutions, Inc. (GIS\Key™ Environmental Data Management System) 80
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) 82
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) 86
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc. (Flame Reactor) 88
Hrubetz Environmental Services, Inc. (HRUBOUT® Process) 90
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
JIT Research Institute/Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) 94
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) 96
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) 98
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) . 104
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises
(Clay-Base Grouting Technology) 106
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
(Base-Catalyzed Decomposition Process) 108
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Volume Reduction Unit) 110
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
and INTECH 180 Corporation (Fungal Treatment Technology) 112
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
and IT Corporation (Debris Washing System) 114
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati,
and FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/
ENSR Consulting and Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Bio vault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Vacuum-Vaporized Well System) 120
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/
R.E. Wright Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
North American Technologies Group, Inc.
(Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) 124
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatment [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corp. (X'TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Radian International LCC (Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum Stripping ...... 130
VI
-------
I
======^==^^= I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
Completed Demonstration Program Projects (Continued) •
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132 ™
Retech, M4 Environmental Management, Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 •
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation I
(Low Temperature Thermal Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146 •
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 •
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc.
(Organic Stabilization and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150 •
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152 |
Terra Vac (In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction) 154
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156 •
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) 158 |
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
United States Environmental Protection Agency •
(Excavation Techniques and Foam Suppression Methods) 162 |
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 .
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 I
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 _
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174 |
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 _
Ongoing Demonstration Program Projects "
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc.
(Biological Air Treatment System) 184 •
Arctic Foundations Inc. (Cyrogenic Barrier) 186 •
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
(Constructed Wetlands-Based Treatment) ,• • • • 188 •
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190 •
EG&G Environmental, Inc. (NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology) 192
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 •
Geotech Development Corporation I
(Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification of Chromium-Contaminated Soils) 196
Lasagna Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna In Situ Soil Remediation) 198 •
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Co.
and Geokmetics International, Inc. (Electrokinetic Remediation Process) 200
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202
VII
I
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
Ongoing Demonstration Program Projects f Continued^
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Bioventing) 204
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Phytotech (Phytoremediation Technology) 208
Pintail Systems Incorporated (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) 214
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) 216
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
Sandia National Laboratories (In Situ Electrokinetic Extraction System) 220
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSMTechnology) 222
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment Process) 224
SIVE Services (Steam Injection and Vacuum Extraction) 226
SOLUCORP Industries (Molecular Bonding System®) 228
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) 230
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Wheelabrator Technologies Lac. (WES-PHix® Stabilization Process) 236
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 239
Completed Emerging Technology Program Projects
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
(Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ Treatment Strategy) 246
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre
(Soil Separation and Washing Process) 248
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254
Battelle Memorial Institute (In Situ Electroacoustic Soil Decontamination) 256
BioTrol® (Methanotrophic Bioreactor System) 258
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
(Acid Extraction Treatment System) „ 260
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
(Organics Destruction and Metals Stabilization) ' 262
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
(Smelting Lead-Containing Waste) 264
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) 270
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
Environmental Biotechnologies, Inc. (Fungal Degradation Process) 274
Ferro Corporation (Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting) 276
vni
-------
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) _
Section Page
Completed Emerging Technology Program Projects (Continued') •
Hazardous Substance Management Research Center at New Jersey Institute
of Technology and Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
(Pneumatic Fracturing and Bioremediation Process) ........................... 278 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) ................... 280 ™
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .......... 282
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) ......... 284 •
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) ..................... 286 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) .................. . .......... 288
IT Corporation (Photolytic and Biological Soil Detoxification) ..................... 290 •
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) ........................... 292 •
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc./Hickson Corporation
(Chromated Copper Arsenate Soil Leaching Process) ........................... 294 •
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) ............ 296 •
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology
(Air-Sparged Hydrocyclone) ........................................... 298 •
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology |
(Campbell Centrifugal Jig) ............................................ 300
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) .................... 302 •
PSI Technologies, A Division of Physical Sciences Inc. |
(Metals Immobilization and Decontamination of Aggregate Solids) .................. 304
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) ...................... 306 •
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) ....... 308 |
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment) ........ 310
Resource Management & Recovery (AlgaSORB® Biological Sorption) ................ 312 •
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center |
(Photocatalytic Degradation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) ............. 314
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process^) ......... 316 _
Thermatrix, Inc. (Photolytic Oxidation Process) .......................... ..... 318 I
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc.
(PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated Soil Detoxification) ..................... 320
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) ............. 322 •
University of South Carolina (In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water) .................... 324 •
University of Washington (Adsorptive Filtration) .............................. 326
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) ................................. "328 • •
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. •
(Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and Adsorption Process) ....................... 330
Roy F. Weston; Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) ............................. 332 •
Ongoing Emerging Technology Program Projects
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. •
(Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of PCE) ......................... 336 . •
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation
(Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air Stripping) ................................ 338 •
IX
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
Ongoing Emerging Technology Program Projects
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
(Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment) 340
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
MX. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation
Processes for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division
(Acoustic Barrier Particulate Separator) 346
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc. (Metals Release and Removal from Wastes) 348
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc.
(High-Energy Electron Beam Irradiation) 350
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
IT Corporation (Chelation/Electrodeposition of Toxic Metals from Soils) 354
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-Integrated-Reaction Process) 356
OHM Remediation Services Corporation
(Oxygen Microbubble In Situ Bioremediation) . . 358
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils) 364
Thermo NUtech (Segmented Gate System) . 366
University of Houston (Concentrated Chloride Extraction and Recovery of Lead) 368
University of Wisconsin-Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and Removal) 370
CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING PROGRAM 373
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc.
(Automated Sampling and Analytical Platform) 378
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Environmental Technologies Group, Inc.
(AirSentry Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer) 384
Fugro Geosciences, Inc. (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 386
Geoprobe Systems (Geoprobe Soil Conductivity Sensor) . 388
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc.
(Test Kits for Organic Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
HNU Systems, Inc.
(HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 31 ID Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Idetek, Inc. (Equate® Immunoassay) 398
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers) 400
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
Millipore Corporation (EnviroGard™ PCB Immunoassay Test Kit) 404
-------
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
Characterization and Monitoring Program Projects ('Continued') I
Millipore Corporation (EnviroGard™ PCP Immunoassay Test Kit) ................... 406 •
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) .............. ............. 408
Naval Command, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center •
(SCAPS Cone Penetrometer) .......................................... 410 •
NITON Corporation (XL Spectrum Analyzer) ..... , .......................... 412
Photovac Monitoring Instruments •
(PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas Chromatograph) .......................... 414 •
SCITEC Corporation (Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer) ................ 416
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) ............... 418 •
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) .............................. 420 I
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) .......................... 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) .................................. 424 •
TN Spectrace (TN 9000 and TNPb Fluorescence Analyzers ....................... 426 |
Tri-Senices (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS]) .......... 428
United States Environmental Protection Agency •
(Field Analytical Screening Program PCB Method) ............................ 430 |
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) ................. ........... . 432
DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FROM THE U.S. EPA |
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT RESEARCH LABORATORY,
SUPERFUND TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION DIVISION .................... 435 _
VIDEO REQUEST FORM ...................................... ......... 445 •
TRADE NAME INDEX ................................................. 449
APPLICABILITY INDEX ................................................ 451
XI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES 2
2 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM 3
3 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN THE EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM . . 3
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 COMPLETED SITE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM PROJECTS
AS OF DECEMBER 1996 8
2 ONGOING SITE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM PROJECTS
AS OF DECEMBER 1996 . 180
3 COMPLETED SITE EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM PROJECTS
AS OF DECEMBER 1996 240
4 ONGOING SITE EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM PROJECTS
AS OF DECEMBER 1996 334
5 COMPLETED SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING
PROGRAM PROJECTS AS OF DECEMBER 1996 374
Xll
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I
I
I
The project manager responsible for the preparation of this document is Paul T. McCauley of EPA's
National Risk Management Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. This document was prepared under
the direction of Robert Olexsey, Director of the Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division. Key
program area contributors for EPA include Stephen Billets, Annette Gatchett, John Martin, and Randy _
Parker. Special acknowledgement is given to the individual EPA SITE project managers and technology •
developers who provided guidance and technical support.
The contractor project manager responsible for the production of this document is Kelly L. Enwright of •
PRC Environmental Management, Inc. (PRC). Key PRC contributors to the development of this document ™
are Robert Foster and Jonathan Lewis; special acknowledgement is given to PRC SITE project managers
for their technical support and to Aaron Cade, Stephen R. Curmode, Charlene Paslay, and Christine I
Rogers for their editorial, graphic, and production assistance. •
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
xin
-------
SiTi P8Q0RAM DESCRIPTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program, now in its eleventh year, encourages the development and implementation of (1) innovative
treatment technologies for hazardous waste site remediation, and (2) characterization and monitoring
technologies for evaluating the nature and extent of hazardous waste site contamination.
The SITE Program was established by EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)
and the Office of Research and Development (ORD) in response to the 1986 Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA), which recognized a need for an "Alternative or Innovative Treatment
Technology Research and Demonstration Program." The SITE Program is administered by ORD's
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.
The SITE Program includes the following component programs:
• Demonstration Program - Conducts and evaluates demonstrations of promising innovative
technologies to provide reliable performance, cost, and applicability information for site cleanup
decision-making
• Emerging Technology Program - Provides funding to developers to continue research efforts from
the bench- and pilot-scale levels to promote the development of innovative technologies
• Characterization and Monitoring Program - Evaluates technologies that detect, monitor, and
measure hazardous and toxic substances to provide better, faster, and more cost-effective methods
for producing real-time data during site characterization and remediation
• Technology Transfer Program - Disseminates technical information, including engineering,
performance, and cost data, on innovative technologies to remove impediments for using innovative
technologies
This Technology Profiles document, a product of the Technology Transfer Program, describes completed
and ongoing projects in the Demonstration, Emerging Technology, and Characterization and Monitoring
Programs. Figure 1 shows the relationship among the programs and depicts the process of technology
development from initial concept to commercial use.
In the Demonstration Program, the technology is field-tested on hazardous waste materials. Engineering
and cost data are gathered on the innovative technology so that potential users can assess the technology's
applicability to a particular site. Data collected during the field demonstration are used to assess the
performance of the technology, the potential need for pre- and post-processing of the waste, applicable
types of wastes and waste matrices, potential operating problems, and approximate capital and operating
costs.
Page 1
-------
COMMERCIALIZATION
TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER
TECHNOLOGY
DEMONSTRATION
Field-Scale Demonstration
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPED
Pilot-Scale Testing
Bench-Scale Studies
CONCEPTUALIZATION
Figure 1: Development of Innovative Technologies
At the conclusion of a SITE demonstration, EPA prepares an Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(ITER), Technology Capsule, and Demonstration Bulletin. Often, a videotape of the demonstration is also
prepared. These reports evaluate all available information on the technology and analyze its overall
applicability to other site characteristics, waste types, and waste matrices. Testing procedures,
performance and cost data, and quality assurance and quality control standards are also presented. These
demonstration documents are distributed by EPA to provide reliable technical data for environmental
decision-making and to promote the technology's commercial use.
The Demonstration Program currently has 103 developers conducting 113 demonstrations. Of these
projects, 85 demonstrations are complete and 28 are ongoing. The projects are divided into the following
categories: thermal destruction (10), biological degradation (21), physical/chemical treatment (45),
solidification/stabilization (10), physical/chemical radioactive waste treatment (2), physical/chemical
thermal desorption (19), physical/chemical biological degradation (1), materials handling (3), and other
(2). Several technologies represent more than one treatment category. Figure 2 shows the breakdown of
technologies in the Demonstration Program.
Page 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Biological
Degradation
21
Physical/Chemical
45
Solidification/Stabilization
Materials Handling
3
Physcial/Chemical
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Biological
Degradation
1
Physical/Chemical
Radioactive Waste
Treatment
2
19
Figure 2: Innovative Technologies in the Demonstration Program
Under the Emerging Technology Program, EPA provides technical and financial support to developers for
bench- and pilot-scale testing and evaluation of innovative technologies that are at a minimum proven on
the conceptual and bench-scale levels. The program provides an opportunity for a private developer to
research and develop a technology for field application and possible evaluation under the Demonstration
Program. A technology's performance is documented in a Final Report, journal article, Summary, and
Bulletin.
EPA has provided technical and financial support to 77 projects in the Emerging Technology Program.
Of these projects, 55 are completed, 18 are ongoing in the program, and 4 have exited the program.
Eighteen Emerging Technology Program projects are participating in the Demonstration Program. The
74 active technologies are divided into the following categories: thermal destruction (9), physical/chemical
treatment (38), biological degradation (19), solidification/stabilization (2), and materials handling (5).
Figure 3 displays the breakdown of technologies in the Emerging Technology Program.
Physical/Chemical
38
Thermal
Destruction
9 Solidification/
Stabilization 2
Biological Degradation
19
Figure 3: Innovative Technologies in the Emerging Technology Program
Page 3
-------
I
I
The Characterization and Monitoring Program's (CaMP) goal is to assess innovative and alternative
monitoring, measurement, and site characterization technologies. To date, 116 technology demonstrations •
have been completed under the SITE Program (85 in the Demonstration Program and 39 hi the CaMP); •
many reports have been published and others are hi various stages of completion.
In the Technology Transfer Program, technical information on innovative technologies hi the •
Demonstration Program, Emerging Technology Program, and CaMP is disseminated to increase the
awareness and promote the use of innovative technologies for assessment and remediation at Superfund
sites. The goal of technology transfer activities is to promote communication among individuals requiring •
up-to-date technical information. ™
The Technology Transfer Program reaches the environmental community through many media, including: •
• Program-specific regional, state, and industry brochures
• On-site Visitors' Days during SITE demonstrations •
• Demonstration videotapes •
• Project-specific fact sheets to comply with site community relations plans
• ITERs, Demonstration Bulletins, Technology Capsules, and Project Summaries |
• The SITE Exhibit, displayed nationwide and internationally at conferences •
• Networking through forums, associations, regions, and states
• Technical assistance to regions, states, and remediation cleanup contractors |
SITE information, including an electronic version of this document, is available through the following _
on-line information clearinghouses: •
SITE Program Home Page: www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/ _
Alternative Treatment Technology Information Center (ATTIC)
System operator: 513-569-7272; Bulletin Board Access: 513-569-7610;
Internet Access: cmbbs.chi.epa.gov •
Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment Technologies (VISITT)
Hotline: 800-245-4505; Internet Access: www.prcemi.com/visitt I
Vendor Field Analytical and Characterization Technology (Vendor Facts)
Hotline: 800-245-4505; Internet Access: www.prcemi.com.vfacts •
Cleanup Information Bulletin Board System (CLU-IN)
Help Desk: 301-589-8368; Modem: 301-589-8366; Internet Access: www.clu-in.com •
Page
I
I
-------
Technical reports may be obtained by completing the document order form at the back of this document
(page 433) or calling the Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI) in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Additional SITE documents become available throughout the year. To find out about newly published
documents or to be placed on the SITE mailing list, call 513-569-7562 or write to:
CERI
26 West Martin Luther King Drive (G72)
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Page 5
-------
SITE PROQftAftfl CONTACTS
The SITE Program is administered by EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD), specifically the
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL). For further information on the SITE Program
or its component programs contact:
Land Remediation and
Pollution Control Division
Robert Olexsey
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7861
Fax:513-569-7620
Annette Gatchett
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7697
Fax: 513-569-7620
Characterization and
-Monitoring Program
T,ff),
• Stephen Billets
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
Randy Parker
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7271
Fax:513-569-7620
Remediation and
Control Branch.
John Martin
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7758
Fax: 513-569-7620
and '
' 'Destruction Branch
Laurel Staley
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7863
Fax:513-569-7105
e> - SITE^Management
- . Support Branch
\ ^
Patricia Erickson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7884
Fax: 513-569-7676
Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
DEMQNSTKATiON
The SITE Demonstration Program develops reliable engineering, performance, and cost data on innovative,
alternative technologies so that potential users can evaluate a technology's applicability for a specific waste
site. Demonstrations are conducted at hazardous waste sites, such as National Priorities List (NPL) sites,
non-NPL sites, and state sites, or under conditions that simulate actual hazardous waste sites.
In the past, technologies have been selected for the SITE Demonstration Program through annual requests
for proposal (RFP). EPA reviewed proposals to determine the technologies with promise for use at
hazardous waste sites. Several technologies also entered the program from current Superfund projects, in
which innovative techniques of broad interest were identified for evaluation under the program. In
addition, several Emerging Technology projects moved to the Demonstration Program. To date, 11
solicitations have been completed — SITE 001 in 1986 through SITE OlOa in 1996.
In 1997, the program will shift from a technology-driven focus to a more integrated approach driven by
the needs of the hazardous waste remediation community. The general solitication for technologies, the
annual RFP, will no longer be issued. Instead, a team of stakeholders will match technologies with a
selected site, which will be identified by the SITE Program. The stakeholders will evaluate proposals from
many technology developers to determine the appropriate innovative technology for the site. Also,
information about technologies will be continually collected and maintained in a database, which will serve
as a resource to the stakeholders.
The SITE demonstration process typically consists of five steps: (1) matching an appropriate site with an
innovative technology; (2) preparing a Demonstration Plan consisting of the test plan, sampling and
analysis plan, quality assurance project plan, and health and safety plan; (3) performing community
' relations activities; (4) conducting the demonstration (ranging in length from days to months); and (5)
documenting results in an Innovative Technology Evaluation Report, a Technology Capsule, a
Demonstration Bulletin, or other demonstration documents. A demonstration videotape may also be
prepared.
Cooperative arrangements among EPA, the developer, and the stakeholders set forth responsibilities for
conducting the demonstration and evaluating the technology. Developers are responsible for operating
their innovative systems at a selected site, and are expected to pay the costs to transport equipment to the
site, operate the equipment on site during the demonstration, and remove the equipment from the site.
EPA is responsible for project planning, sampling and analysis, quality assurance and quality control,
preparing reports, and disseminating information.
Demonstration data are used to assess the technology's performance, the potential need for pre- and
post-processing of the waste, applicable types of wastes and media, potential operating problems, and the
approximate capital and operating costs. Demonstration data can also provide insight into long-term
operating and maintenance costs and long-term risks.
The Demonstration Program currently includes 103 developers and 113 projects. These projects are
organized into two sections: completed projects and ongoing projects. The completed projects are
presented in alphabetical order by developer name in Table 1 and in the profiles that follow; the ongoing
projects are presented in Table 2 and in the profiles that follow.
Page 7
-------
TABLE 1
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc.,
Keyport.NJ (005)'
Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction3"
and Catalytic Oxidation
American Combustion, Inc.,
Norcross, GA (001)
PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co.,"
Lynchburg, VA (006)/(E02)
Cyclone Furnace
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex,
Inc.,
Gallatin.TN (007)
Soil and Sediment Washing
Berkeley Environmental
Restoration Center,
Berkeley, CA (005)
In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction
Process
Billings and Associates, Inc.,
Albuquerque, NM (007)
Subsurface Volatilization and
Ventilation System (SVVS»)
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc.,
Springfield, VA (005)
BioGenesis3M Soil and Sediment
Washing Process
Bio-Rem, Inc.,
Butler, IN (006)
Augmented In Situ Subsurface
Bioremediation i Process :
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Pate
New Jersey Environmental
Cleanup Responsibility Act site
in Hillsborough, NJ/
July - August 1992
EPA's Incineration Research
facility in Jefferson, AR using
soil from Stringfellow Acid Pit
Superfund site in Glen Avon,
CA/
November 1987 - January 1988
Developer's facility in Alliance,
OH/November 1991
Toronto, Ontario, Canada and
Saginaw Bay Confined Disposal
Facility in Saginaw, MI/
April 1992 and May 1992
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory in Altamont Hills,
CA/December 1993
Site in Buchanan, MI/
March 1993 - May 1994
Refinery site in Minnesota/
November 1992
Williams AFB in Phoenix, AZ/
May 1992 -June 1993
Technology
Contact
John Liskowitz
908-739-6444
Gregory Oilman
770-564-4180
Evans Reynolds
804-522-6000
George Jones
615-230-2217
Kent Udell
510-642-2928
Steve Collins
510-643-1300
Gale Billings
505-345-1116
Don Brenneman
713-676-5324
Charles Wilde
703-913-9700
David Mann
219-868-5823
800-428-4626
EPA Project
Manager
Not Available
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Paul dePercin .
513-569-7797
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Annette Gatchett
513-569-7697
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Applicable
Media
Soil, Rock,
Groundwater
Liquids, Solids,
Sludges
Solids, Soil,
Sludge
Soil, Sediment
Soil, Groundwater
Soil, Sludge,
Groundwater
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil, Water
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific, Low-
Level Radionuclides,
Heavy Metals
Heavy Metals,
Radionuclides
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Organic
Eialogenated and
Nonhalogenated
VOCs and SVOCs
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
PCBs, Nonspecific
Organics
VOCs and SVOCs,
Hydrocarbons,
Solvents
BTEX, Hydrocarbons
Volatile and
Nonvolatile
Hydrocarbons, PCBs,
Nonspecific Organics
Halogenated and
Nonhalogenated
Hydrocarbons
00
Solicitation Number
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
BioTrol®,
Eden Prairie, MN (003)
Biological Aqueous Treatment
System
BioTrol®,
Eden Prairie, MN (003)
Soil Washing System
Brice Environmental
Services Corporation,
Fairbanks, AK (006)
Soil Washing Process
Calgon Carbon Oxidation
Technologies (formerly Vulcan
Peroxidation Systems, Inc.),
Pittsburgh, PA (006)
perox-pure"1 Chemical Oxidation
Technology
CF Systems Corporation,
Arvada.CO (002)
Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction
(LG-SX) Technology
Cherafix Technologies, Inc.,
Metairie, LA (002)
Solidification and Stabilization
COGNIS, Inc.,"
(009)/(E05)
TERRAMET* Soil Remediation
System
Commodore Environmental
Services, Inc.,
Columbus, OH (010)
Solvated Electron Remediation
System
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
MacGillis and Gibbs Superfund
site in New Brighton, MN/
July - September 1989
MacGillis and Gibbs Superfund
site in New Brighton, MN/
September - October 1989
Alaskan Battery Enterprises
Superfund site in Fairbanks,
AK/September 1992
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory in Altamont Hills,
CA/September 1992
New Bedford Harbor Superfund
site in New Bedford, MA/
September 1988
Portable Equipment Salvage
Company site in Clackamas,
OR/March 1989
Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant in New Brighton, MN/
August 1994
Construction Battalion Supply
Center in Port Hueneme, CA/
September 1996
Technology
Contact
Durell Dobbins
612-942-8032
Dwell Dobbins
612-942-8032
Craig Jones
907-452-2512
Bertrand Dussert
412-787-6681
L.V. Benningfield
303-420-1550
David Donaldson
504-831-3600
Not Available
Neil Drobny
614-297-036*5
EPA Project
Manager
Not Available
Not Available
Not Available
Norma Lewis
513-569-7665
Mark Meckes
513-569-7348
Edwin Barth
513-569-7669
Michael Royer
908-321-6633
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Applicable
Media
Liquid Waste,
Groundwater
Soil
Soil
Groundwater,
Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment,
Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Solids
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soils, Sludges,
Sediments, Oils,
Hand Tools,
Personal Protective
Clothing
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Metals
Radioactive and
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals, Low-
Level Nuclear Waste
Lead, Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Organic
Chlorinated and
Nonchlorinated
Hydrocarbons,
Pesticides
High Molecular
Weight Organics,
PAHs. PCP, PCBs,
Pesticides
Hydrocarbons
Fuel Hydrocarbons,
Chlorinated Solvents,
PCBs, Phenolics,
Pesticides
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, PCBs,
Dioxins, PCP
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
PCBs, Pesticides,
Halogenated
Compounds
CO
From Emerging Technology Program •
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
Dehydro-Tech Corporation,
Somerviile. NJ (004)
Carver-Greenfield Process® for
Solvent Extraction of Wet, Oily
Wastes
E.I. DuPpnt de Nemours and
Company, and Oberlin Filter
: Co-, -_,l,:
WilmingtohyDE (003)
Membrane Microfiltration
Dynaphore, Inc.,
Richmond, VA (006)
FORAGER® Sponge
ECOVA Corporation,
Boulder, CO i(006)
Bioslurry Reactor
ELI Eco Logic International Inc.,
Rockwood, Ontario, Canada (006)
Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction
Process
ELI Eco Logic International Inc.,
Rockwood, Ontario, Canada (006)
Thermal Desorption Unit
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc.,
Guelph, Ontario, Canada (008)
In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced
Abiotic Degradation of Dissolved
Halogenated Organic Compounds in
Groundwater
(Two Demonstrations)
Demonstration location/
Demonstration Date
EPA's Research Facility in
Edison, NI using wastes from
the PAB Oil site in Abbeville,
LA/August 1991
Palmerton Zinc Superfund site
in Palmerton, PA/
April -May 1990
National Lead Industry site in
Pedricktown, NJ/April 1994
EPA's Test and Evaluation
Facility in Cincinnati, OH/
May - September 1991
Middleground Landfill in Bay
City, MI/
October - November 1992
Middleground Landfill in Bay
City, MI/
October - November 1992
Industrial facility in New Jersey
and industrial facility in New
York/November 1994 -
February 1995 and May -
December 1995
Technology
Contact
Theodore Trowbridge
908-904-1606
Ernest Mayer
302-774-2277
Norman Rainer
804-288-7109
William Mahaffey
303-670-2875
303-443-3282
Jim Nash
519-856-9591
Jim Nasto
519-856-9591
Larry Kwicinski
519-824-0432
EPA Project
Manager
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
John Martin
513-569-7758
Not Available
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Gordon Evans
513-569-7684
Gordon Evans
513-569-7684
Chien Chen
908-906-6985
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Groundwater,
Leachate,
Wastewater,
Electroplating
Rinsewaters
Industrial
Discharge,
Municipal Sewage,
Process Streams,
Acid Mine
Drainage
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Liquids
Soil, Sludge,
Liquids
Groundwater
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals,
Cyanide, Uranium
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
PCBs, Dioxins,
PAHs,
Hydrocarbon-Soluble
Organics
Organic Particulates,
Volatile Organics,
Oily Wastes
Not Applicable
Creosote and
Petroleum Wastes
PCBs, PAHs,
Chlorinated Dioxins
and Dibenzofurans,
Chlorinated Solvents
and Chlorophenols
PCBs, PAHs,
Chlorinated Dioxins
and Dibenzofurans,
Chlorinated Solvents
and Chlorophenols
Halogenated Organic
Compounds
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
EPOC Water, Inc.,
Fresno, CA (004)
Precipitation, Microfiltration, and
Sludge Dewatering
Filter Flow Technology, Inc.,
League City, TX (006)
Colloid Polishing Filter Method*
Funderburk & Associates
(formerly HAZCON, Inc.),
Apollo Beach, PL (001)
Dechlorination and Immobilization
General Atomics,
San Diego, CA (001)
Circulating Bed Combustor
General Environmental
Corporation (formerly
Hydrologies, Inc.),
Denver, CO (008)
CURE^-Electrocoagulation
Wastewater Treatment System
Geo-Con, Inc.,
Monroeville, PA (001)
In Situ Solidification and
Stabilization Process
(Two Demonstrations)
Geosafe Corporation,
Richland, WA (002)
In Situ Vitrification
GIS\Solutions, Inc.,
Concord, CA (007)
GIS\Key™ Environmental Data
Management System
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
Iron Mountain Superfund site in
Redding, CA/May - June 1992
DOE's Rocky Flats Plant in
Denver, CO/Septerober 1993
Former oil processing plant in
Douglassville, PA/October 1987
Developer's facility in San
Diego, CA using waste from the
McColl Superfund site in
Fullerton, CA/March 1989
DOE's Rocky Flats Plant in
Denver, CO/
August - September 1995
General Electric Service Shop
site in Hialeah, FL/
April 1988
Parsons Chemical site in Grand
Ledge, Ml/March - April 1994
San Francisco, CA and
Washington, DC/
August 1993 (CA) and
December 1993 (DC)
Technology
Contact
Rodney Squires
209-291-8144
Tod Johnson
281-332-3438
Ray Funderburk
800-723-8847
Jeffrey Broido
619-455-4495
Carl Dalrymple
303-889-5949
Dan Eide
561-575-3500
Linda Ward
Robert Hayden
412-856-7700
James Hansen
Matthew Haass
509-375-0710
John Saguto .
415-827-5400
EPA Project
Manager
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Annette Gatchett
513-569-7697
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Douglas Grosse
513-569-7844
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Not Available
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
Applicable
Media
Sludge,
Wastewater,
Leachable Soil
Groundvvater,
Industrial
Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Slurry, Liquids
Water
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil, Sludge,
Sediments
Mot Applicable
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals
Heavy Metals,
Nontritium
Radionuclides
Heavy Metals
Metals, Cyanides.,
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Metals and
Radionuclides
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Organic
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Chlorinated Organics
Halogenated and
Nonbalogenated
Organic Compounds,
PCBs
Not Applicable
PCBs, PCP, Other
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Mot Applicable
-------
Ki
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
GRACE Bioremediation
Technologies,
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (008)
DARAMEND™ Bioremediation
Technology
Gruppo Italimpresse (developed by
Shirco Infrared Systems, Inc.),
Rome, Italy (001)
Infrared Thermal Destruction
(Two Demonstrations)
High Voltage Environmental
Applications, Inc.
(formerly Electron Beam
Research Facility, Florida
International University, and
University of Miami),"
Miami, FL (008)/(E03)
High-Energy Electron Irradiation
Horsehead Resource
Development Co., Inc.,
Palmenon, PA (004)
Flame Reactor
Hrubetz Environmental
Services, Inc.,
Dallas, TX (007)
HRUBOUT® Process
Hughes Environmental
Systems, Inc.,
(005)
Steam Enhanced Recovery Process
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
Domtar Wood Preserving
facility in Trenton, Ontario,
Canada/
Fall 1993 - September 1994
Peak Oil Superfund site in
Brandon, PL and Rose
Township-Demode Road
Superfund site in Oakland '
County, Mil August 1987 (FL)
and November 1987 (MI)
DOE's Savannah River site in
Aiken, SCI
September - November 1994
Developer's facility in Monaca,
PA using waste ftom National
Smelting and Refining Company
Superfund site in Atlanta, GfJ
March 1991
Kelly Air Force Base' in San
Antonio, TX/
January - February 1993
Fuel spill site in Huntington
Beach, CA/
August 1991 - September 1993
Technology
Contact
Alan Seech
Paul Bucens
905-272-7480
Not Available
William Cooper
305-593-5330
Regis Zagroeki
610-826-8818
Michael Hrubetz
Barbara Hrubetz
214-363-7833
Not Available
EPA Project
Manager
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Franklin Alvarez
513-569-7631
Marts K, Richards
513-569-7692
Gordon Evans
513-569-7684
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Applicable
Media :
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil, Sediment
Liquid, Sludge
Soil, Sludge,
Industrial Solid
Residues
Soil
Soil, Groundwater
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
,ead, Manganese,
Zinc
tfbt Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
PAHs, PCP, Total
'etroleum
Hydrocarbons
Nonspecific Organics
Most Organics
Not Applicable
Halogenated or
Nonhalogenated
VOCs and SVOCs
YOCs, SVQCs,
Hydrocarbons,
Solvents
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
> ; Devejoper/
: Technology
HT Research Institute/Brown and
Root Environmental,
Chicago, IL (007)
Radio Frequency Heating
Ionics/Resources Conservation
Company,
Bellevue, WA (001)
B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction
Technology
KAI Technologies, Inc. /Brown and
Root Environmental,
Portsmouth, NH (008)
Radio Frequency Heating
Magnum Water Technology,
El Segundo, CA (007)
CAV-OX® Process
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc.,"
London, Ontario, Canada
(009)/(E05)
Photocatalytic Water Treatment
Maxyrnillian Technologies, Inc.
(formerly Clean BcrKshires,
• ••:.&»?•)»
Boston, MA (005)
Thermal Desorption System :
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/
Spetstamponazhgeologia
Enterprises,
Clay-Based Grouting Technology
Boise, ID (009)
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
Kelly Air Force Base in San
Antonio, TX/August 1993
Grand Calumet River site in
Gary, IN/July 1992
Kelly Air Force Base in San
Antonio, TX/
January - July 1994
Edwards Air Force Base, CA/
March 1993
3OE's Oak Ridge Reservation
in Oak Ridge, TN/
August - September 1995
Niagara Mohawk Power
Corporation Harbor Point site in
Utica, NY/
November - December 1993
dike Horse Mine Site in
Montana/1994-1996
Technology
Contact
Harsh Dev
312-567-4257
Captain Jeff Stinson
904-283-6254
Clifton Blanchard
423-483-9900
William Heins
206-828-2400
Raymond Kasevich
603-431-2266
Captain Jeff Stinson
904-283-6254
Clifton Blanchard
423-483-9900
Dale Cox
310-322-4143
Jack Simser
310-640-7000
Bob Henderson
519-660-8669
Meal Maxyrnillian
617-557-6077
Cathryn Levihn
lick Raymondi
208-386-6115
EPA Project
Manager
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Mark Meckes
513-569-7348
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
lonald Lewis:
513-569-7856
ack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Applicable
Media
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil
Groundwater,
Wastewater
Wastewater,
Groundwater,
Process Water
Soil
Groundwater,
^iquid
Applicable Waste
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Cyanide
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Cyanide
leavy Metals
Petroleum
Hydrocarbons,
VOCs, SVOCs,
Pesticides
Hydrocarbons, PCBs,
PAHs, Pesticides,
Herbicides
Petroleum
Hydrocarbons,
VOCs, SVOCs,
Pesticides
Halogenated
Solvents, Phenol,
PCP, PCBs, BTEX
Most Organics
VQCs, SVQCs,
PAHs, Coal Tars
Nonspecific Organics
CO
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH (005)
Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH (007)
Volume Reduction Unit
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory and
INTECH 180 Corporation,
Cincinnati, OH (006)
Fungal Treatment Technology
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory and
IT Corporation,
Cincinnati, OH (004)
Debris Washing System
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory,
University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc.,
Cincinnati, OH (005)
Hydraulic Fracturing
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation/
ENSR Consulting and
Engineering, and Larsen
Engineers,
Albany, NY (009)
ExSituBiovault
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
- ' -
Koppers Company Superfund
ite in Morrisville, NC/
August - September 1993
Escambia Treating Company
site in Pensacola, VU
November 1992 • -
Brookhaven Wood Preserving
site in Brookhaven, MS/
June - November 1992
Superfund sites in Detroit, MI;
Hopkinsvilte, KY; and Walker
County, GA/
September 1988 (MI),
December 1989 (KY), and
August 1990 (GA)
Xerox Corporation site in Oak
Brook, IL and an underground
storage tank spill site in Dayton,
OH/July 1991 - September 1992
(IL) and August 1991 -
September 1992 (OH)
Sweden 3-Chaproan site in
Sweden, NY/
July -December 1994
Technology
Contact :
ssrsir^^^sm^^sss^^^ss
George Huffman
513-569-7431
Yei-Shong Shieh
Steven Detwiler
610-431-9100
Richard Griffiths
513-569-7832
John Glaser
513-569-7568
Richard Lamar
801-753-2111
Michael Taylor
Majid Dosani
513-782-4700
William Slack
513-469-6040
NickKolak
518-457-3372
David Ramsden,
713-520-9900
N. Sathiyakumar
716-272-7310
EPA Project
Manager
Terrence Lyons
513-569-7589
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Donald Banning
513-569-7875
Michael Roulier
513-569-7796
Carolyn Acheson
513-569-7190
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil
Soil
Debris
Soil, Groundwater
Soil
Applicable Waste
' ' ' ' 1
Inorganic I
4ol Applicable
Metals
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Organic
"""-' --' "•• ' ••
PCBs, PCP,
Halogenated
Compounds,
'olychlorinated
Jioxins and Furans
Creosote, PCP,
PAHs, VOCs,
SVOCs, Pesticides
PCP, PAHs,
Chlorinated Organics
Nonspecific
Organics, PCBs,
Pesticides
Nonspecific Organics
Chlorinated and
Nonchlorinated
YOCs and SVOCs
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology"
New York State Department of
Environmental
Conservation/SBP Technologies,
Inc.,
Albany NY (009)
Vacuum- Vaporized Well System
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation/:
R,E, Wright Environmental,
Inc.,
Albany, NY (009)
In Situ Bioventing Treatment System
North American Technologies
Group, Inc.,
Bellaire, TX (008)
Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic
Chip
NOVATERRA Associates,
Los Angeles, CA (003)
In Situ Soil Treatment (Steam and Air
Stripping)
OHM Remediation Services Corp.
(formerly offered by
Chemical Waste
Management, Inc.),
Lombard, IL (004)
XTRAX™ Thermal Desorption
Radian International LLO
(formerly Dow Environmental,
Inc.),
Walnut Creek, CA (004)
Integrated Vapor Extraction and
Steam Vacuum Stripping
Remediation Technologies, Inc.,
Seattle, WA (002),
Liquid and Solids Biological
Treatment
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
Sweden 3-Chapman site in
Sweden, NY/ July 1994 - Fall
1995
Sweden 3-Chapman site in
Sweden, NY/
July - December 1994
Petroleum Products Corporation
site in Fort Lauderdale, FL/
June 1994
Annex Terminal in San Pedro,
CA/September 1989
Re-Solve, Inc., Superfund site
in North Dartmouth, MA/
May 1992
San Fernando Valley
Groundwater Basin Superfund
site in Burbank, CA/
September 1990
Niagara Mohawk Power
Corporation facility at Harbor
Point in Utica, NY/
June-August 1995
Technology
Contact
Nick Kolak
518-457-3372
Richard Desrosiers
914-694-2280
NielKoM
518-457-3372
Richard Cronee
717-944-5501
Alan Bell
713-662-2699
Phil La Mori
213-969-9788
Chetan Trivedi
603-261-3958
David Bluestein
510-988-1125
Merv Cooper
206-624-9349
EPA Project
Manager
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Greg Sayles
513-569-7607
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Gordon Evans
513-569-7684
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Applicable
Media
Soil, Groundwater
Soil
Groundwater,
Marine Wastes
Soil, Sludge,
Liquids
Soil, Sludge,
Solids
Groundwater, Soil
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicablee
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics, Heavy
Metals
Mercury, Heavy
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
Chlorinated and
Nonchlorinated
VOCs
Chlorinated and
Nonchlorinated
VOCs, SVOCs
Gasoline, Crude Oil,
Diesel Fuel, BTEX,
PAHs, PCBs, PCP,
Trichloroethene
VOCs, SVOCs,
Hydrocarbons
VOCs, SVOCs,
PCBs, Hydrocarbons
VOCs, Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Biodegradable
Organics, Creosote,
PCP, PAHs
CXl
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
Retech, M4 Enviromental
Management Inc.,
Ukiah, CA (002)
Plasma Arc Vitrification
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc.,
Torrance, CA (000
Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System
SBP Technologies, Inc.,
Baton Rouge, LA (005)
Membrane Filtration and
Bioremediation
J.R. Simplot Company,"
Pocatello, ID (006)/(E03)
The SABRE™ Process
(Two Demonstrations)
Smith Environmental Technologies
Corporation (formerly Canonie
Environmental Services
Corporation),
Englewood, CO (006)
Low Temperature Thermal Aeration
(LTTA®)
SoHTecb ATP Systems, Inc.,
Englewood, CO (005)
Anaerobic Thermal Processor
(Two Demonstrations)
Soliditech, Inc.,
(002)
Solidification and Stabilization
Demonstration Location/
. Demonstration Date
DOE's Component
Development and Integration
Facility in Butte, MT/July 1991
Central Landfill Superfund site
in Johnston, RI/August 1994
American Creosote Works in
Pensacola, PL/October 1991
Bowers Field in Ellensburg, WA
and Weldon Spring Ordnance
Works site in Weldon Spring,
MO/
July 1993 (WA) and September
1993 - February 1994 (MO)
Pesticide site in Phoenix, AZ/
September 1992
Wide Beacb. Development
Superfund site in Brant, NY and
Waukegan Harbor Superfund
site in Waukegan, IL/
May 1991 (NY); June 1992 (IL)
Imperial Oil
Company /Champion Chemical
Company Superfund site in
Morganville, NJ/
December 1988
Technology
Contact
Ronald Womack
Leroy Leland
707-462-6522
David LaMoniea
310-370-316Q
Clayton Page
504-755-7711
Russell Kaake
208-235-5620
Tom Yergovich
208-238-2850
Joseph Hutton
303-790-1747
Joseph Hutton
303-790-1747
Not Available
EPA Project
Manager
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Douglas Grosse
513-569-7844
John Martin
513-569-7758
Wendy Davis-Hoover
513-569-7206
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sludge,
Liquids, Solids
Nonspecific
Liquids, Leachates
Groundwater,
Surface Water,
Storm Water,
Landfill Leachates,
Industrial Process
Wastewater
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Mercury
Metals, Nonspecific
Inorganics
Organic
Nonspecific Organics
Organic Solvents
Organic Compounds,
PAHs, Petroleum
Hydrocarbons, TCE,
PCP
Nitroaromatics
VOCs, SVOCs,
OCPs, OPPs, TPH
Petroleum and
Halogenated
Hydrocarbons,
PAHs, VOCs,
SVOCs
Nonspecific
Organics, Oil and
Grease
" From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
Sonotech, Inc.,
Atlanta, GA (007)
Frequency-Tunable Pulse
Combustion System
STC Remediation, A. Division of
Omega Environmental, Inc.
(formerly Silicate Technology
Corporation),
Scottsdale, AZ (003)
Organic Stabilization and Chemical
Fixation/Solidification
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc.,
Del Mar, CA (006)
Solvent Extraction Treatment System
Terra Vac,
Windsor, NJ (001)
In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum
Extraction
Texaco Inc.,
S. El Monte, CA (006)
Texaco Gasification Process
Toronto Harbour Commission,
(006)
Soil Recycling
U.S. Filtcr/Zimpro, Inc. (formerly
Ultrox, A Division of Ziinpro
Environmental, Inc.,
Huntington Beach, CA (003)
Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
EPA's Incineration Research
Facility in Jefferson, AR/
September - October 1994
Selma Pressure Treating
Superfund site in Selma,
CA/November 1990
Naval Air Station North Island
in San Diego, CA/
May - June 1994
Groveland Wells Superfund site
in Groveland, MA/
December 1987 - April 1988
Developer's Montebello
Research Laboratory using a
mixture of soil from the Purity
Oil Sales Superfund site in
Fresno, CA/January 1994
Toronto Port Industrial District
in Toronto, Ontario, Canada/
April - May 1992
Lorentz Barrel and Drum
Company site in San Jose, CA/
March 1989
Technology
Contact
Ben Zinn
404-894-3033
Scott Larsen
Stephen Pegler
602-948-7100
Alan Cash
619-558-8762
Loren Martin
609-371-0070
James Malot
787-723-9171
John Winter
310-908-7387
Mot Available
William Himebaugh
714-545-5557
EPA Project
Manager
Marta K. Richards
513-569-7692
Edward Bates
513-569-7774
Mark Meckes
513-569-7348
Terrence Lyons
513-569-7589
Not Available
Marta K. Richards
513-569-7692
Ten Richardson
513-569-7949
Morma Lewis
513-569-7665
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Gas
Soil, Sludge,
Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Groundwater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil
Groundwater,
Leachate,
Wastewater
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Heavy Metals,
Cyanides, Fluorides,
Arsenates, Chromates,
Selenium
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Mot Applicable
Organic
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific
Organics, PAHs
PCBs, PCP, PAH,
Creosote,
Chlorinated
Pesticides, PCDD,
PCDF
VOCs, SVOCs
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Halogenated
Solvents, VOCs,
Pesticides, PCBs,
BTEX, PCP
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer/
Technology
United States Environmental
Protection Agency,
(005)
Excavation Techniques and Foam
Suppression Methods
University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
Lincoln, NE,((HO)
Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System
WASTECH, Inc.,
(004)
Solidification and Stabilization
Roy F, Weston, Inc.,
West Chester, PA (006)
Low Temperature Thermal Treatment
System
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG
Technologies,
Sherman Oaks, CA (008)
UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems,
Inc. (formerly Chemical Waste
Management, Inc.),
Schaumburg, IL (005)
PO*WW*ER™ Technology
Xerox Corporation,
Webster, NY (009)
2-PHASE ™ EXTRACTION Process
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
VfcColl Superfund site in
Fullerton, CA/June - July 1990
North Landfill Subsite in
Hastings, NE/
July 1996
Robins Air Force Base in
Warner Robins, GA/
August 1991
Anderson Development
Company Superfund site in
Adrian, MI/
November - December 1991
March Air Force Base, CA/
May 1993 - May 1994
Chemical Waste Management's
facility in Lake Charles, LA/
September 1992
McClellan Air Force Base in
Sacramento, CA/
August 1994 - February 1995
Technology
Contact
Not Available
Ray Spalding
402472-7558
Not Available
Mike Cosmos
610-701-7423
JeffBannon
818-971-4900
Eric Klingel
704-599-4818
Myron Reicher
847-706-6900
Ron Hess
716-422-3694
Phil Mook
916-643-5443
EPA Project
Manager
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Terrence Lyons
513-569-7589
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797,
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Air
Groundwater
Soil, Sludge,
Liquids
Soil, Sludge
Groundwater,
Liquid, Soil
Wastewater,
Leachate,
Groundwater,
Low-Level
Radioactive Mixed
Waste
Groundwater, Soil,
Liquid
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Metals
Not Applicable
Nonspecific and
Radioactive
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Metals, Volatile
Inorganic Compounds,
Radioriuclides
Nonspecific Soluble
Inorganics
Organic
VOCs, SVOCs
VOCs
Nonspecific Organics
VOCs, SVOCs,
Petroleum
Hydrocarbons,
PAHs, PCBs
VOCs, SVOCs
VOCs and
Nonvolatile Organic
Compounds
VOCs
00
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Completed SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
; Developer/
;, ; ^Technology
ZENON Environmental Inc.
(formerly Wastewater
Technology Center),"
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
(007/E02)
Cross-Flow Pervaporation System
ZENON Environmental Inc.,
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
(007)
ZenoGem™ Process
Demonstration Location/
Demonstration Date
Naval Air Station North Island
in San Diego, CA/
February 1995
Nascolite Superfimd site in
Millville, NJ/
September - November 1994
Technology
Contact
Chris Lipski
905-639-6320
Tonytonelli
Philip Canning
905-639-6320
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Turner
513-569-7775
Daniel SuHivan
908-321-6677 '
Applicable
Media
Groundwater,
Leachate, Liquid
Groundwater,
Leachate,
Wastewater
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
Solvents, Degreasers,
Gasoline, Other
VOCs
Nonspecific Organics
(Q
" From Emerging Technology Program
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ACCUTECH REMEDIAL SYSTEMS, INC.
(Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction3171 and Catalytic Oxidation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Accutech),
and the Hazardous Substance Management
Research Center at the New Jersey Institute of
Technology in Newark, New Jersey have jointly
developed an integrated treatment system that
combines Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction3"
(PFESM) with catalytic oxidation. According to
Accutech, the system provides a cost-effective,
accelerated approach for remediating less
permeable formations contaminated with
halogenated and nonhalogenated volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOC).
The Accutech system forces compressed gas into
a geologic formation at pressures that exceed the
natural in situ stresses, creating a fracture
network. These fractures allow subsurface air to
circulate faster and more efficiently throughout
the formation, which can greatly improve
contaminant mass removal rates. PFE3M also
increases the effective area that can be influenced
by each extraction well, while intersecting new
pockets of contamination that were previously
trapped in the formation. Thus, VOCs and
SVOCs can be removed faster and from a larger
section of the formation.
can be combined with a catalytic
oxidation unit equipped with special catalysts to
destroy halogenated organics (see photograph
below). The heat from the catalytic oxidation
unit can be recycled to the formation,
significantly raising the vapor pressure of the
Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction3" and Catalytic Oxidation
Page 20
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
contaminants. Thus, VOCs and SVOCs
volatilize faster, making cleanup more efficient.
PFESM can also be combined with hot gas
injection (HGI), an in situ thermal process, to
further enhance VOC and SVOC removal rates.
HGI returns to the ground the energy generated
during catalytic oxidation of the VOCs.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Accutech system can remove halogenated
and nonhalogenated VOCs and SVOCs from both
the vadose and saturated zones. The integrated
treatment system is cost-effective for treating
soils and rock when less permeable geologic
formations limit the effectiveness of conventional
in situ technologies.
According to Accutech, the PFESM-HGI
integrated treatment system is cost-effective for
treating less permeable soil and rock formations
where conventional in situ technologies have
limited effectiveness. Activated carbon is used
when contaminant concentrations decrease to
levels where catalytic oxidation is no longer cost-
effective.
STATUS:
The Accutech technology was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in December 1990.
The demonstration was conducted in summer
1992 at a New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection and Energy Environ-.
mental Cleanup Responsibility Act site in
Hillsborough, New Jersey. During the
demonstration, trichloroethene and other VOCs
were removed from a siltstone formation.
Results of this demonstration were published in
the following documents available from EPA:
• Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-93/509)
• Technology Demonstration Summary
(EPA/540/SR-93/509)
• Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-93/509)
• Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/509)
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The demonstration results indicate that PFESM
increased the effective vacuum radius of influ-
ence nearly threefold. PFESM also increased the
rate of mass removal up to 25 times over the
rates measured using conventional extraction
technology.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
John Liskowitz
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc.
Cass Street at Highway 35
Keyport, NJ 07735
908-739-6444
Fax: 908-739-0451
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 21
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
AMERICAN COMBUSTION, INC.
(PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PYRETRON® thermal destruction
technology controls the heat input during
incineration by controlling excess oxygen
available to oxidize hazardous waste (see figure
below). The PYRETRON® combustor relies on
a new technique for mixing auxiliary oxygen, air,
and fuel to (1) provide the flame envelope with
enhanced stability, luminosity, and flame core
temperature, and (2) increase the rate of heat
released.
The technology is computer-controlled to
automatically adjust the temperatures of the
primary and secondary combustion chambers and
the amount of excess oxygen. The system adjusts
the amount of excess oxygen in response to
sudden changes in contaminant volatilization
rates in the waste.
The technology fits any conventional incineration
unit and can burn liquids, solids, and sludges.
Solids and sludges can also be coincinerated
when the burner is used with a rotary kiln or
similar equipment.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The PYRETRON® technology treats high- and
low-British thermal unit solid wastes
contaminated with rapidly volatilized hazardous
organics. In general, the technology treats any
waste that can be incinerated. It is not suitable
for processing Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act heavy metal wastes or inorganic
wastes.
STATUS:
The PYRETRON® technology was demonstrated
at EPA's Incineration Research Facility in
Jefferson, Arkansas, using a mixture of 40
percent contaminated soil from the Stringfellow
Acid Pit Superfund site in Glen Avon, California
and 60 percent decanter tank tar sludge (K087)
Measured
Process
Parameters
Valve Train
(gas, oxygen, air)
I Gas, air, and oxygen
flow to the burners
T = Temperature
Ash Pit
PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction System
Page 22
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
from coking operations. The demonstration
began in November 1987 and was completed at
the end of January 1988.
Both the Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/5-89/008) and Applications Analysis
Report (EPA/540/A5-89/008) are available from
EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
naphthalene, acenaphthylene, fluorene,
phenanthrene, anthracene, and fluoranthene were
selected as the principal organic hazardous
constituents (POHC) for the demonstration. The
PYRETRON® technology achieved greater than
99.99 percent destruction and removal
efficiencies for all six POHCs in all test runs.
Other results are listed below:
• The PYRETRON® technology with
oxygen enhancement doubled the waste
throughput possible with conventional
incineration.
• All participate emission levels from the
scrubber system discharge were
significantly below the hazardous waste
incinerator performance standard of 180
milligrams per dry standard cubic meter
at 7 percent oxygen. This standard was
in place until May 1993.
• Solid residues were contaminant-free.
• There were no significant differences in
transient emissions of carbon monoxide
between air-only incineration and
PYRETRON® oxygen-enhanced
operation with doubled throughput rate.
• Cost savings increase when operating
and fuel costs are high and oxygen costs
are relatively low.
• The system can double the capacity of a
conventional rotary kiln incinerator.
This increase is more significant for
wastes with low heating values.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Gregory Gitman
American Combustion, Inc.
4476 Park Drive
Norcross, GA 30093
770-564-4180
Fax: 770-564-4192
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 23
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
BABCOCK & WILCOX CO.
(Cyclone Furnace)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Babcock & Wilcox)
cyclone furnace is designed to combust coal with
high inorganic content (high-ash). Through
cofiring, the cyclone furnace can also
accommodate highly contaminated wastes
containing heavy metals and organics in soil or
sludge. High heat-release rates of 45,000 British
thermal units (Btu) per cubic foot of coal and
high turbulence in cyclones ensures the high
temperatures required for melting the high-ash
fuels and combusting the organics. The inert ash
exits the cyclone furnace as a vitrified slag.
The pilot-scale cyclone furnace, shown hi the
figure below, is a water cooled, scaled-down
version of a commercial coal-fired cyclone with
a restricted exit (throat). The furnace geometry
is a horizontal cylinder (barrel).
Natural gas and preheated combustion air are
heated to 820 °F and enter tangentially into the
cyclone burner. For dry soil processing, the soil
COMBUSTION
AIR
INSIDE FURNA
matrix and natural gas enter tangentially along
the cyclone furnace barrel. For wet soil
processing, an atomizer uses compressed air to
spray the soil slurry directly into the furnace.
The soil or sludge and inorganics are captured
and melted, and organics are destroyed in the gas
phase or in the molten slag layer. This slag layer
is formed and retained on the furnace barrel wall
by centrifugal action.
The soil melts, exits the cyclone furnace from the
tap at the cyclone throat, and drops into a water-
filled slag tank where it solidifies. A small
quantity of soil also exits as fly ash with the flue
gas from the furnace and is collected hi a
baghouse. In principle, this fly ash can be
recycled to the furnace to increase metal capture
and to niiriirnize the volume of the potentially
hazardous waste stream.
The energy requirements for vitrification are
15,000 Btu per pound of soil treated. The
cyclone furnace can be operated with gas, oil, or
coal as the supplemental fuel. If the waste is
NATURAL GAS
INJECTORS
NATURAL GAS
SOIL INJECTOR
\
CYCLONE
BARREL
Cyclone Furnace
Page 24
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
high in organic content, it may also supply a
significant portion of the required fuel heat input.
Particulates are captured by a baghouse. To
maximize the capture of particulate metals, a heat
exchanger is used to cool the stack gases to
approximately 200 °F before they enter the
baghouse.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The cyclone furnace can treat highly'
contaminated hazardous wastes, sludges, and
soils that contain heavy metals and organic
constituents. The wastes may be solid, a soil
slurry (wet soil), or liquids. To be treated in the
cyclone furnace, the ash or solid matrix must
melt (with or without additives) and flow at
cyclone furnace temperatures (2,400 to
3,000 °F). Because the furnace captures heavy
metals in the slag and renders them nonleachable,
it is particularly suited to soils that contain lower-
volatility radionuclides such as strontium and
transuranics.
STATUS:
Based on results from the Emerging Technology
Program, the cyclone furnace technology was
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program
in August 1991. A demonstration occurred in
November 1991 at the developer's facility in
Alliance, Ohio. The process was demonstrated
using an EPA-supplied, wet synthetic soil matrix
(SSM) spiked with heavy metals (lead, cadmium,
and chromium), organics (anthracene and
dimethylphthalate), and simulated radionuclides
(bismuth, strontium, and zirconium). Results
from the demonstrations have been published in
the Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/520/AR-92/017) and Technology
Evaluation Report, Volumes 1 and 2
(EPA/504/R-92/017A and EPA/540/R-92/017B);
these documents are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Vitrified slag teachabilities for the heavy metals
met EPA toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP) limits. TCLP teachabilities
were 0.29 milligram per liter (mg/L) for lead,
0.12 mg/L for cadmium, and 0.30 mg/L for
chromium. Almost 95 percent of the
noncombustible SSM was incorporated into the
slag. Greater than 75 percent of the chromium,
88 percent of the strontium, and 97 percent of the
zirconium were captured in the slag. Dry weight
volume was reduced 28 percent. Destruction and
removal efficiencies for anthracene and
dimethylphthalate were greater than
99.997 percent and 99.998 percent, respectively.
Stack particulates were 0.001 grain per dry
standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) at 7 percent oxygen,
which was below the Resource Conservation
Recovery Act limit of 0.08 gr/dscf effective until
May 1993. Carbon monoxide and total hydro-
carbons in the flue gas were 6.0 parts per million
(ppm) and 8.3 ppm, respectively.
An independent cost analysis was performed as
part of the SITE demonstration. The cost to
remediate 20,000 tons of contaminated soil using
a 3.3-ton-per-hour unit was estimated at $465 per
ton if the unit is on line 80 percent of the time,
and $529 per ton if the unit is on line 60 percent
of the time.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Evans Reynolds
Babcock & Wilcox Co.
2220 Langhorne Road
Lynchburg, VA 24506-0598
804-522-6000
Fax: 804-948-4846
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 25
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
BERGMANN, A DIVISION OF LINATEX, INC.
(Soil and Sediment Washing)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The soil and sediment washing technology
developed by Bergmann, A Division of Linatex,
Inc.'s, (Bergman), separates contaminated
particles by density and grain size (see
photograph below). The technology operates on
the hypothesis that most contamination is
concentrated in the fine particle fraction (less
than 45 microns [urn]) and that contamination of
larger particles is generally not extensive.
After contaminated soil is screened to remove
coarse rock and debris, water and chemical
additives such as surfactants, acids, bases, and
chelators are added to the medium to produce a
slurry feed. The slurry feed flows to an attrition
scrubbing machine. A rotary trommel screen,
dense media separators, cyclone separators, and
other equipment create mechanical and fluid shear
stress, removing contaminated silts and clays from
granular soil particles.
Different separation processes create the following
four output streams: (1) coarse clean fraction; (2)
enriched fine fraction; (3) separated contaminated
humic materials; and (4) process wash water. The
coarse clean fraction particles, which measure
greater than 45 ^m (greater than 325 mesh) each,
can be used as backfill or recycled for concrete,
masonry, or asphalt sand application. The
enriched fine fraction particles, measuring less
than 45 turn each are prepared for subsequent
treatment, immobilization, destruction, or
regulated disposal. Separated contaminated humic
materials (leaves, twigs, roots, grasses, wood
chips) are dewatered and require subsequent
treatment or disposal. Upflow classification and
separation, also known as elutriation, separates
light contaminated materials such as leaves, twigs,
Bergmann Soil and Sediment Washing
Page 26
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
roots, or wood chips. The process wash water is
treated by flocculation and sedimentation, oil-
water separation, or dissolved air flotation to
remove solubilized heavy metal and emulsified
organic fractions. The treated process wash water
is then returned to the plant for reuse.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is suitable for treating soils and
sediment contaminated with organics, including
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), creosote, fuel
residues, and heavy petroleum; and heavy metals,
including cadmium, chromium, lead, arsenic,
copper, cyanides, mercury, nickel, radionuclides,
and zinc.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in winter 1991. It was
demonstrated in Toronto, Ontario, Canada in
April 1992 as part of the Toronto Harbour
Commission (THC) soil recycling process. For
further information on the THC process, including
demonstration results, refer to the THC profile in
the Demonstration Program section (completed
projects). The technology was also demonstrated
in May 1992 at the Saginaw Bay Confined
Disposal Facility in Saginaw, Michigan. The
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-92/075) and the Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/075) are available from
EPA.
Since 1981, Bergmann has provided 31
commercial systems, treating up to 350 tons per
hour, at contaminated waste sites.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Demonstration results indicate that the soil arid
sediment washing system can effectively isolate
and concentrate PCB contamination into the
organic fractions and the fines. Levels of metals
contamination were also beneficially altered from
the feed stream to the output streams. The
effectiveness of the soil and sediment washing
system on the inorganic compounds met or
exceeded its performance for PCB contamination.
During a 5-day test in May 1992, the Bergmann
soil and sediment washing system experienced no
downtime as it operated for 8 hours per day to
treat dredged sediments from the Saginaw River.
The demonstration provided the following results:
• Approximately 71 percent of the particles
smaller than 45-//m in the input sediment
was apportioned to the enriched fine
stream.
• Less than 20 percent of the particles
smaller than 45-yum in the input sediment
was apportioned to the coarse clean
fraction.
• The distribution of the concentrations of
PCBs in the input and output streams
were as follows:
Input sediment = 1.6 milligrams per
kilogram (mg/kg)
Output coarse clean fraction = 0.20
mg/kg
Output humic materials = 11 mg/kg
Output enriched fines = 4.4 mg/kg
• The heavy metals were concentrated in
the same manner as the PCBs.
• The coarse clean sand consisted of
approximately 82 percent of the input
sediment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
George Jones
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc.
1550 Airport Road
Gallatin, TN 37066-3739
615-230-2217
Fax: 615-452-5525
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 27
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
BERKELEY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION CENTER
Qh Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The in situ steam enhanced extraction (ISEE)
process removes volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and semivolatile organic compounds
(SVOC) from contaminated water and soils above
and below the water table (see figure below).
Pressurized steam is introduced through injection
wells to force steam through the soil to thermally
enhance the vapor and liquid extraction processes.
The extraction wells have two purposes: (1) to
pump groundwater for ex situ treatment; and (2)
to transport steam and vaporized contaminants
under vacuum to the surface. Recovered
contaminants are condensed and recycled,
processed with the contaminated groundwater, or
treated hi the gas phase. The ISEE process uses
readily available components such as injection,
extraction, and monitoring wells; manifold piping;
vapor and liquid separators; vacuum pumps; and
gas emission control equipment.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ISEE process extracts VOCs and SVOCs
from contaminated soils and groundwater. The
primary compounds suitable for treatment include
hydrocarbons such as gasoline, diesel, and jet
fuel; solvents such as trichloroethene,
trichloroethane, and dichlorobenzene; or a
mixture of these compounds. The process may be
applied to contaminants above or below the water
table. After treatment is complete, subsurface
conditions are amenable to biodegradation of
residual contaminants, if necessary. The process
can be applied to contaminated soil very near the
surface with a cap. Compounds denser than water
may be treated only in low concentrations, unless
a barrier exists or can be created to prevent
downward percolation of a separate phase.
STATUS:
In August 1988, a successful pilot-scale
demonstration of the ISEE process was completed
at a site contaminated with a mixture of solvents.
Contaminants amounting to 764 pounds were
removed from the 10-foot-diameter, 12-foot-deep
test region. After 5 days of steam injection, soil
contaminant concentrations dropped by a factor of
10.
In December 1993, a full-scale demonstration was
completed at a gasoline spill site at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in
Water
Fuel
Vapors from
Recovery Wells
Steam to I
Injection Wells —f\
Q +
~7 0
Air
Treatment
Condonoato
Pump ^
SUBSURFACE
Steam
Contaminant-
Water—*1—1
•Air
». Liquid
Contaminant
»» Water
LEGEND
Liquid Flow
—-•— Vapor Flow
— — .Steam Flow
In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction Process
Page 28
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Altamont Hills, California. Gasoline was
dispersed both above and below groundwater due
to a 25-foot rise in the water table since the spill
occurred. The lateral distribution of liquid-phase
gasoline was within a region 150 feet in diameter
and up to 125 feet deep. Appendix A of the
Hughes Environmental Systems Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-
94/510) contains detailed results from the LLNL
SITE demonstration. This report is available from
EPA.
A pilot-scale test of the ISEE process was
conducted in 1994 at Naval Air Station (NAS)
Lemoore in California. During 3 months of
operation, over 98,000 gallons of JP-5 jet fuel was
recovered from medium permeability, partially
saturated sand to a depth of 20 feet. Preliminary
soil sampling showed reductions of JP-5 jet fuel
concentrations from several thousand parts per
million (ppm) above the water table to values less
than 25 ppm.
For more information about similar technologies,
see the following profiles in the Demonstration
Program section: Hughes Environmental
Systems, Inc., (completed projects) and Praxis
Environmental Technologies, Inc. (ongoing
projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration at LLNL, over
7,600 gallons of gasoline were recovered from
above and below the water table in 26 weeks of
operation. Recovery rates were about 50 times
greater than those achieved by vacuum extraction
and groundwater pumping alone. The rates were
highest during cyclic steam injection, after
subsurface soils reached steam temperatures. The
majority of the recovered gasoline came from the
condenser as a separate phase liquid or in the
effluent air stream.
Without further pumping, 1,2-dichloroethene,
benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene
concentrations in sampled groundwater were
decreased to below maximum contaminant levels
after 6 months. Post-process soil sampling
indicated that a thriving hydrocarbon-degrading
microbial population existed in soils experiencing
prolonged steam contact.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Kent Udell
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center
6147 Etcheverry Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-1740
510-642-2928
Fax: 510-642-6163
Steve Collins
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center
461 Evans Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-1706
510-643-1300
Fax: 510-643-2076
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 29
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
BILLINGS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
(Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System [SWS®])
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation
System (SWS®), developed by Billings and
Associates, Inc. (BA1), and operated by several
other firms under a licensing agreement, uses a
network of injection and extraction wells
(collectively called a reactor nest) to treat
subsurface organic contamination through soil
vacuum extraction combined with in situ
biodegradation. Each system is designed to meet
site-specific conditions.
The SWS® is shown in the figure below. A
series of injection and extraction wells is installed
at a site. One or more vacuum pumps create
negative pressure to extract contaminant vapors,
while an air compressor simultaneously creates
positive pressure, sparging the subsurface
treatment area. Control is maintained at a vapor
control unit that houses pumps, control valves,
gauges, and other process control hardware. At
most sites with subsurface organic contamination,
extraction wells are placed above the water table
and injection wells are placed below the
groundwater. This placement allows the
groundwater to be used as a diffusion device.
The number and spacing of the wells depends on
the modeling results of a design parameter matrix,
as well as the physical, chemical, and biological
characteristics of the site. The exact depth of the
injection wells and screened intervals are
additional design considerations.
To enhance vaporization, solar panels are
occasionally used to heat the injected air.
Additional valves for limiting or increasing air
flow and pressure are placed on individual reactor
nest lines (radials) or, at some sites, on individual
well points. Depending on groundwater depths
and fluctuations, horizontal vacuum screens,
"stubbed" screens, or multiple-depth completions
can be applied. Positive and negative air flow can
be shifted to different locations at the site to
emphasize remediation on the most contaminated
Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System (SWS®)
Page 30
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
areas. Negative pressure is maintained at a
suitable level to prevent escape of vapors.
Because it provides oxygen to the subsurface, the
SWS® can enhance in situ bioremediation at a
site, thereby decreasing remediation time. These
processes are normally monitored by measuring
dissolved oxygen levels hi the aquifer, recording
carbon dioxide levels hi transmission lines and at
the emission point, and periodically sampling
microbial populations. When required by air
quality permits, volatile organic compound
emissions can be treated by a patent-pending
biological filter that uses indigenous microbes
from the site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SWS® is applicable to soils, sludges, and
groundwater contaminated with gasoline, diesel
fuels, and other hydrocarbons, including
halogenated compounds. The technology is
effective on benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylene contamination. It can also contain
contaminant plumes through its unique vacuum
and aur injection techniques.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in winter 1991. A site in
Buchanan, Michigan was selected for the
demonstration, and initial drilling and construction
began in July 1992. The demonstration began in
March 1993 and was completed in May 1994.
The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-94/529), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-94/529a), and Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-94/529) are
available from EPA. The SWS® has also been
implemented at 75 underground storage tank sites
in New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Florida.
BAI is researching ways to increase the
microbiological effectiveness of the technology
and is testing a mobile unit. The mobile unit will
allow rapid field pilot tests to support the design
process. This unit will also permit actual
remediation of small sites and of small,
recalcitrant areas on large sites.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the SWS® demonstration are as
follows:
• Data indicated that the overall reductions
for several target analytes, as determined
from individual boreholes, ranged from
71 percent to over 99 percent, over a 1-
year period.
• The early phase of the remediation was
characterized by higher concentrations of
volatile organics in the extracted vapor
stream.
• The shutdown tests indicate that the
technology stimulated biodegradative
processes at the site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercui.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Gale Billings
Billings and Associates, Inc.
6808 Academy Parkway E. N.E.
Suite A-4
Albuquerque, NM 87109
505-345-1116
Fax: 505-345-1756
Don Brenneman
Brown and Root Environmental
P.O. Box 3
Houston, TX 77001-0003
713-676-5324
Fax: 713-676-5357
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 31
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
BIOGENESIS ENTERPRISES, INC.
(BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The BioGenesisSM soil and sediment washing
process uses specialized, patent-pending
equipment, complex surfactants, and water to
clean soil, sediment, and sludge contaminated with
organic and inorganic constituents. Two types of
mobile equipment wash different sizes of particles.
A truck-mounted batch unit processes 20 yards per
hour, and washes soil particles 10 mesh and
larger. A full-scale, mobile, continuous flow unit
cleans sand, silt, clay, and sludge particles smaller
than 10 mesh at a rate of 20 to 40 yards per hour.
Auxiliary equipment includes tanks, dewatering
and water treatment equipment, and a bioreactor.
Extraction efficiencies per wash cycle range from
85 to 99 percent. High contaminant levels require
multiple washes.
The principal components of the process consist of
pretreatment equipment for particle sizing, a
truck-mounted soil washer for larger particles, a
sediment washing unit(s) for fine particles, and
water treatment and reconditioning equipment.
The BioGenesisSM soil washing system for larger
particles consists of a trailer-mounted gondola
plumbed for air mixing, water and chemical
addition, oil skimming, and liquid drainage (see
figure below). Water, BioGenesisSM cleaning
Effluent from
Wash Unit r ToWastcwaler
Treatment Plant
Makeup
Water
Soil Washing Process
chemicals, and soil are loaded into the gondola.
Aeration nozzles feed compressed air to create a
fluidized bed. The resulting slurry is agitated to
release organic and inorganic contaminants from
the soil particles. After mixing, a short settling
period allows the soil particles to sink and the
removed oil to rise to the water surface, where it
is skimmed for reclamation or disposal.
Following drainage of the wash water, the treated
soil is evacuated by raising the gondola's dump
mechanism. Processed soil contains a moisture
level of 10 to 20 percent depending on the soil
matrix.
A prototype BioGenesisSM sediment washing
machine was tested in Environment Canada's
Contaminated Sediment Treatment Technology
Program. The sediment washing machine is a
continuous flow unit. Capacities of up to 80 to
100 cubic yards per hour are possible using full-
scale, parallel processing equipment.
In the sediment washing machine, sediment is
pretreated to form a slurry. The slurry passes to
a shaker screen separator that sizes particles into
two streams. Material greater than 1 millimeter
(mm) in diameter is diverted to the large particle
soil washer. Material 1 mm and smaller continues
to the sediment washer's feed hopper. From
10 mesh particles/
Sediment Washing Process
Page 32
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
there, the slurry is injected to the sediment
cleaning chamber to loosen the bonds between the
pollutant and the particle.
After the cleaning chamber, the slurry flows to the
scrubber to further weaken the bonds between
contaminants and particles. After the scrubber,
the slurry passes through a buffer tank, where
large particles separate by gravity. The slurry
then flows through hydrocyclone banks to separate
solids down to 3 to 5 microns in size. The free
liquid routes to a centrifuge for final solid-liquid
separation. All solids go to the treated soil pile;
all liquid is routed to wastewater treatment to
remove organic and inorganic contaminants.
Decontaminated wastewater is recycled back
through the process. Equipment configuration
varies depending on the soil matrix.
The BioGenesis™ cleaning chemical is a light
alkaline mixture of ionic and nonionic surfactants
and bioremediating agents that act similarly to a
biosurfactant. The proprietary cleaner contains no
hazardous ingredients.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology extracts many inorganics, volatile
and nonvolatile hydrocarbons, chlorinated
hydrocarbons, pesticides, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB), polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, and most organics from nearly
every soil and sediment type, including clay.
STATUS:
The BioGenesisSM soil washing technology was
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program in
June 1990. The process was demonstrated in
November 1992 on weathered crude oil at a
refinery site in Minnesota. Results from the
demonstration have been published in the Inno-
vative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-93/510) and the SITE
Technology Capsule (EPA/540/SR-93/510). The
reports are available from EPA. BioGenesis
Enterprises, Inc., is planning a future
demonstration of the BioGenesisSM sediment
washing process using PCB-contaminated
sediment.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results of the SITE demonstration are presented
below:
• Soil washing and biodegradation with
BioGenesisSM removed about 85 percent
of the total recoverable petroleum
hydrocarbon (TRPH)-related
contaminants in the soil.
• Treatment system performance was
reproducible at constant operating
conditions.
« At the end of 90 days, TRPH
concentrations decreased an additional 50
percent compared to washing alone.
• The prototype equipment operated within
design parameters. New production
equipment is expected to streamline
overall operating efficiency.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Annette Gatchett
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7697
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Charles Wilde
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc.
7420 Alban Station Boulevard, Suite B 208
Springfield, VA 22150
703-913-9700
Fax: 703-913-9704
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 33
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
BIO-REM, INC.
(Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Bio-Rem, Inc., Augmented In Situ
Subsurface Bioremediation Process uses a
proprietary blend (H-10) of microaerophilic
bacteria and micronutrients for subsurface
bioremediation of hydrocarbon contamination in
soil and water (see figure below). The insertion
methodology is adaptable to site-specific
situations. The bacteria are hardy and can treat
contaminants in a wide temperature range. The
process does not require additional oxygen or
oxygen-producing compounds, such as hydrogen
peroxide. Degradation products include carbon
dioxide and water.
The bioremediation process consists of four steps:
(1) defining and characterizing the contamination
plume; (2) selecting a site-specific application
methodology; (3) initiating and propagating the
bacterial culture; and (4) monitoring and reporting
cleanup.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology treats soil and water contaminated
with hydrocarbons, including halogenated
hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in winter 1991. The
technology was demonstrated at Williams Air
Force Base in Phoenix, Arizona from May 1992
through June 1993. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-93/527) is available from EPA.
Bio-Rem, Inc., has remediated sites in Illinois,
Michigan, Indiana, Texas, Kentucky, Ohio,
Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Vermont,
Microaerophilic
Bacteria
Water
Contaminated
Soil
H-10
^-
Clean
Soil
Micronutrients
Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process
Page 34
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Oklahoma, Virginia, Nevada, California,
Missouri, and Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
David Mann
Bio-Rem, Inc.
P.O. Box 116
Butler, IN 46721
219-868-5823
800-428-4626
Fax: 219-868-5851
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 35
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
BIOTROL®
(Biological Aqueous Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The BioTrol biological aqueous treatment system
(BATS) is a patented biological system that treats
contaminated groundwater and process water.
The system uses naturally occurring microbes; in
some instances, however, a specific
microorganism may be added. This technique,
known as microbial amendment, is important if a
highly toxic or recalcitrant target compound is
present. The amended microbial system removes
both the target contaminant and the background
organic carbon.
The figure below is a schematic of the BATS.
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 with a heater and a heat exchanger, to
minimize energy costs. The water then flows to
the bioreactor, where the contaminants are
biodegraded.
MIX
TANK
The microorganisms that degrade the
contaminants are immobilized in a multiple-cell,
submerged, fixed-film bioreactor. Each cell is
filled with a highly porous packing material to
which the microbes adhere. For aerobic condi-
tions, air is supplied by fine bubble membrane
diffusers mounted at the bottom of each cell. The
system may also run under anaerobic conditions.
As water flows through the bioreactor, the
contaminants are degraded to biological end-
products, predominantly carbon dioxide and
water. The resulting effluent may be discharged
to a publicly owned treatment works or reused on
site. In some cases, discharge with a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
may be possible.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The BATS may be applied to a wide variety of
wastewaters, including groundwater, lagoons, and
BATS
INLET
BLOWERS
CONTROLS
DISCHARGE
RECIRCULATION
LINE
BioTrol Biological Aqueous Treatment System (BATS)
Page 36
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
process water. Contaminants amenable to
treatment include pentachlorophenol (PCP),
creosote components, gasoline and fuel oil
components, chlorinated hydrocarbons, phenolics,
and solvents. Other potential target waste streams
include coal tar residues and organic pesticides.
The BATS 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.
STATUS:
The BATS was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1989. The system was
demonstrated under the SITE Program from July
to September 1989 at the MacGillis and Gibbs
Superfund site in New Brighton, Minnesota. The
system operated continuously for 6 weeks at three
different flow rates. The Applications Analysis
Report (EPA/540/A5-91/001), the Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-91/001), and the
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/001) are
available from EPA.
During 1986 and 1987, BioTrol performed a
successful 9-month pilot-scale field test of the
BATS at a wood preserving facility. Since that
time, the firm has installed more than 20 full-scale
systems and has performed several pilot-scale
demonstrations. These systems have successfully
treated waters contaminated with gasoline, mineral
spirit solvents, phenol, and creosote.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
For the SITE demonstration, the BATS yielded the
following results:
• Reduced PCP concentrations from about
45 parts per million (ppm) to 1 ppm or
less in a single pass
• Produced minimal sludge and no PCP air
emissions
• Mineralized chlorinated phenolics
• Eliminated groundwater biotoxicity
• Appeared to be unaffected by low
concentrations of oil and grease (about
50 ppm) and heavy metals in groundwater
• Required minimal operator attention
The treatment cost per 1,000 gallons was $3.45
for a 5-gallon-per-minute (gpm) pilot-scale system
and $2.43 for a 30-gpm system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Durell Dobbins
BioTrol
10300 Valley View Road, Suite 107
Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3456
612-942-8032
Fax: 612-942-8526
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 37
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
BIOTROL®
(Soil Washing System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The BioTrol Soil Washing System is a patented,
water-based volume reduction process used to
treat excavated soil. The system may be applied
to contaminants concentrated in the fine-sized soil
fraction (silt, clay, and soil organic matter) or in
the coarse soil fraction (sand and gravel).
In the first part of the process, debris is removed
from the soil. The soil is then mixed with water
and subjected to various unit operations common
to the mineral processing industry (see figure
below). The equipment used in these operations
can include mixing trommels, pug mills, vibrating
screens, froth flotation cells, attrition scrubbing
machines, hydrocyclones, screw classifiers, and
various dewatering apparatus.
The core of the process is a multistage, counter-
current, intensive scrubbing circuit with interstage
classification. The scrubbing action disintegrates
Recycle
soil aggregates, freeing contaminated fine particles
from the coarser material. 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.
Contaminated residual products can be treated by
other methods. Process water is normally
recycled after biological or physical treatment.
Contaminated fines may be disposed of off site,
incinerated, stabilized, or biologically treated.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This system was initially developed to clean soils
contaminated with wood preserving wastes, such
as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and
pentachlorophenol (PCP). The system may also
apply to soils contaminated with petroleum
hydrocarbons, pesticides, polychlorinated
Contaminated
Water
1
r
^
i
Contaminated
Silt/Clay
>
P
BioTrol Soil Washing System Process Diagram
Page 38
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
biphenyls, various industrial chemicals, and
metals.
STATUS:
The BioTrol Soil Washing System was accepted
into the SITE Demonstration Program in 1989.
The system was demonstrated under the SITE
Program between September and October 1989 at
the MacGillis and Gibbs Superfund site in New
Brighton, Minnesota. A pilot-scale unit with a
treatment capacity of 500 pounds per hour
operated 24 hours per day during the
demonstration. Feed for the first phase of the
demonstration (2 days) consisted of soil
contaminated with 130 parts per million (ppm)
PCP and 247 ppm total PAHs; feed for the second
phase (7 days) consisted of soil containing 680
ppm PCP and 404 ppm total PAHs.
Contaminated process water was treated
biologically in a fixed-film reactor and recycled.
A portion of the contaminated soil fines was
treated biologically in a three-stage, pilot-scale
EDMCO Biolift™ reactor system supplied by the
EIMCO Process Equipment Company. The
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-91/003) and the Technology
Evaluation Report Volume I
(EPA/540/5-91/003a) and Volume H
(EPA/540/5-91/003b and EPA/540/5-91/003c) are
available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Key findings from the BioTrol demonstration are
summarized below:
• Feed soil (dry weight basis) was
successfully separated into 83 percent
washed soil, 10 percent woody residues,
and 7 percent fines. The washed soil
retained about 10 percent of the feed soil
contamination; 90 percent of this
contamination was contained within the
woody residues, fines, and process
wastes.
• The multistage scrubbing circuit removed
up to 89 percent PCP and 88 percent total
PAHs, based on the difference between
concentration levels in the contaminated
(wet) feed soil and the washed soil.
• The scrubbing circuit degraded up to
94 percent PCP in the process water
during soil washing. PAH removal could
not be determined because of low influent
concentrations.
• The cost of a commercial-scale soil
washing system, assuming use of all three
technologies (soil washing, water
treatment, and fines treatment), was
estimated to be $168 per ton.
Incineration of woody material accounts
for 76 percent of the cost.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Dennis Chilcote
BioTrol
10300 Valley View Road, Suite 107
Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3456
612-942-8032
Fax: 612-942-8526
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 39
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
BRICE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CORPORATION
(Soil Washing Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Brice Environmental Services Corporation
(BESCORP) has developed a portable
aboveground soil washing process that reduces the
overall volume of contaminated soil requiring
treatment. BESCORP's soil washing process
involves site-specific unit operations, the selection
of which depend on soil and contaminant
characteristics, cleanup standards, cost, and client
specifications. The process includes a volume
reduction operation, in which oversized soil is
cleaned by intensive scrubbing, followed by
density, magnetic, and size separations. During
volume reduction, contaminants that exist as
discrete or attrited particles are partitioned with
the soil fines, while the process water is recircu-
lated and treated to remove suspended and
dissolved contaminants.
BESCORP's small volume reduction plant, used
for demonstration and pilot testing, is contained on
BESCORP Soil Washing Plant
Page 4O
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
one trailer and has a variable process rate from 4
to 20 tons per hour, depending on soil and
contaminant characteristics. A full-scale plant (see
photograph on previous page) has operated
successfully since 1993, averaging 15 tons per
hour during summer 1994 field activities.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The BESCORP soil washing process can treat
soils contaminated with radioactive and heavy
metals. It can be combined with chemical
treatment technologies for complete soil
remediation. BESCORP has also built a soil
washing plant to remediate hydrocarbon-
contaminated soil.
STATUS:
The BESCORP soil washing process was accepted
into the SITE Demonstration Program in winter
1991. Under the program, the BESCORP system
was demonstrated in late summer 1992 on lead-
contaminated soil at the Alaskan Battery
Enterprises (ABE) Superfund site in Fairbanks,
Alaska. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-93/503) and the Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540/A5-93/503) are
available from EPA.
The BESCORP soil washing process was also
linked with a chemical treatment process
developed by COGNIS, Inc., to remove heavy
metals from contaminated soil at the Twin Cities
Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) Site F in New
Brighton, Minnesota. At Site F, BESCORP and
COGNIS, Inc., treated lead, copper, and several
other heavy metals to soil cleanup criteria. The
technologies treated feed soils containing lead in
concentrations from 3,000 to 10,000 parts per
million (ppm) to under 300 ppm in a continuous
12- to 15-ton-per-hour process. The full-scale,
combined system processed contaminated soil
from September 1993 through August 1995.
For further information on the COGNIS, Inc.,
TERRAMET® chemical treatment process, refer to
the profile in the Demonstration Program section
(completed projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The demonstration at the ABE site consisted of
three test runs using the BESCORP small volume
reduction plant, averaging 5 hours in duration; 48
tons of soil were processed. Results from the
demonstration include the following:
• Feed soils averaged 4,500 ppm lead, and
the processed, separated fines fraction
averaged 13,000 ppm lead.
• On-line reliability was 92 percent.
• Lead removal from the combined gravel
and sand fractions during the three runs
was 61, 93, and 85 percent.
• Large quantities of metallic lead (battery
casings) discovered in the excavated soil
made it necessary to modify the system by
employing density separation equipment.
The processed sand and gravel in Run 3
contained no metallic lead.
• Gravel produced by all three runs met
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) criteria, with average lead
concentrations in the TCLP leachate at
1.0, 0.8, and 0.2 milligram per liter.
• Battery casings removal efficiencies
during the three runs were 94, 100, and
90 percent.
Results from the demonstration at TCAAP Site F
indicate that the BESCORP process reduced the
lead load to the TERRAMET® process by 39 to 63
percent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Craig Jones
BESCORP
3200 Shell Street
P.O. Box 73520
Fairbanks, AK 99707
907-452-2512
Fax: 907-452-5018
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 4-1
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
CALGON CARBON OXIDATION TECHNOLOGIES
(formerly VULCAN PEROXIDATION SYSTEMS, INC.)
(perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The perox-pure™ treatment system is designed to
destroy dissolved organic contaminants in
groundwater or wastewater with an advanced
chemical oxidation process that uses ultraviolet
(UV) radiation and hydrogen peroxide. Hydrogen
peroxide is added to the contaminated water, and
the mixture is then fed into the treatment system.
The treatment system's oxidation section contains
one or more reaction chambers. Each chamber
contains one high-intensity UV lamp mounted in
a quartz sleeve. The contaminated water flows in
the space between the chamber wall and the quartz
sleeve in which each UV lamp is mounted. The
perox-pure™ equipment includes ckcular wipers
attached to the quartz sleeves. These wipers
periodically remove solids that may accumulate on
the sleeves, a feature designed to maintain
maximum treatment efficiency.
UV light catalyzes chemical oxidation of organic
contaminants in water by affecting the organics so
they react with hydrogen peroxide. Many organic
contaminants that absorb UV light change
chemically or become more reactive with
chemical oxidants. More importantly, UV light
catalyzes hydrogen peroxide breakdown to
produce hydroxyl radicals, which are powerful
chemical oxidants. Hydroxyl radicals react with
and destroy organic contaminants, ultimately
producing harmless by-products such as carbon
dioxide, halides, and water. The treatment system
produces no air emissions.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The perox-pure™ technology treats groundwater
and wastewater contaminated with chlorinated
solvents, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls,
phenolics, ethers, fuel hydrocarbons, and other
organic compounds. It is effective on
perox-pure™ Model SSB-30
Page 42
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
concentrations ranging from low parts per billion
to several hundred parts per million (ppm). In
certain instances, when used in conjunction with
photocatalysts, it can be competitive for
contaminated concentrations of several thousand
ppm. In some cases, the combination of the
perox-pure™ technology with activated carbon,
air stripping, or biological treatment will provide
a more economical approach than would be
obtained by using only one technology.
STATUS:
The perox-pure™ technology was accepted into
the SITE Demonstration Program in April 1991.
A Model SSB-30 (see photograph on previous
page) was demonstrated in September 1992 at the
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Superfund site in Altamont Hills, California. The
purpose of this demonstration was to measure how
well the perox-pure™ technology removed volatile
organic compounds from contaminated
groundwater at the site. The Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/501), Technology
Demonstration Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/501),
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/501), and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-93/501) are
available from EPA.
This technology has been successfully applied to
over 150 sites throughout the United States,
Canada, the Far East, and Europe. The treat-ment
units at these sites have treated contaminated
groundwater, industrial wastewater, contaminated
drinking water, landfill leachates, and industrial
reuse streams (process waters). Equipment
treatment rates range from several gallons to
several thousand gallons per minute.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Operating parameters for the treatment system
were varied during the demonstration. Three
reproducibility tests were performed at the
optimum operating conditions, which were
selected from the initial test runs.
In most cases, the perox-pure™ technology
reduced trichloroethene, tetrachloroethene,
chloroform, trichloroethane, and dichloroethane to
below analytical detection limits. For each
organic contaminant, the perox-pure™ technology
complied with California action levels and federal
drinking water maximum contaminant levels at the
95 percent confidence level. The quartz sleeve
wipers effectively cleaned the sleeves and
eliminated the interference caused by tube scaling.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7665
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Bertrand Dussert
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies
500 Calgon Carbon Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15205
412-787-6681
Fax: 412-787-6682
E-mail: Dussert@calgcarb.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 43
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
CF SYSTEMS CORPORATION
(Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The CF Systems Corporation (CF Systems)
liquified gas solvent extraction (LG-SX)
technology uses liquified gas solvents to extract
organics from soils, sludges, sediments, and
wastewaters. Gases, when liquified under
pressure, have unique physical properties that
enhance their use as solvents. The low viscosities,
densities, and surface tensions of these gases result
in significantly higher rates of extraction compared
to conventional liquid solvents. These enhanced
physical properties also accelerate treated water's
gravity settling rate following extraction. Due to
their high volatility, gases are also easily
recovered from the suspended solids matrix,
minimizing solvent losses.
Liquified propane solvent is typically used to treat
soils, sludges, and sediments, while liquified
carbon dioxide is typically used to treat
wastewater. The extraction system uses a batch
extractor-decanter design for solids and sludges
and a continuous trayed tower design for waste-
waters and low-solids wastes. Typical treatment
costs for non-pumpable soils and sludges range
from $80 to $300 per ton of feed, excluding
excavation and disposal.
Contaminated solids, slurries, or wastewaters are
fed into the extraction system along with solvent
(see figure below). Typically, more than
99 percent of the organics are extracted from the
feed. After the solvent and organics are separated
from the treated feed, the solvent and organic
mixture passes to the solvent recovery system.
Once in the solvent recovery system, the solvent
is vaporized and recycled as fresh solvent. The
organics are drawn off and either reused or
disposed of. Treated feed is discharged from the
extraction system as a slurry. The slurry is filtered
and dewatered. The reclaimed water is recycled
to the extraction system and the filter cake is sent
to disposal or reused.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The LG-SX technology can be applied to soils and
sludges containing volatile and semivolatile
organic compounds and other higher boiling point
complex organics, such as polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), polychlorinated biphenyls
RECOVERED
ORGANICS
TREATED CAKE
TO DISPOSAL
Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction (LG-SX) Technology
Page 44
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1936
Completed Project
(PCB), dioxins, and pentachlorophenol (PCP).
This process can also treat refinery wastes and
wastewater contaminated with organics.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1988. Under the SITE
Program, a pilot-scale mobile demonstration unit
was tested in September 1988 on PCB-laden
sediments from the New Bedford Harbor
Superfund site in Massachusetts. PCB
concentrations in the harbor sediment ranged from
300 parts per million (ppm) to 2,500 ppm. The
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/5-90/002) and the Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540/A5-90/002) are
available from EPA.
A pilot-scale treatability study was completed on
PCB-contaminated soil from a Michigan
Superfund site. Analytical data showed that the
treatment reduced PCB levels to below 5 ppm,
representing a 98 percent removal efficiency for
this waste. A Project Summary
(EPA/540/SR-95/505), which details results
from this work, is available from EPA.
CF Systems completed the first commercial on-site
treatment operation at Star Enterprise in Port
Arthur, Texas. The propane-based solvent
extraction unit processed listed refinery K- and
F-wastes, producing Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act treated solids that met EPA land-ban
requirements. The unit operated continuously
from March 1991 to March 1992 and was on-line
more than 90 percent of the time. Following
heavy metals fixation, the treated solids were
disposed of in a Class I landfill.
EPA Region 6 and the Texas Natural Resources
Conservation Commission selected the LG-SX
technology to clean an estimated 115,000 tons of
contaminated soil at the United Creosoting
Superfund Site in Conroe, Texas. The 250 tons
per day unit is on site and is anticipated to begin
full scale operation in December 1996. The soil is
contaminated with PAHs, PCP, and chlorinated
isomers of furan and dioxin.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
This technology was demonstrated concurrently
with dredging studies managed by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Contaminated sediments
were treated by the LG-SX technology, using a
liquified propane and butane mixture as the
extraction solvent. The demonstration at the New
Bedford site yielded the following results:
• Extraction efficiencies were 90 to
98 percent for sediments containing PCBs
between 360 and 2,575 ppm. PCB
concentrations were as low as 8 ppm in
the treated sediment.
• Volatile and semivolatile organics in
aqueous and semisolid wastes were
extracted with 99.9 percent efficiency.
• Operating problems included solids
retention in the system hardware and
foaming in receiving tanks. The
problems were corrected in the full-scale
operations at Star Enterprise.
• Projected costs for PCB cleanup were
estimated at $150 to $450 per ton,
including material handling and pre- and
posttreatment costs. These costs are
highly dependent on the utilization factor
and job size, which may result in lower
costs for large cleanups.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Mark Meckes
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7348
Fax: 513-569-7328
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
L.V. Benningfield
CF Systems Corporation
18300 West Highway 72
Arvada, CO 80007
303-420-1550
Fax: 303-420-2890
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 45
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
CHEMFIX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Solidification and Stabilization)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
In this solidification and stabilization process,
pozzolanic materials react with polyvalent metal
ions and other waste components to produce a
chemically and physically stable solid material.
Optional binders and reagents may include
soluble silicates, carbonates, phosphates, and
borates. The end product may be similar to a
clay-like soil, depending on the characteristics of
the raw waste and the properties desired in the end
product.
The figure below illustrates the Chemfix
Technologies, Inc. (Chemfix), process.
Typically, the waste is first blended in a reaction
vessel with pozzolanic materials that contain
calcium hydroxide. This blend is then dispersed
throughout an aqueous phase. The reagents react
with one another and with toxic metal ions,
forming both anionic and cationic metal
complexes. Pozzolanics that accelerate and other
reagents that precipitate metals can be added
REAGENTTRUCK.
UNLOADING /
REAGENTTRUCK*
UNLOADING /
before or after the dry binder is initially mixed
with the waste.
When a water soluble silicate reacts with the waste
and the pozzolanic binder system, colloidal silicate
gel strengths are increased within the binder-waste
matrix, helping to bind polyvalent metal cations.
A large percentage of the heavy metals become
part of the calcium silicate and aluminate colloidal
structures formed by the pozzolans and calcium
hydroxide. Some of the metals, such as lead,
adsorb to the surface of the pozzolanic structures.
The entire pozzolanic matrix, when physically
cured, decreases toxic metal mobility by reducing
the incursion of leaching liquids into and out of the
stabilized matrices.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process is suitable for contaminated soils,
sludges, ashes, and other solid wastes. The
process is particularly applicable to electroplating
sludges, electric arc furnace dust, heavy metal
WASTE INPUT
WATER SUPPLY)
REAGENT TRUCKv
UNLOADING /
WATER
TANK
WATER
TANK
/
FE
^
LIQUID REAGENT #2
FEED PUMP
.TO CONTAINMENT AREA
TRANSFER PUMP
Process Flow Diagram
Page 46
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1936
Completed Project
contaminated soils, oil field drilling muds and
cuttings, municipal sewage sludges, and residuals
from other treatment processes. This process
effectively treats heavy metals, such as antimony,
arsenic, lead, cadmium, hexavalent chromium,
mercury, copper, and zinc. In addition, when
combined with specialized binders and additives,
this process can stabilize low-level nuclear wastes.
With modifications, the system may be applied to
wastes containing between 10 to 100 percent
solids.
STATUS:
The solidification and stabilization process was
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program in
1988. The process was demonstrated in March
1989 at the Portable Equipment Salvage Company
site in Clackamas, Oregon. The Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-89/011 a) and the
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-89/011) are available from EPA.
In addition, several full-scale remediation projects
have been completed since 1977, including a 1991
high solids CHEMSET® reagent protocol designed
by Chemfix to treat 30,000 cubic yards of
hexavalent chromium-contaminated, high solids
waste. The average chromium level after
treatment was less than 0.15 milligram per liter
and met toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) criteria. The final product permeability
was less than 1 x 10"6 centimeters per second
(cm/sec).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The demonstration yielded the following results:
• The technology effectively reduced
copper and lead concentrations in the
wastes. The concentrations in the TCLP
extracts from the treated wastes were
94 to 99 percent less than those from the
untreated wastes. Total lead
concentrations in the untreated waste
approached 14 percent.
• The volume of excavated waste material
increased between 20 and 50 percent after
treatment.
• During 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 pounds per square inch after 28 days.
Hydraulic conductivity of the treated
material ranged between 1 x 10"6 cm/sec
and 6.4 x 10"7cm/sec.
• Air monitoring data suggest there was no
significant volatilization of
polychlorinated biphenyls during the
treatment process.
• Treatment costs were approximately $73
per ton, including mobilization, labor,
reagents, and demobilization, but not
disposal.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Edwin Earth
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7669
Fax: 513-569-7585
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
David Donaldson
Chemfix Technologies, Inc.
3500 North Causeway Boulevard
Suite 720
Metairie, LA 70002
504-831-3600
Fax: 504-833-4615
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 4-7
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
COGNIS, INC.
(TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The COGNIS, Inc. (COGNIS), TERRAMET® soil
remediation system leaches and recovers lead and
other metals from contaminated soil, dust, sludge,
or sediment. The system uses a patented aqueous
leachant that is optimized through treatability tests
for the soil and the target contaminant. The
TERRAMET® system can treat most types of lead
contamination, including metallic lead and lead
salts and oxides. The lead compounds are often
tightly bound by fine soil constituents such as clay,
manganese and iron oxides, and humus.
The figure below illustrates the process. A
pretreatment, physical separation stage may
involve dry screening to remove gross oversized
material. The soil can be separated into oversized
(gravel), sand, and fine (silt, clay, and humus)
fractions. Soil, including the oversized fraction,
is first washed. Most lead contamination is
typically associated with fines fraction, and this
fraction is subjected to countercurrent leaching to
dissolve the adsorbed lead and other heavy metal
species. The sand fraction may also contain
significant lead, especially if the contamination is
due to particulate lead, such as that found in
battery recycling, ammunition burning, and scrap
yard activities. In this case, the sand fraction is
pretreated to remove dense metallic or magnetic
materials before subjecting the sand fraction to
countercurrent leaching. Sand and fines can be
treated in separate parallel streams.
After dissolution of the lead and other heavy metal
contaminants, the metal ions are recovered from the
aqueous leachate by a metal recovery process such
as reduction, liquid ion exchange, resin ion
exchange, or precipitation. The metal recovery
technique depends on the metals to be recovered
and the leachant employed. In most cases, a
patented reduction process is used so that the metals
are recovered in a compact form suitable for
recycling. After the metals are recovered, the
leachant can be reused within the TERRAMET®
system for continued leaching.
Important characteristics of the TERRAMET®
leaching/recovery combination are as follows: (1)
the leachant is tailored to the substrate and the
contaminant; (2) the leachant is fully recycled
within the treatment plant; (3) treated soil can be
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Physical Separation Stage
Feeder I-
-200
Dewatered
+1/4"
Oversize
TERRAMET® Chemical Leaching Stage
Soil Fines From
Separation Stage
Separation
Chamber
i
-1/4"
+200 rr
Density
Separation
mesh | 1
— --^ Clarifier I —
esh
Dewatering L
Sand Screw I
. Soil Fines to
Leaching Circuit
' Organic Material
Sand to
Leaching Circuit
Lead Concentrate
' to Recycler
Clean, Dewatered
Neutralized Soil
Sand From—
Separation Stage
Make-up
Chemicals
Lime
Lead Concentrate
to Recycler
TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System
Page 48
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
returned on site; (4) all soil fractions can be
treated; (5) end products include treated soil and
recycled metal; and (6) no waste is generated
during processing.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The COGNIS TERRAMET® soil remediation system
can treat soil, sediment, and sludge contaminated
by lead and other heavy metals or metal mixtures.
Appropriate sites include contaminated ammunition
testing areas, firing ranges, battery recycling
centers, scrap yards, metal plating shops, and
chemical manufacturers. Certain lead compounds,
such as lead sulfide, are not amenable to treatment
because of their exceedingly low solubilities. The
system can be modified to leach and recover other
metals, such as cadmium, zinc, copper, and
mercury, from soils.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in August 1992.
Based on results from the Emerging Technology
Program, the technology was accepted into the
Demonstration Program in 1994. The
demonstration took place at the Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) Site F during August
1994. The TERRAMET® system was evaluated
during a full-scale remediation conducted by
COGNIS at TCAAP. The Mi-scale system was
linked with a soil washing process developed by
Brice Environmental Services Corporation
(BESCORP). The system treated soil at a rate of
12 to 15 tons per hour.
An Innovative Technology Evaluation Report and
a Technology Capsule describing the
demonstration and its results will be available in
1997.
The TERRAMET® system is no longer available
through COGNIS, Inc. For further information
about the system, contact the EPA Project
Manager. For further information on the
BESCORP soil washing process, refer to the
profile in the Demonstration Program section
(completed projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Lead levels in the feed soil ranged from 380 to
1,800 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Lead
levels in untreated and treated fines ranged from
210 to 780 mg/kg and from 50 to 190 mg/kg,
respectively. Average removal efficiencies for lead
were about 75 percent. The TERRAMET® and
BESCORP processes operated smoothly at a feed
rate of 12 to 15 tons per hour. Size separation
using the BESCORP process proved to be effective
and reduced the lead load to the TERRAMET®
leaching process by 39 to 63 percent. Leaching
solution was recycled, and lead concentrates were
delivered to a lead smelting facility. The cost of
treating contaminated soil at the TCAAP site using
the COGNIS and BESCORP processes is about
$200 per ton of treated soil, based on treatment of
10,000 tons of soil. This cost includes the cost of
removing ordnance from the soil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michael Royer
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Avenue, MS-104
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-321-6633
Fax: 908-321-6640
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 49
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
COMMODORE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
(Solvated Electron Remediation System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Commmodore Environmental Services, Inc.'s
(Commodore), solvated electron remediation system
chemically transforms toxic contaminants such as
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), pesticides, and
other halogenated compounds into relatively benign
substances. The solvating system uses a solution of
ammonia and an "active" metal to create a powerful
reducing agent that can clean up contaminated soils,
sediments, and liquids.
A solvated electron solution is a liquid homogeneous
mixture that produces a large supply of free
electrons. It can be created by combining liquid
ammonia with a metal such as sodium, calcium,
lithium, or potassium. When a solvated electron
solution is mixed with a contaminated material, the
free electrons in the solution chemically convert the
contaminant to relatively harmless substances and
salts.
The solvating system consists of components to move
and recover the ammonia (such as piping, pumps,
and tanks), along with reactor vessels which hold the
contaminated medium and the solvating solution.
The system can be transported to different field sites,
but the process is performed ex situ, meaning that the
contaminated medium must be introduced into the
reactor vessels.
The treatment process begins by placing the
contaminated medium into the reactor vessels, where
the medium is then mixed with ammonia. One of the
reactive metals (usually sodium) is then added to the
contaminated medium-ammonia mixture, and a
Metal
Dirty Soil
Reactor
Ammonia
Ammonia/Soil
Separator
Clean Soil
Compressor
Ammonia/Water
Separator
Water
Schematic Diagram of the Solvated Electron Remediation System
Page 50
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
chemical reaction ensues. After the chemical
reaction is complete (about 1 minute), the ammonia
is removed to a discharge tank for reuse. The treated
medium is then removed from the reactor vessels,
tested for contamination, and returned to the site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Commodore claims that its solvating electron
remediation system can effectively decontaminate
soils, sludges, sediments, oils, hand tools, and
personal protective clothing. The technology
chemically transforms PCBs, pesticides, and other
halogenated compounds into relatively benign salts.
Commodore also believes that the technology is
effective in treating chemical warfare agents and
radionuclides.
STATUS:
Commodore was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1995 and is also
participating in the Rapid Commercialization
Initiative (RCI). RCI was created by the
Department of Commerce, Department of Defense,
Department of Energy, and EPA to assist in the
integration of innovative technologies into the
marketplace.
Commodore demonstrated the solvating system at
the Construction Battalion Supply Center in Port
Hueneme, California in September 1996. The
demonstration was designed to evaluate the system's
performance capability, costs, and design parameters.
Results from the demonstration will be presented in
an Innovative Technology Evaluation Report, which
will be available in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Neil Drobny
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc.
1487 Delashmut Avenue
Columbus, OH 43212
614-297-0365
Fax: 614-297-7535
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 51
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
DEHYDRO-TECH CORPORATION
(Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of Wet, Oily Wastes)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Carver-Greenfield Process® (C-G Process™)
combines dehydration and solvent extraction
technologies to separate wet, oily wastes into their
constituent solid, water, and oil phases (see figure
below).
Waste is first mixed with a low-cost hydrocarbon
solvent. The resultant slurry mixture is fed to an
evaporator system that vaporizes water and initiates
solvent extraction of the indigenous oil.
Depending on the water content of the feed, single-
effect or energy-saving multi-effect evaporators
may be used. Next, the slurry of dried solids is
treated in a multistage solvent extraction unit,
where solids contact recycled solvent until the target
amount of indigenous oil is removed.
Finally, solids are centrifuged away from the
solvent, followed by "desolventizing," an operation
that evaporates residual solvent. The final solids
product typically contains less than 2 percent water
and less than 1 percent solvent. The spent solvent,
which contains the extracted indigenous oil, is
distilled to separate the solvent for reuse, and the
oil for recovery or disposal.
The C-G Process yields (1) a clean, dry solid; (2) a
water product virtually free of solids, indigenous
oil, and solvent; and (3) the extracted indigenous
oil, which contains the hazardous, hydrocarbon-
soluble feed components.
The C-G Process combination of dehydration and
solvent extraction has the following advantages: (1)
any emulsions initially present are broken and
EVAPORATED
SOLVENT WATER
Carver-Greenfield Process® Schematic Diagram
Page 52
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
potential emulsion formation is prevented; (2)
solvent extraction is more efficient because water is
not present; and (3) the dry solids product is
stabilized more readily if required (for example, if
metals contamination is a concern).
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The C-G Process can treat sludges, soils,
sediments, and other water-bearing wastes
containing hydrocarbon-soluble hazardous
compounds, including polychlorinated biphenyls,
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and dioxins.
The process has been commercially applied to
municipal wastewater sludge, paper mill sludge,
rendering waste, pharmaceutical plant sludge, and
other wastes.
STATUS:
The C-G Process was accepted into the SITE
program in 1990. The pilot-scale SITE
demonstration of this technology was completed in
August 1991 at EPA's research facility in Edison,
New Jersey. Spent petroleum drilling fluids from
the PAB oil site in Abbeville, Louisiana were used
as process feed. The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-92/002), Technology Demonstration
Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/002), and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-92/002) are
available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration of the C-G Process
yielded the following results:
• The process successfully separated the
petroleum-contaminated sludge into its
solid, indigenous oil, and water phases.
No detectable levels of indigenous total
petroleum hydrocarbons were present in
the final solid product.
• The final solid product was a dry powder
similar to bentonite. A food-grade solvent
comprised the bulk of the residual
hydrocarbons in the solid.
• Values for all metals and organics were
well below the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure limits for characteristic
hazardous wastes.
• The resulting water product required
treatment due to the presence of small
amounts of light organics and solvent.
Normally, it may be disposed of at a local
publicly owned treatment works.
• A full-scale C-G Process can treat drilling
fluid wastes at technology-specific costs of
$100 to $220 per ton of wet feed,
exclusive of disposal costs for the
residuals. Site-specific costs, which
include the cost of residual disposal,
depend on site characteristics and
treatment objectives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Theodore Trowbridge
Dehydro-Tech Corporation
401 Towne Center Drive
Hillsborough Township
Somerville, NJ 08876
908-904-1606
Fax:908-904-1561
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 53
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, and
OBERLIN FILTER COMPANY
(Membrane Microfiltration)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This membrane microfiltration 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.
The membrane microfiltration system uses an
automatic pressure filter (developed by Oberlin
Filter Company), combined with a special Tyvek®
filter material (Tyvek® T-980) made of spun-
bonded olefin (invented by E.I. DuPont de
Nemours and Company) (see figure below). The
filter material is a thin, durable plastic fabric with
tiny openings about 1 ten-millionth of a meter in
diameter. These openings allow water or other
liquids and solid particles smaller than the openings
Air Cylinder
Filter Cake
Used Tyvek®.
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 collects in the
lower chamber. Following filtration, air is fed into
the upper chamber at a pressure of about 45 pounds
per square inch. Air removes any liquid remaining
in the upper chamber and further dries the filter
cake. When the filter cake is dry, the upper
chamber is lifted, and the filter cake is
automatically discharged. Clean filter material is
Pressurized
1 Air
Waste
Feed
^-Air Bags
Waste Feed Chamber
Clean Tyvek®
Filter Belt
Filtrate Chamber
Filtrate
Discharge
Membrane Microfiltration System
Page 54
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
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 before disposal, if
necessary.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This membrane microfiltration system may be
applied to (1) hazardous waste suspensions,
particularly liquid heavy metal- and cyanide
bearing wastes (such as electroplating rinsewaters),
(2) groundwater contaminated with heavy metals,
(3) constituents in landfill leachate, and (4) process
wastewaters containing uranium. The technology
is best suited for treating wastes with solids
concentrations of less than 5,000 parts per million;
otherwise, the cake capacity and handling become
limiting factors. The system can treat any type of
solids, including inorganics, organics, and oily
wastes, with a wide variety of particle sizes.
Moreover, because the system is enclosed, it can
treat liquid wastes that contain volatile organics.
STATUS:
The membrane microfiltration system, accepted
into the SITE Program in 1988, was demonstrated
at the Palmerton Zinc Superfund site in Palmerton,
Pennsylvania. The demonstration was conducted
over a 4-week period in April and May 1990.
Groundwater from the shallow aquifer at the site
was contaminated with dissolved heavy metals,
including cadmium, lead, and zinc. This
contaminated groundwater served as the feed waste
for the demonstration. The system treated waste at
a rate of about 1 to 2 gallons per minute.
The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-90/007), the Technology Evaluation
Report (EPA/540/5-90/007), and a videotape of the
demonstration are available from EPA.
Since 1991, about 12 commercial installations of
the technology have been operational.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration at the Palmerton Zinc
Superfund site, the membrane microfiltration
system achieved the following results:
• Removal efficiencies for zinc and total
suspended solids ranged from 99.75 to
99.99 percent (averaging 99.95 percent).
• Solids in the filter cake ranged from 30.5
to 47.1 percent.
• Dry filter cake in all test runs passed the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
paint filter liquids test.
• Filtrate met the applicable National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
standards for cadmium, lead, zinc, and
total suspended solids.
• A composite filter cake sample passed the
extraction procedure toxicity and toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure tests for
metals.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
John Martin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7758
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ernest Mayer
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company
Nemours 6440
1007 Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19898
302-774-2277
Fax: 302-368-0021
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 55
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
DYNAPHORE, INC.
(FORAGER® Sponge)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The FORAGER® Sponge (Sponge) is an open-
celled cellulose sponge containing a polymer with
selective affinity for dissolved heavy metals in both
cationic and anionic states. The polymer contains
iminodiacetic acid groups which enter into chelation
bonding with transition-group heavy metal cations.
The polymer's affinity for particular cations is
influenced by solution parameters such as pH,
temperature, and total ionic content. In general, the
following affinity sequence for several
representative ions prevails:
- > Cu
++
•>Pb++>Au+++>Zn+
>Ca+
*>Co++:
Mg++»Na+
During absorption, a cation is displaced from the
polymer. The displaced cation may be H+ or a
cation below the absorbed cation in the affinity
sequence.
The polymer also contains tertiary amine salt
groups which exhibit selective bonding for anion
species such as the following:
Cr04-2, As04'3, Au(CN)2-, SeO4'2, HgCl3-,
AefS-^OoV3, SiO3-2, UO4'2
Fishnet Bags Placed Vertically in a Well
The absorption of certain anion species can be
enhanced by preabsorption of a cation that
ordinarily reacts with a sought anion to produce
a highly insoluble compound. For example, a
Sponge presaturated with Fe+3 strongly absorbs
arsenate anion because ferric arsenate is highly
insoluble.
The removal efficiency for transition-group
heavy metals is about 90 percent at a flow rate of
0.1 bed volume per minute. The Sponge's highly
porous nature speeds diffusional effects,
promoting high rates of ion absorption. The
Sponge can be used hi columns, fishnet-type
enclosures, or rotating drums. When used in a
column, flow rates of three bed volumes per
minute can be obtained at hydrostatic pressures
only 2 feet above the bed and without additional
pressurization. Therefore, Sponge-packed col-
umns are suitable for unattended field use.
Absorbed ions can be eluted from the Sponge
using techniques typically employed to regenerate
ion-exchange resins and activated carbon.
Following elution, the Sponge can be used in the
next absorption cycle. The number of useful
cycles depends on the nature of the absorbed ions
and the elution technique used. Alternatively,
the metal-saturated Sponge can be incinerated.
In some instances, the Sponge may be dried and
reduced hi volume to facilitate disposal.
A trailer-mounted pump-and-treat apparatus can
handle up to 10 gallons per minute with low
pumping pressures of 4 to 10 pounds per square
inch. The apparatus employs four or six
Plexiglas columns, connected in series, with
valving to expedite regeneration and staging.
Each column accommodates a fishnet container
of Sponge in the form of half-inch cubes.
Groundwater can be remediated hi situ using
elongated fishnet bags that confine the Sponge.
The bags are placed vertically in wells, as shown
in the figure to the left, or placed horizontally in
trenches, as shown in the figure on the next page.
Alternatively, the groundwater can be treated
aboveground in a packed column configuration.
Page 56
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Sponge can scavenge metals in concentration
levels of parts per million and parts per billion
from industrial discharges, municipal sewage,
process streams, and acid mine drainage. The
Sponge is particularly useful when treating water
with low contaminant levels, especially in
polishing or end-of-pipe treatments. Because of
the low capital investment required, the Sponge
is well-suited for use in short-term remediation
projects and for sporadic flows conditions.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in June 1991. The
Sponge was demonstrated in April 1994 at the
National Lead Industry site in Pedricktown, New
Jersey. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-94/522), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-94/522a), and Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/522) are available from EPA.
The Sponge has also effectively removed trace
heavy metals from acid mine drainage at three
locations in Colorado. In bench-scale tests, the
Sponge reduced mercury, lead, nickel, cadmium,
and chromium in groundwater from various
Superfund locations to below detectable levels.
The Sponge was also demonstrated in a field-
scale installation at a photoprocessing operation.
The process reduced chromate and silver by 75
percent at a cost of $ 1,100 per month. In bench-
scale tests, the Sponge has removed lead,
mercury, and copper from pourable sludges such
as simulated municipal sewage, and from soils
slurried with water.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Treatment performance from
demonstration was as follows:
the SITE
Average Influence Percent
Analyte . Concentration (ttg/D Removal
Cadmium 537 90
Copper 917 97
Lead 578 97
Chromium"1 426 32
In 1996, the Sponge, configured in a column,
was employed in a pump-and-treat remediation of
360,000 gallons of water that had accumulated as
a result of a fuel handling operation. The water,
containing 0.2 parts per million (ppm) arsenic,
was treated at 12 gallons per minute (0.1 bed
volume per minute) to produce an effluent having
a nondetect level of arsenic.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Norman Rainer
Dynaphore, Inc.
2709 Willard Road
Richmond, VA 23294
804-288-7109
Fax: 804-282-1325
Fishnet Bags Placed Horizontally in a Trench
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 57
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ECOVA CORPORATION
(Bioslurry Reactor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The ECOVA Corporation (ECOVA) slurry-phase
bioremediation (bioslurry) technology aerobically
biodegrades creosote-contaminated materials.
The technology uses batch and continuous flow
bioreactors to process polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbon (PAH)-contaminated soils,
sediments, and sludges. The bioreactors are
supplemented with oxygen, nutrients, and a
specific inoculum of enriched indigenous
microorganisms to enhance the degradation
process.
Because site-specific environments influence
biological treatment, all chemical, physical, and
microbial factors are designed into the treatment
process. The ultimate goal is to convert organic
wastes into relatively harmless by-products of
microbial metabolism, such as carbon dioxide,
water, and inorganic salts. Biological reaction
rates are accelerated in a slurry system because
of the increased contact efficiency between
contaminants and microorganisms. The
photograph below shows the bioslurry reactor.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The bioslurry reactor is designed to treat highly
contaminated creosote wastes. It can also treat
other concentrated contaminants that can be
aerobically biodegraded, such as petroleum
wastes. The bioslurry reactor system must be
engineered to maintain parameters such as pH,
temperature, and dissolved oxygen within ranges
conducive to the desired microbial activity.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in spring 1991. From
May through September 1991, EPA conducted a
Bioslurry Reactor
Page 58
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
SITE demonstration using six bioslurry reactors
at EPA's Test and Evaluation Facility in
Cincinnati, Ohio.
ECOVA conducted bench- and pilot-scale studies
to evaluate bioremediation of PAHs in creosote-
contaminated soil from the Burlington Northern
Superfund site in Brainerd, Minnesota.
Bench-scale studies were conducted before
pilot-scale evaluations to determine optimal
treatment protocols. EIMCO Biolift™ slurry
reactors were used for the pilot-scale processing.
Data from the optimized pilot-scale program
were used to establish treatment standards for
K001 wastes as part of EPA's Best Demonstrated
Available Technology program.
This technology is no longer available through
ECOVA. However, the technology is being
implemented by Walsh Environmental Scientists
& Engineers. For further information on the
technology, contact either the EPA Project
Manager or the technology developer contact.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the SITE demonstration indicated
that slurry-phase biological treatment
significantly improved biodegradation rates of
carcinogenic 4- to 6-ring PAHs. The pilot-scale
bioslurry reactor reduced 82 ± 15 percent of the
total soil-bound PAHs in the first week. After
14 days, total PAHs had been biodegraded by
96 ±2 percent. An overall reduction of
97 ±2 percent was observed over a 12-week
treatment period, indicating that almost all
biodegradation occurred within the first 2 weeks
of treatment. Carcinogenic PAHs were biode-
graded by 90 ±3.2 percent to
501 ± 103 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) from
levels of 5,081 ±1,530 mg/kg.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Mahaffey
Walsh Environmental Scientists & Engineers
4888 Pearl E. Circle, Suite 108
Boulder, CO 80301-2475
303-670-2875
303-443-3282
Fax: 303-443-0367
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 59
-------
Technology Prof He
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ELI ECO LOGIC INTERNATIONAL INC.
(Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The patented ELI Eco Logic International Inc.
(Eco Logic), process (see photograph below) uses
a gas-phase reduction reaction of hydrogen with
organic and chlorinated organic compounds at
elevated temperatures to produce a hydrocarbon-
rich gas product. During the SITE
demonstration, soils were pretreated within Eco
Logic's thermal desorption unit (TDU), which
was operated hi conjunction with the reduction
reactor. For further information on Eco Logic's
TDU, see the profile in the Demonstration
Program section (completed projects).
The gas-phase reduction reaction takes place
within a specially designed reactor at ambient
pressure. Separate nozzles inject gaseous
atomized waste, steam, and hydrogen into the
reactor. As the mixture swirls down between the
outer reactor wall and a central ceramic tube, it
passes a series of electric glo-bar heaters, raising
the temperature to 850 °C. The reduction
reaction takes place as the gases enter the
ceramic tube through inlets at the bottom of the
tube and travel up toward the scrubber. The
scrubber removes hydrogen chloride, heat,
water, and paniculate matter. If necessary,
scrubber liquid may be recycled through the
system for additional treatment.
For waste with a low organic content, the
majority of the hydrogen-rich gas recirculates to
the reactor; the remainder can be used as a
supplementary fuel for a propane-fired boiler that
produces steam. Processing waste with a high
organic content produces excess gas product,
which can be compressed and stored for later
analysis and reuse as supplementary fuel.
The unit is mounted on two standard, drop-deck,
highway trailers. A computerized process
control system allows the operator to monitor
process variables such as temperature, pressure,
hydrogen content, and oxygen levels. In addi-
tion, an on-line mass spectrometer is used to
continually monitor selected organic compounds.
Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process
Page 60
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Eco Logic process is designed to treat
aqueous and oily waste streams and soil or sludge
contaminated with hazardous organic waste such
as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated dioxins and
dibenzofurans, chlorinated solvents,
chlorobenzenes, and chlorophenols. Wastes with
high water content are easily handled by the
process since water is a good source of
hydrogen.
STATUS:
In October and November 1992, the Eco Logic
process was demonstrated at the Middleground
Landfill in Bay City, Michigan, under a Toxic
Substances Control Act research and
development permit. The demonstration was
conducted hi cooperation with Environment
Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment. The test was performed using
PCB-contaminated wastewater, waste oil, and
soil from the site. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-93/522) and the Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540/AR-93/522) are
available from EPA.
Since the SITE demonstration, Eco Logic has
developed a commercial-scale system (the SE25)
which is designed to treat 100 to 300 tons per day
of contaminated soil or sediment and 20 tons per
day of PCB liquid. The SE25 combines the
reduction reactor, which treats PCB oils and
aqueous wastes, with a redesigned TDU, which
treats contaminated soils and sediments and an
SBV for treating bulk solids such as electrical
equipment, drums, and personal protective
equipment.
Two commercial-scale SE25 treatment units are
currently in operation; one in Perth, Western
Australia, and the other at a General Motors of
Canada Ltd (GMCL) facility in Ontario. Both
are currently treating a variety of waste matrices,
including DDT residues and PCBs hi soil, oils,
electrical equipment, concrete, and other solids.
Following the GMCL project, the unit will be
relocated to Toronto, Ontario where General
Electric (GE) and Eco Logic have a contract to
destroy PCB-impacted materials stored
aboveground at GE's Lansdowne and Davenport
facility. Eco Logic has also been awarded a
contract through the Department of Energy's
Morgantown Energy Technology Center for
treatment of hazardous wastes, radioactive mixed
low-level wastes, and energetics-explosives.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration, two separate waste
feed conditions were used: (1) wastewater
containing an average PCB concentration of
4,600 parts per million, and (2) waste oil
containing an average PCB concentration of 24.5
percent. Both feeds were tested in triplicate.
The demonstration of the Eco Logic process
yielded the folio whig results:
• At least 99.99 percent destruction and
removal efficiency for PCBs during all
runs
• A 99.99 percent destruction efficiency
for perchloroethylene, a tracer
compound, during all runs
• Net destruction of trace feedstock dioxin
and furan compounds during all runs
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Gordon Evans
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7684
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jim Nash
ELI Eco Logic International Inc.
143 Dennis Street
Rockwood, Ontario, Canada
NOB 2KO
519-856-9591
Fax: 519-856-9235
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 61
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ELI ECO LOGIC INTERNATIONAL INC.
(Thermal Desorption Unit)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Eco
Logic), thermal desorption unit (TDU) is
specially designed for use with Eco Logic's gas-
phase chemical reduction process. The TDU,
shown in the figure below, consists of an
externally heated bath of molten tin metal (heated
with propane) in a hydrogen gas atmosphere.
Tin is used for several reasons: tin and hydrogen
are nonreactive; tin's density allows soils to float
on the molten bath; molten tin is a good fluid for
heat transfer; tin is nontoxic hi soil; and tin is
used as a bath medium hi the manufacture of
plate glass.
Contaminated soil is conveyed into the TDU feed
hopper, where an auger feeds the soil into the
TDU. A screw feeder provides a gas seal
between the outside air and the hydrogen
atmosphere inside the TDU. The auger's
variable speed drive provides feed rate control.
Soil inside the TDU floats on top of the molten
tin and is heated to 600 °C vaporizing the water
and organic material. Decontaminated soil is
removed from the tin bath into a water-filled
I
quench tank. The water in the quench tank
provides a gas seal between the TDU's hydrogen
atmosphere and the outside air. A scraper
mechanism removes decontaminated soil from
the quench tank into drums.
After desorption from the soil, the organic
contaminants are carried from the TDU to Eco
Logic's proprietary gas-phase reduction reactor.
In the reactor, the organic contaminants undergo
gas-phase chemical reduction reactions with
hydrogen at elevated temperatures and ambient
pressure. This reaction converts organic and
chlorinated organic contaminants into a
hydrocarbon-rich gas product. After passing
through a scrubber, the gas product's primary
components are hydrogen, nitrogen, methane,
carbon monoxide, water vapor, and other lighter
hydrocarbons. Most of this gas product
recirculates into the process, while excess gas
can be compressed for later analysis and reuse as
supplemental fuel. For further information on
the Eco Logic gas-phase chemical reduction
process, see the profile hi the Demonstration
Program section (completed projects).
RECIRCULATED GAS
H2
n
DESORBED GAS
MOLTEN BATH
TREATED SOILS
THERMAL DESORPTION
UNIT
_
\
:TOR
•o
_/
850 "C
r~
UD
—
nrr
r~
35°C
C1
HYDE
SLUDGE AND DECANT
WATER SLOWDOWN
CLEAN STEAM
GAS (5%)
STACK GAS
n
REACTOR SYSTEM
Thermal Desorption Unit
Page 62
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Eco Logic TDU, when used with the gas-
phase chemical reduction reactor, is designed to
desorb soils and sludges contaminated with
hazardous organic contaminants such as
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons, chlorinated dioxins and
dibenzofurans, chlorinated solvents,
chlorobenzenes, and chlorophenols. The
combined technologies are suited for wastes with
high water content since water is a good source
of hydrogen.
STATUS:
In October and November 1992, the Eco Logic
process, including the TDU, was demonstrated at
the Middleground Landfill in Bay City,
Michigan, under a Toxic Substances Control Act
research and development permit. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/504)
and the Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-94/504) are available from EPA.
Further research and development since the
demonstration has focused on optimizing the
process for commercial operations and improving
the design of the soil and sediment processing
unit. According to Eco Logic, the TDU design
currently hi commercial operation has achieved
excellent results, with contaminants in soils and
sediments desorbed from high parts per million
(ppm) levels to low parts per billion levels.
Two commercial-scale SE25 treatment units are
currently hi operation; one in Perth, Western
Australia, and the other at a General Motors of
Canada Ltd (GMCL) facility in Ontario. Both
are currently treating a variety of waste matrices
including DDT residues and PCBs hi soils, oils,
electrical equipment, concrete, and other solids.
Following the GMCL project, the unit will be
relocated to Toronto, Ontario where General
Electric (GE) and Eco Logic have a contract to
destroy PCB-impacted materials stored
aboveground at GE's Lansdowne and Davenport
facility.
Also, Eco Logic has teamed with Westinghouse
Electric to treat chemical warfare agents using
the process. Eco Logic has been awarded a
contract through the Department of Energy's
Morgantown Energy Technology Center for
treatment of hazardous wastes, radioactive mixed
low-level wastes, and energetics-explosives.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration hi Bay City, Michigan,
the Eco Logic TDU achieved the following:
• Desorption efficiencies for PCBs from
the soil of 93.5 percent hi run one and
98.8 percent hi run two
• Desorption efficiency for
hexachlorobenzene (a tracer compound)
from the soil of 72.13 percent hi run one
and 99.99 percent hi run two
• PCB destruction and removal efficiencies
of 99.99 percent for the combined TDU
and reduction reactor
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Gordon Evans
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7684
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jim Nash
ELI Eco Logic International Inc.
143 Dennis Street
Rockwood, Ontario, Canada
NOB 2KO
519-856-9591
Fax: 519-856-9235
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 63
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
ENVIROMETAL TECHNOLOGIES INC.
(In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic Degradation of
Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This remedial technology, developed by the
University of Waterloo and EnviroMetal
Technologies Inc., degrades dissolved
halogenated organic compounds in ground-water
with an in situ permeable wall containing reactive
metal (usually iron) (see photograph below). The
technology may also be used in an aboveground
reactor for ex situ treatment.
The technology employs an electrochemical
process. Contaminated groundwater passes
through the specially prepared granular reactive
iron, which oxidizes, inducing reductive
dehalogenation of contaminants. Halogenated
organics are degraded to nonhazardous
substances, preventing contaminants from
migrating further downstream. Observed
degradation rates are several times higher than
those reported for natural abiotic degradation
processes.
In most in situ applications of this technology,
groundwater moves naturally through the
permeable subsurface wall or is directed by
flanking impermeable sections such as sheet piles
or slurry walls. This passive remediation method
is a cost-effective alternative to conventional
pump-and-treat methods. Aboveground reactor
vessels employing this technology may replace or
add to treatment units in conventional pump-and-
treat systems.
Process residuals may include dissolved ethane,
ethene, methane, hydrogen gas, chloride, and
ferrous iron. Because contaminants are degraded
to nonhazardous substances and not transferred to
another medium, this process eliminates the need
for waste treatment or disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process was developed to treat dissolved
halogenated organic compounds in groundwater.
The technology has degraded a wide variety of
Installation of Pilot-Scale In Situ Treatment System
at an Industrial Facility in Northeast United States
Page 64
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
chlorinated alkanes and alkenes, including
trichloroethene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE),
vinyl chloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and 1,2-
dichloroethene (DCE). The technology also
degrades other organic contaminants, including
Freon-113, ethylene dibromide, certain
nitroaromatics, and N-nitrosodimethylamine.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in spring 1993. A pilot-
scale demonstration of the aboveground reactor
(ex situ) technology took place from November
1994 to February 1995 at an industrial facility in
New Jersey. Groundwater at the facility
contained dissolved TCE and PCE.
A second SITE demonstration was performed in
New York from May through December 1995.
A pilot-scale in situ permeable wall was installed
in a shallow sand and gravel aquifer containing
TCE, DCE, vinyl chloride, and 1,1,1-
trichloroethane. This project may eventually be
expanded to full- scale.
A successful permeable in situ wall was installed
at the Canadian Forces Base Borden test site in
June 1991. The technology removed about 90
percent of the TCE and PCE from groundwater
passing through the reactive iron wall. The wall
has performed consistently for 5 years. More
than 250 sites have been identified where the
technology could be applied. Over 50 successful
bench-scale feasibility tests have been completed
using groundwater from industrial and
government facilities in the United States and
Canada.
The first full-scale, in situ installation of this
technology was completed at an industrial facility
in California in December 1994. Since that time,
five additional full-scale in situ systems and three
pilot-scale systems have been installed in
locations including Colorado, Kansas, North
Carolina and Belfast, Northern Ireland. Several
more are planned for 1997. Aboveground
treatment systems have been proposed at sites in
Maryland and Germany.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the New Jersey (ex situ) demonstration,
about 60,833 gallons of groundwater was treated
during 13 weeks of sampling. Conversion
efficiency of PCE during the demonstration
period exceeded 99.9 percent. Vinyl chloride
and cis-l,2-dichloroethene occasionally exceeded
the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection limits. This exceedance may have
been caused by a reduction in the iron's reactive
capacity due to precipitate formation. Complete
demonstration results will be published in the
Technology Capsule and Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (ITER), which will be
available in 1997.
For the New York (in situ) demonstration,
preliminary data indicate a significant reduction
in all critical contaminants present, and no
apparent decrease in removal efficiency over the
seven month demonstration period. Results of
the in situ demonstration of the process will be
published in an ITER that will be available in
1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Chien Chen
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Avenue, MS-104
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-906-6985
Fax: 908-321-6640
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Larry Kwicinski
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc.
42 Arrow Road
Guelph, Ontario, Canada NIK 1S6
519-824-0432
Fax: 519-763-2378
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 65
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
EPOC WATER, INC.
(Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The precipitation, microfiltration, and sludge
dewatering treatment uses a combination of pro-
cesses to treat a variety of wastes. In the first
step of the process, heavy metals are chemically
precipitated. Precipitates and all particles larger
than 0.2 micron are filtered through a unique
tubular textile crossflow microfilter
(EXXFLOW). The concentrate stream is then
dewatered in a filter press of the same material.
EXXFLOW microfilter modules are fabricated
from a proprietary tubular woven polyester.
Wastes pumped into the polyester tubes form a
dynamic membrane, which produces a high
quality filtrate and removes all particle sizes
larger than 0.2 micron. The flow velocity
continually maintains the membrane, maximizing
treatment efficiency.
Metals are removed through precipitation by
adjusting the pH in the EXXFLOW feed tank.
Metal hydroxides or oxides form a dynamic
membrane with any other suspended solids. The
EXXFLOW concentrate stream, which contains
up to 5 percent solids, is then dewatered. A
semidry cake, up to 0.25 inch thick, is formed
inside the tubular filter. When the discharge
valve is opened, rollers on the outside of the
tubes move to form a venturi within the tubes.
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. Discharge water is re-
cycled to the feed tank. Filter cakes are typically
40 to 60 percent solids by weight.
Constituents other than metals can be removed
using seeded slurry methods in EXXFLOW.
Hardness can be removed by using lime. Oil and
grease can be removed by adding adsorbents.
Nonvolatile organics and solvents can be
removed using adsorbents, activated carbon, or
powdered ion-exchange resins.
The EXXFLOW demonstration unit (see
photograph below) is transportable 'and is
EXXFLOW Demonstration Unit
Page 66
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
mounted on skids. The unit is designed to
process approximately 30 pounds of solids per
hour and 10 gallons of wastewater per minute.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
When flocculation and precipitation techniques
are used at close to stoichiometric dosing rates,
the EXXFLOW technology removes mixed
metals, oil and grease, and suspended solids sized
at 0.10 micron.
When the EXXFLOW technology operates with
finely divided adsorbent powders, it removes
contaminants such as isophthalic acid, acetic
acid, methyl ethyl ketone, fluorides, and phos-
phates from effluents generated by semiconductor
manufacture. Treated effluents can then be
reclaimed for reuse.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1989. Bench-scale
tests were conducted in 1990. The SITE demon-
stration was conducted during May and June
1992 on highly acidic mine drainage from the
Old Number 8 mine seep at the Iron Mountain
Superfund site in Redding, California. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/513)
and the Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/513) are available from EPA.
This technology was commercialized in 1988.
Treatment systems have since been installed at
over 45 sites worldwide. System capacities range
from 1 gallon per minute to over 2 million
gallons per day.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE Demonstration, developer
claims for metal removal efficiencies on acid
mine drainage, when neutralizing with sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) and calcium hydroxide
[Ca(OH)J, were generally met or exceeded
except for aluminum. This was most likely due
to excessive alkalinity (high pH) produced by the
added NaOH and Ca(OH)2, which redissolved the
aluminum. The claims for all metals, including
aluminum, were exceeded when magnesium
oxide (MgO) was used as the neutralizing agent.
In most cases, no detectable concentrations of
heavy metals were present in the permeate
samples.
Filter cake produced from the demonstration test
contained approximately 12 percent, 31 percent,
and 30 percent solids when NaOH, Ca(OH)2, and
MgO, respectively, were used as the treatment
chemicals. Toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP) tests performed on the filter
cake showed that leachable levels of TCLP
metals were below regulatory limits for each
treatment chemical tested.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Rodney Squires
EPOC Water, Inc.
3065 North Sunnyside
Fresno, CA 93727
209-291-8144
Fax: 209-291-4926
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 67
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
FILTER FLOW TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(Colloid Polishing Filter Method®)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Colloid Polishing Filter Method® (CPFM®)
uses inorganic, oxide-based sorption particles
(FF-1000®) and optimized fluidics control to
remove ionic, colloidal heavy metals and
nontritium radionuclides from water. Beta- and
alpha-emitting radionuclides can be treated
selectively by modifying the bed formulation.
The methodology efficiently removes inorganics
from groundwater, pond water, or wastewater
based on sorption, chemical and physical
properties of the pollutant species, and filtration.
The CPFM® is also an efficient heavy metals and
radionuclide polishing filter for groundwater and
wastewater. Excess solids and total dissolved
solids must be removed first, since they overload
the beds, resulting in frequent bed backwashing
and regeneration cycles and shorter bed lifetimes.
Three different types of CPFM® equipment have
been designed and successfully tested:
(1) vertical plate design beds with FF-1000®
sorption bed particles packaged in polymesh bags
or filter packs for field applications; (2) small,
filter-housing units for processing less than 1,000
gallons of contaminated water; and (3) deep-bed,
epoxy-coated, stainless steel and carbon steel
tanks equipped with special fluidics controls and
bed sluicing ports for continuous processing.
The photograph below shows a mobile CPFM®
unit.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CPFM® efficiently removes heavy metals
and nontritium radionuclides from water to parts
per million or parts per billion levels. This
simple methodology can be used separately to
treat water with low total suspended solids; in a
treatment train downstream from other
Mobile CPFM® Unit, Including Mixing Tanks,
Pumps, Filter Apparatus, and Other Equipment
Page 68
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1936
Completed Proiect
technologies such as soil washing or organic
oxidation; or as a conventional wastewater
treatment that uses flocculation and solids
removal.
The CPFM®'s major advantages are its high
performance; alpha and beta emitter efficiency;
and its application to monovalent, divalent,
multivalent, and high valence forms existing as
colloids, and ionic, chelated, and complexed
forms. The same equipment can treat water at
different sites, but the preconditioning chemistry
and pH must be optimized for each site through
bench-scale and field testing.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in July 1991. EPA and
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
cosponsored the technology evaluation. The
SITE demonstration occurred in September 1993
at DOE's Rocky Flats Plant (RFP) in Denver,
Colorado. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-94/501), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-94/501a), and Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/501) are available from EPA.
The CPFM has been demonstrated independent
of the SITE Program at two locations at DOE's
Hanford facility, where it removed Strontium-90,
Cesium-137, Plutonium-239, and Americium-241
from water at K-Basin and Strontium-90 from
groundwater at Site 100N Area (N-Spring). A
report detailing the results is available from DOE
(DOE/RL-95-110).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, the CPFM®
treated about 10,000 gallons of water that
contained about 100 micrograms per liter of
uranium and 100 picoCuries per liter of gross
alpha contamination. The demonstration
consisted of three tests. The first test consisted
of three 4-hour runs, at a flow rate of about 5
gallons per minute (gpm). For the second test,
also run for 4 hours at 5 gpm, the influent water
was pretreated with sodium sulfide. The third
test was a 15-hour run designed to determine the
amount of contamination each filter pack could
treat.
The CPFM® system removed up to 95 percent
uranium and 94 percent gross alpha
contamination. However, due to the significant
variation in removal efficiencies between runs,
average removal efficiencies were significantly
less: 80 percent for uranium and 72 percent for
gross alpha. Though removal is largely
attributable to the colloid filter pack, uranium
was significantly removed in runs one and four
before colloid filter treatment. Significant gross
alpha was also removed before colloid filter
treatment in runs one and three. At less than the
maximum removal efficiency, effluent from the
CPFM® system did not meet the Colorado Water
Quality Control Commission standards for
discharge of waters from RFP.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Annette Gatchett
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7697
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Tod Johnson
Filter Flow Technology, Inc.
122 Texas Avenue
League City, TX 77573
281-332-3438
Fax: 281-332-3644
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 69
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
FUNDERBURK & ASSOCIATES
(formerly HAZCON, INC.)
(Dechlorination and Immobilization)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology mixes hazardous wastes with
cement (or fly ash), water, and one of 18
patented reagents, commonly known as
Chloranan, to immobilize heavy metals. The
developers also claim that certain chlorinated
organics are dechlorinated by the treatment
reagents.
Soils, sludges, and sediments can be treated in
situ or excavated and treated ex situ. Sediments
can be treated under water. In the finished
product, immobilized metals have a very low
solubility.
Ex situ treatment occurs in batches, with
volumetric throughput rated at 120 tons per hour.
The treatment process begins by adding
Chloranan and water to the blending unit (see
figure below). Waste is then added and mixed
for 2 minutes. Cement or fly ash is added and
mixed for a similar time. After 12 hours, the
treated material hardens into a concrete-like mass
that exhibits unconfined compressive strengths
(UCS) ranging from 1,000 to 3,000 pounds per
square inch (psi), with permeabilities of 10"9
centimeters per second (cm/sec). The hardened
concrete-like mass can withstand several hundred
freeze and thaw cycles.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology is applicable to solid wastes
containing heavy metals and organics. The
developer claims that, since the 1987 SITE
demonstration, the technology has been refined to
dechlorinate certain chlorinated organics and to
immobilize other wastes, including those with
high levels of metals. Wastes with organic and
inorganic contaminants can be treated together.
The process can treat contaminated material with
high concentrations (up to 25 percent) of oil.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1987. The process
was demonstrated in October 1987 at a former oil
processing plant in Douglassville, Pennsylvania.
The site soil contained high levels of oil and
grease (250,000 parts per million [ppm]) and
heavy metals (22,000 ppm lead), and low levels
of volatile organic compounds (VOC) (100 ppm)
CEMENT OR
FLYASH
CHLORANAN
-i
WATER
FIELD BLENDING UNIT
WASTE
Dechlorination and Immobilization Treatment Process
Page 70
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) (75 ppm).
The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-89/001) and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-89/00la) are
available from EPA. A report on long-term
monitoring may be also obtained from EPA. The
technology has also been used to remediate a
California Superfund site with zinc contamination
as high as 220,000 ppm.
Since the demonstration in 1987, 17 additional
reagent formulations have been developed.
These reagents supposedly dechlorinate many
chlorinated organics, including PCBs, ethylene
dichloride, trichloroethene, and
pentachlorophenol.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
For the SITE demonstration, samples were taken
after treatment at intervals of 7 days, 28 days, 9
months, and 22 months. Analytical results from
these samples were generally favorable. The
physical test results indicated a UCS between
220 and 1,570 psi. Low permeabilities (10"9
cm/sec) were recorded, and the porosity of the
treated wastes was moderate. Durability test
results showed no change in physical strength
after the wet and dry and freeze and thaw cycles.
The waste volume increased by about 120
percent. However, technology refinements now
restrict volumetric increases to 15 to 25 percent.
Using a smaller volume of additives reduces
physical strength, but toxicity reduction is not
affected.
The results of the leaching tests were mixed.
Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) results for the stabilized wastes showed
that concentrations of metals, VOCs, and
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC) were
below 1 ppm. Lead concentrations hi leachate
decreased by a factor of 200 to below 100 parts
per billion. VOC and SVOC concentrations hi
the TCLP leachate were not affected by
treatment. Oil and grease concentrations were
greater hi the treated waste TCLP leachate (4
ppm) than in the untreated waste TCLP leachate
(less than 2 ppm).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercui.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ray Funderburk
Funderburk & Associates
916 Allegro Lane
Apollo Beach, PL 33572
800-723-8847
Fax: 813-645-9620
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 71
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
GENERAL ATOMICS
(Circulating Bed Combustor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
General Atomies' circulating bed combustor
(CBC) uses high velocity air to entrain
circulating solids and create a highly turbulent
combustion zone that destroys toxic
hydrocarbons. The commercial-scale, 3-foot
combustion chamber can treat up to 150 tons of
contaminated soil daily, depending on the heating
value of the feed material.
The CBC operates at lower temperatures than
conventional incinerators (1,450 to 1,600 °F).
The CBC's high turbulence produces a uniform
temperature around the combustion chamber and
hot cyclone. The CBC also completely mixes the
waste material during combustion. Effective
mixing and low combustion temperature reduce
operating costs and potential emissions of such
gases as nitrogen oxide (NOX) and carbon
monoxide (CO). Natural gas, fuel oil, or diesel
can be used as auxiliary fuel. No auxiliary fuel
is needed for waste streams with a net heating
value greater than 2,900 British thermal units per
pound.
(2)
COMBUSTION
CHAMBER
As shown in the figure below, waste material and
limestone are fed into the combustion chamber
along with the recirculating bed material. The
limestone neutralizes acid gases. A conveyor
transports the treated ash out of the system for
proper disposal. Hot combustion gases pass
through a convective gas cooler and baghouse
before they are released to the atmosphere.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CBC process can treat liquids, slurries,
solids, and sludges contaminated with corrosives,
cyanides, dioxins and furans, inorganics, metals,
organics, oxidizers, pesticides, polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB), phenols, and volatile organic
compounds. The CBC is permitted under the
Toxic Substances Control Act to burn PCBs in all
10 EPA regions, having demonstrated a 99.99
percent destruction removal efficiency (DRE).
Applications of the CBC include a variety of
industrial wastes and contaminated site materials.
Waste feed for the CBC must be sized to less
than 1 inch. Metals in the waste do not inhibit
(8)
FLUE GAS
(DUST)
FILTER
0(9)
STACK
FD
FAN
(6)
ASH CONVEYOR
SYSTEM
Circulating Bed Combustor (CBC)
Page 72
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
performance and become less leachable after
incineration. Treated residual ash can be
replaced on site or stabilized for landfill disposal
if metals exceed regulatory limits.
STATUS:
The CBC (formerly owned by Ogden
Environmental Services) was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in 1986. A
treatability study on wastes from the McColl
Superfund site in California was conducted under
the guidance of the SITE Program, EPA Region
9, and the California Department of Health
Services in March 1989. A pilot-scale
demonstration was conducted at the General
Atomics research facility in San Diego,
California using a 16-inch-diameter CBC. The
demonstration was conducted on soil from the
McColl Superfund Site hi Fullerton, California.
Several 3-foot-diameter CBCs have been built
and successfully operated. At the Swanson River
project in Alaska, over 100,000 tons of PCB-
contaminated soil was successfully treated to
limits of detection that were far below allowable
limits. The process took just over 3 years, from
mobilization of the transportable unit to
demobilization. The unit operated at over 85
percent availability all year, including winter,
when temperatures were below -50 °F. The soil
was delisted and returned to the original site.
The unit has subsequently been moved to a
Canadian site.
Another unit of similar size treated soils
contaminated with #6 fuel oil. Over 14,000 tons
of soil was successfully treated and delisted.
Upon completion, the site was upgraded to
permit operation as a merchant facility treating a
wide range of materials from leaking
underground fuel tanks at other sites. Two other
units of the same size have been constructed in
Germany for treatment of munitions wastes
consisting of slurried explosives and propellant.
These units have been operational since early
1995 and have been permitted under stringent
German regulations.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, the CBC
performed as follows:
• Achieved DRE values of 99.99 percent
or greater for principal organic
hazardous constituents
• Minimized formation of products of
incomplete combustion
• Met research facility permit conditions
and California South Coast Basin
emission standards
• Controlled sulfur oxide emissions by
adding limestone and residual materials
(fly ash and bed ash); these emissions
were nonhazardous. No significant
levels of hazardous organic compounds
were found in the system, the stack gas,
or the bed and fly ash.
• Minimized emissions of sulfur oxide,
NOX, and particulates. Other regulated
pollutants were controlled to well below
permit levels.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Douglas Grosse
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7844
Fax: 513-569-7585
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jeffrey Broido
General Atomics
P.O. Box 85608
3550 General Atomics Court
San Diego, CA 92186-9784
619-455-4495
Fax: 619-455-4111
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 73
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL CORPORATION
(formerly HYDROLOGICS, INC.)
(CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The CURE®-Electrocoagulation (CURE®) system
is designed to remove ionic metal species and other
charged particles from water (see figure below).
Because many toxic metal ions such as nickel, lead,
and chromates are held in solution by electrical
charges, they will precipitate out of solution if they
are neutralized with oppositely charged ions. The
CURE® system is effective at breaking oily
emulsions and removing suspended solids. The
system improves on previous electrocoagulation
methods through a unique geometrical
configuration.
The CURE® system's patented geometry maximizes
liquid surface contact between the anode and
concentric cathode electrocoagulation tubes, thus
minimizing the power requirements for efficient
operation. The CURE® system allows the
contaminated water to flow continuously through
the cathode tube, enabling a direct current to pass
uniformly through a water stream. The
contaminated water then passes through the annular
space between the cathode and anode tubes and is
exposed to sequential positive and negative
electrical fields. Typical retention time is less than
20 seconds. Water characteristics such as pH,
oxidation-reduction potential, and conductivity can
be adjusted to achieve maximum removal
efficiencies for specific contaminants.
After the treated water exits the electrocoagulation
tubes, the destabilized colloids are allowed to
flocculate and are then separated with an integrated
clarifier system. Polymers can be added to enhance
flocculation, but in most cases they are not
required. The sludge produced by this process is
usually very stable and acid-resistant. Tests have
shown that sludges produced by the CURE® system
pass the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) and are often disposed of as nonhazardous
waste.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CURE® system can treat a broad range of
dissolved metals, including aluminum, arsenic,
barium, cadmium, chromium, cyanide, iron, lead,
nickel, uranium, and zinc. The system can also
INFLUENT
EFFLUENT
CURE®-Electrocoagulation System
Page 74
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
treat contaminants such as emulsified oils,
suspended solids, paints, and dyes. Radionuclides
were removed by the system at the Rocky Flats
Environmental Technology Site (RFETS).
Because this system treats a wide range of
contaminants, it is suited for industries and utilities
such as plating, mining, electronics, industrial
wastewater, as well as remediation projects.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1993. A bench-scale
test of the technology was conducted in April 1995
to determine the ability of the system to remove
radionuclides from solar evaporation water at
RFETS. The system removed over 90 percent of
uranium and plutonium from the test water. The
technology was demonstrated during August and
September 1995 at RFETS under a joint agreement
between the Department of Energy, the State of
Colorado, and EPA.
The technology has also been demonstrated at
several private industrial facilities and is currently
being used to remove metals and oily wastes from
the following: plating wastewater at a jewelry
manufacturing facility, industrial wastewaters from
an engine manufacturing facility, cooling tower.
water at an industrial facility, and for several other
industrial applications in the U.S. and
internationally. Full- or pilot-scale units are
available from General Environmental Corporation.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, four 3-hour test
runs were conducted at RFETS over a 2-week
period. Prior to the demonstration, operating
parameters were adjusted during several
optimization runs.
The demonstration showed that the system removed
30 to 50 percent of uranium and 60 to 99 percent of
plutonium from the solar pond water at RFETS.
The radionuclide and metal content of the
dewatered sludge indicated that these contaminants
were highly concentrated in the sludge. Uranium
and plutonium were only slightly leachable by
TCLP and no metals were leachable by TCLP.
These results suggest that the sludge is very
stable and resistant to breakdown.
The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-96/502), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-92/502a), and Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-96/502) are available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Carl Dalrymple
General Environmental Corporation
9025 East Kenyon, Suite 312
Denver, CO 80237
303-889-5949
Fax: 303-889-5946
Dan Eide
CURE International
1001 U.S. Highway One, Suite 409
Jupiter, FL 33477
561-575-3500
FAX 561-575-9510
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 75
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
GEO-CON, INC.
(In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The in situ solidification and stabilization process
immobilizes organic and inorganic compounds in
wet or dry soils, using reagents (additives) to
produce a cement-like mass. The basic
components of this technology are (1) Geo-Con,
Inc.'s (Geo-Con), deep soil mixing (DSM)
system, to deliver and mix the chemicals with the
soil in situ; and (2) a batch mixing plant to supply
proprietary additives (see figure below).
The proprietary additives generate a complex,
crystalline, connective network of inorganic
polymers in a two-phase reaction. • In the first
phase, contaminants are complexed in a fast-
acting reaction. In the second phase,
macromolecules build over a long period of time
in a slow-acting reaction.
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 revolutions per minute. Two
conduits in the auger inject the additive slurry
and supplemental water. Additives are injected
on the downstroke; the slurry is further mixed
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.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process treats soils, sediments, and sludge-
pond bottoms contaminated with organic
compounds and metals. The process has been
laboratory-tested on soils containing
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
pentachlorophenol, refinery wastes, and
chlorinated and nitrated hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
A SITE demonstration was conducted as a joint
effort between International Waste Technologies
(IWT) and Geo-Con. The demonstration was
conducted at the General Electric Service Shop
site in Hialeah, Florida in April 1988. IWT
provided the treatment reagent, specifically the
proprietary additive (HWT-20), and Geo-Con
provided both engineering and hardware for the
in situ soil treatment. Two 10-by-20-foot areas
were treated — one to a depth of 18 feet, and the
other to a depth of 14 feet. Ten months after the
Reagent
Silo
Flow
Control
Box
Air
Controlled
Valves -"
In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process Flow Diagram
Page 76
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
demonstration, long-term monitoring tests were
performed on the treated sectors. A four-auger
process was later used to remediate the PCB-
contaminated Hialeah site during the winter and
spring of 1990. Cooperative efforts between
Geo-Con and IWT ended with the remediation of
the Hialeah site.
Presently, Geo-Con offers the entire in situ
stabilization package, including the treatment
chemicals. Geo-Con has used the process to
complete over 40 in situ stabilization projects
throughout the United States. Significant projects
completed to date include the following:
• Construction of a 110,000-square-foot,
60-foot-deep, soil-bentonite DSM wall to
contain contaminated groundwater from
a former waste pond. All DSM
permeabilities were less than 10"7
centimeters per second (cm/s).
• Shallow soil mixing and stabilization of
82,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils
at a former manufactured gas plant site.
The site was declared clean and
ultimately converted to a city park.
The DSM system augers have been scaled up to
diameters as large as 12 feet. To date, Geo-Con
has used this process to treat over 1 million cubic
yards of contaminated soils and sludges.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration yielded the following
results:
• PCB immobilization appeared 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 1
year later on treated soil samples showed
no increase in PCB concentrations,
indicating immobilization.
• Data were insufficient to evaluate the
system's performance on other organic
compounds and metals.
• Each test sample showed high
unconfined compressive strength (UCS),
low permeability, and low porosity.
These physical properties improved in
samples retested 1 year later, indicating
the potential for long-term durability.
• Bulk density of the soil increased 21
percent after treatment. This treatment
increased the treated soil volume by 8.5
percent and caused a small ground rise
of 1 inch per foot of treated soil.
• The UCS of treated soil was satisfactory,
with values up to 1,500 pounds per
square inch.
• The permeability of the treated soil was
satisfactory, decreasing to 10"6 and
10"7 cm/s compared to 10"2 cm/s for
untreated soil.
• Data were insufficient to confirm
immobilization of volatile and
semivolatile organics. This may be due
to organophilic clays present in the
reagent.
• Process costs were $194 per ton for the
1-auger machine used in the
demonstration, and $111 per ton for a
commercial four-auger operation. More
recent experience with larger scale
equipment reduced process costs to about
$15 per ton plus the cost of reagents.
The Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/5-89/004a) and the Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540/A5-89/004) are
available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Linda Ward or Robert Hayden
Geo-Con, Inc.
4075 Monroeville Boulevard
Corporate One, Building II, Suite 400
Monroeville, PA 15146
412-856-7700
Fax: 412-373-3357
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 77
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
GEOSAFE CORPORATION
(In Situ Vitrification)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Geosafe Corporation's (Geosafe) in situ
vitrification (ISV) process uses electricity to melt
soil or other earthen materials at temperatures of
1600 to 2000 °C, destroying organic pollutants
by pyrolysis. Inorganic pollutants are
immobilized within the vitrified glass and
crystalline mass. Water vapor and organic
pyrolysis products are captured in a hood, which
draws the off-gases into a treatment system that
removes particulates and other pollutants.
To begin the vitrification process, an array of
four large electrodes is inserted into contaminated
zones containing enough soil for melting to occur
(see photograph below). A graphite starter is
used to melt the adjacent soil, which then
becomes the primary current-carrying medium
for further processing. As power is applied, the
melting continues downward and outward at an
average rate of 4 to 6 tons per hour, or 1 to
2 inches per hour. The electrode array is
lowered progressively, as the melt grows to the
desired trea'tment depth. After cooling, a vitrified
monolith with a glass and microcrystalline
structure remains. This monolith possesses high
strength and excellent weathering and leaching
properties.
Air flow through the hood is controlled to
maintain a negative pressure. Excess oxygen is
supplied for combustion of any organic pyrolysis
by-products. Off-gases are treated by quenching,
pH-controlled scrubbing, dewatering (mist
elimination), heating (for dew point control),
particulate filtration, and either activated carbon
adsorption or thermal oxidation may be employed
as a final off-gas polishing step.
Individual melt settings may encompass a total
melt mass of up to 1,400 tons, a maximum width
of 40 feet, and depths as great as 22 feet. Special
settings to reach deeper contamination are also
possible. Void volume and volatile material
removal results in a 30 to 50 percent volume
reduction for typical soils.
The mobile ISV system is mounted on three
semi-trailers. Electric power may be provided by
In Situ Vitrification Process Equipment
Page 78
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
local utility or on-site diesel generator. Typical
power consumption ranges from 800 to 1,000
kilowatt-hours per ton of processed soil. The
electrical supply system has an isolated ground
circuit to provide safety.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ISV process can destroy or remove organics
and immobilize most inorganics in contaminated
soils, sediments, sludges, or other earthen
materials. The process has been tested on a
broad range of volatile and semivolatile organic
compounds, other organics including dioxins and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), and on most
priority pollutant metals and heavy metal radio-
nuclides. The process also treats large amounts
of debris and waste materials present in soil.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1988. The
demonstration of the process occurred during
March and April 1994 at the former Parsons
Chemical (Parsons) site in Grand Ledge,
Michigan. The soil at Parsons was contaminated
with pesticides, metals, and low levels of dioxins.
The Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/520) and the Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/520) are available
from EPA.
In November 1995, Geosafe was issued a
National Toxic Substances Control Act permit for
the treatment of soils contaminated with up to
17,860 parts per million PCBs. All air emissions
and vitrified product samples had nondetectable
levels of PCBs and dioxins and furans. In
December 1995, Geosafe completed the
remediation of. the Wasatch Chemical Superfund
Site in Salt Lake City, Utah. This site contained
about 6,000 tons of dioxin, pentachlorophenol,
herbicide, pesticide, and other organic-
contaminated soil and debris.
ISV has also been selected for the remediation of
radioactively contaminated soil at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Tennessee and an isolated
nuclear test site hi southern Australia. ISV is
also being researched for the treatment of coal
ash in Japan.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, about 330 cubic
yards (250 cubic meters) of a saturated clayey
soil was vitrified in 10 days. This is the
equivalent to a production rate of 53 tons per
day.
The technology met cleanup levels specified by
EPA Region 5 for chlordane, 4,4-dichlorodiphe-
nyltrichloroethane, dieldrin, and mercury.
Pesticide concentrations were nondetectible in the
vitrified soil. Results also indicated that
leachable mercury was below the regulatory
guidelines (40 CFR part 261.64), and no target
pesticides were detected hi the leachate.
No target pesticides were detected hi the stack
gas samples, and metal emissions were below
regulatory requirements. Continuous emission
monitoring showed that total hydrocarbon and
carbon monoxide emissions were within EPA
Region 5 limits.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
James Hansen or Matthew Haass
Geosafe Corporation
2950 George Washington Way
Richland, WA 99352
509-375-0710
Fax: 509-375-7721
E-Mail: GEOSAFE@oneworld.out.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 79
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
GIS\SOLUTIONS, INC.
(GIS\Key™ Environmental Data Management System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
GISXKey™ is a comprehensive environmental
database management system that integrates site
data and graphics, enabling the user to create
geologic cross-sections, boring logs,
potentiometric maps, isopleth maps, structure
maps, summary tables, hydrographs, chemical
time series graphs, and numerous other maps and
line graphs (see table below). The software is
menu-driven, making it relatively simple to use.
All system outputs meet Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) reporting requirements
and are consistent with current industry practices.
GISXKey™ can be a cost-effective tool to help
manage hazardous waste site environmental data
more effectively and accurately. GIS\Key™
allows project managers to focus on problem
solving, because less time is required to enter,
evaluate, and report the supporting site data. It
also provides project managers access to
environmental databases traditionally available
only to computer specialists.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The GIS\Key™ software can be used at any
Superfund site to facilitate the collection,
reporting, and analysis of site data. The software
is designed with numerous checks to assure the
quality of the data, including comprehensive
quality assurance/quality control protocols.
System outputs, listed in the table below, are
presentation-quality and meet RCRA and
CERCLA reporting requirements. GISNKey™
software includes an electronic laboratory import
program that can immediately show where
samples fall outside of historical data ranges,
along with federal, state, and local action levels.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi summer 1992. The
demonstration was held in August 1993 in San
Francisco, California, and December 1993 hi
Washington, DC. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-94/505), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/SR-94/505), Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-94/505), and
project videotape are available from EPA.
Isopleth maps of soil or water quality plan
or section view
Graphs
- Time series graphs
- Chemical versus chemical and inter-
well and intra-well
- Concentration versus distance
Summary of statistics
Trilinear Piper diagrams
Usar alerts
- When QA/QC results fall outside data
quality objectives
- When sample results fall outside histo-
rical ranges
- When sample results exceed applicable
regulatory standards
Presentation-quality data tables
Completely customizable boring logs
Geologic cross-section maps
Isopach maps
Structure maps
Modflow integration
Density-corrected water level, floating
product, hydraulic conductivity, and contour
maps
Water elevation and floating product
thickness versus time graphs
Flow versus time and chemical flux graphs
Modflow integration
GISXKey™ Environmental Data Management System Outputs
Page 80
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
The GIS\Key™ software is in use at two
Superfund sites: the Crazyhorse site near
Salinas, California, and the Moffett Field site
near San Jose, California.
The U.S. Air Force's Environmental Data
Management and Decision Support working
group is testing the effectiveness of the GISYKey™
technology at Norton Air Force Base in
California. The technology is also being used by
consultants at over 20 other U.S. Air Force
bases.
The GIS\Key™ software can directly export data
into the leading three-dimensional visualization
systems. These systems produce three-
dimensional contaminant plume models and
groundwater flow models as well as fence
diagrams. GIS\Solutions, Inc., can provide an
optional software module for three-dimensional
modeling that runs on the Microsoft® Windows™
operating system.
Improper use of certain AutoCAD® commands
can cause problems with basemap integrity.
GIS\Key™ includes limited audit or transaction
logging capabilities. GIS\Key™ data consistency
and validity checks could be improved as it is
possible to enter invalid data. Site data related to
ecological assessment and air emissions is not
managed by this software.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The goal of the SITE demonstration was to
evaluate whether the software performs the
functions claimed by the developer and assess the
accuracy of the GIS\Key™ output. Also,
GIS\Key™ procedures were reviewed to ensure
data integrity, to evaluate the general usability of
GIS\Key™, and to compare GISYKey™ features to
user requirements.
Results from the SITE demonstration indicated
that the GISYKey™ software generated the four
types of contour maps necessary to assist in
groundwater mapping: hydrogeologic maps,
chemical concentration isopleths, geologic
structure maps, and geologic structure thickness
isopach maps. Several advanced chemistry
reports and construction and borehole summary
tables were also automatically prepared using
customized GISYKey™ menu commands. The
system automated well and borehole logs based
on the information contained in the database.
GISYKey™ provided several editable reference
lists, including a list of regulatory thresholds, test
methods, and a list of chemical names, aliases,
and registry numbers.
The GISYKey™ database menu provided
commands for electronic database import and
export. Any of the database files used by
GISYKey™ can be used with the general import
and export commands available in the database
menu.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Filers
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7809
Fax: 513-569-7111
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
John Saguto
GISYSolutions, Inc.
1800 Sutler Street
Suite 830
Concord, CA 94520
415-827-5400
Fax: 510-827-5467
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 81
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
GRACE BIOREMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES
(DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The GRACE Bioremediation Technologies
organic amendment-enhanced bioremediation
technology (DARAMEND711) is designed to
degrade many organic contaminants hi industrial
soils and sediments, including pentachlorophenol
(PCP), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH), and petroleum hydrocarbons. The
technology has been applied both hi situ and ex
situ. In either case, soil may be treated in lifts up
to 2 feet deep using available mixing equipment.
The technology may also be applied ex situ, as a
biopile.
The technology treats batches of soil using
DARAMEND™ soil amendments. These
amendments are introduced using conventional
agricultural equipment (see photograph below),
followed by regular tilling and irrigation.
DARAMEND™ soil amendments are solid-phase
products prepared from natural organic materials
to have soil-specific particle size distribution,
nutrient content, and nutrient release kinetics.
Soil amendments sharply increase the ability of
the soil matrix to supply water and nutrients to
the microorganisms that degrade the hazardous
compounds. The amendments can also
transiently bind contaminants, reducing the acute
toxicity of the soil aqueous phase. This reduction
allows microorganisms to survive hi soils
containing very high concentrations of toxic
compounds.
DARAMEND™ treatment involves three
fundamental steps. First, the treatment area is
prepared. For the ex situ application, a lined
treatment cell is constructed. In situ application
requires the treatment area to be cleared and
ripped to reduce soil compaction. Second, the
soil is pretreated; this includes removing debris
larger than 4 inches, such as metal or rocks, that
may damage the tilling equipment. Sediments
under-going treatment must be dewatered. And
third, the DARAMEND™ soil amendment is
incorporated, usually at 1 percent to 5 percent by
weight, followed by regular tilling and irrigating.
Soil is tilled with a rotary tiller to reduce
variation hi soil properties and contaminant
concentrations. Tilling also incorporates the
required soil amendments and helps deliver
oxygen to contaminant-degrading
microorganisms.
DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology
Page 82
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
An irrigation system is used to maintain soil
moisture in the desired range. If the treatment
area is not covered, leachate or surface runoff
caused by heavy precipitation is collected and
reapplied to the soil as needed.
Equipment needed to implement this technology
includes a rotary tiller, irrigation equipment, and
excavation and screening equipment. Depending
on site-specific factors such as contaminant type
and initial concentration, and project schedule
and climate, a waterproof cover may be
constructed over the treatment area.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The DARAMEND™ technology can treat soil,
sediment, and other solid wastes such as lagoon
sludge. These matrices may be contaminated by
a wide range of organic compounds including,
but not limited to, PAHs, PCP, petroleum
hydrocarbons, and phthalates. Matrices of lead,
manganese, and zinc have been effectively
treated with the DARAMEND™ technology.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi spring 1993. The ex
situ application of the technology was
demonstrated from fall 1993 to summer 1994 at
the Domtar Wood Preserving facility in Trenton,
Ontario, Canada. The demonstration was one
component of a 5,000-ton remediation project
underway at the site.
Currently, the DARAMEND™ technology and
cycled modification is being applied on a large
scale, and is awaiting regulatory approval for
application at four sites in the U.S. In addition,
the technology is being applied at a number of
Canadian sites, including a 2,500-ton biopile hi
Eastern Canada, and two projects targeting
pesticides and herbicides in Ontario.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
In the ex situ demonstration area, the
DARAMEND™ technology achieved the
following overall reductions: PAHs, 94 percent
(1,710 milligram/kilogram [mg/kg] to 98 mg/kg);
chlorophenols, 96 percent (352 mg/kg to 13.6
mg/kg); and TPH, 87 percent. These reductions
were achieved in 254 days of treatment,
including whiter days when no activity occurred
because of low soil temperatures. The control
area showed a reduction of 41 percent hi PAH
concentrations; no reduction was seen hi the
concentration of either chlorinated phenols or
TPH during the treatment time. Results from the
toxicity analysis (earthworm mortality and seed
germination) showed that the toxicity was
eliminated or greatly reduced in the treated soil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Alan Seech or Paul Bucens
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies
3451 Erindale Station Road
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5A 3T5
905-272-7480
Fax: 905-272-7472
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 83
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
GRUPPO ITALIMPRESSE
(developed by SHIRCO INFRARED SYSTEMS, INC.)
(Infrared Thermal Destruction)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The infrared thermal destruction technology is a
mobile thermal processing system that 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 (see figure below) consists of four
components: (1) an electric-powered infrared
primary chamber; (2) a gas-fired secondary
combustion chamber; (3) an emissions control
system; and (4) a control center.
Waste is fed into the primary chamber and
exposed to infrared radiant heat (up to 1,850 °F)
provided by silicon carbide rods above the
conveyor belt. A blower delivers air to selected
locations along the belt to control the oxidation
rate of the waste feed.
The ash material hi the primary chamber is
quenched with scrubber water effluent. The ash
is then conveyed to an ash hopper, where it is
removed to a holding area and analyzed for
organic contaminants such as polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB).
Volatile gases from the primary chamber flow
into the secondary chamber, which uses higher
Mobile Thermal Processing System
temperatures, greater residence time, 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. The scrubber liquid effluent flows into a
clarifier, where scrubber sludge settles and is
removed for disposal. The liquid then flows
through an activated carbon filter for reuse or to
a publicly owned treatment works for disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is suitable for soils or sediments
with organic contaminants. Liquid organic
wastes can be treated after mixing with sand or
soil. Optimal waste characteristics are as
follows:
• Particle size, 5 microns to 2 inches
• Moisture content, up to 50 percent by
weight
• Density, 30 to 130 pounds per cubic foot
• Heating value, up to 10,000 British
thermal units per pound
• Chlorine content, up to 5 percent by
weight
• Sulfur content, up to 5 percent by weight
• Phosphorus, 0 to 300 parts per million
(ppm)
• pH, 5 to 9
• Alkali metals, up to 1 percent by weight
STATUS:
EPA conducted two evaluations of the infrared
thermal destruction technology. A full-scale unit
was evaluated during August 1987 at the Peak
Oil Superfund site in Brandon, Florida. The
system treated nearly 7,000 cubic yards of waste
oil sludge containing PCBs and lead. A pilot-
scale demonstration took place at the Rose
Page 84
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Township-Demode Road Superfund site in
Michigan during November 1987. Organics,
PCBs, and metals in soil were the target waste
compounds. Two Applications Analysis Reports
(EPA/540/A5-89/010 and EPA/540/A5-89/007)
and two Technology Evaluation Reports
(EPA/540/5-88/002a and EPA/540/5-89/007a)
are available from EPA. In addition, the
technology has been used to remediate PCB
contamination at the Florida Steel Corporation
and the LaSalle Electric Superfund sites.
This technology is no longer available through
vendors in the United States. For further
information about the technology, contact the
EPA Project Manager.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The results from the two SITE demonstrations
are summarized below.
• PCBs were reduced to less than 1 ppm in
the ash, with a destruction 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 standard for particulate emissions
(0.08 gram per dry standard cubic foot)
was achieved. In the full-scale
demonstration, however, this standard
was not met in all runs because of
scrubber inefficiencies.
• Lead was not immobilized; however, it
remained in the ash. Significant amounts
were not transferred to the scrubber
water or emitted to the atmosphere.
• The pilot-scale unit demonstrated
satisfactory performance with high feed
rate and reduced power consumption
when fuel oil was added to the waste
feed and the primary chamber
temperature was reduced.
• Economic analysis suggests an overall
waste remediation cost of less than $800
per ton.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 85
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
HIGH VOLTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATIONS, INC.
(formerly ELECTRON BEAM RESEARCH FACILITY, FLORIDA
INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, and UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI)
(High-Energy Electron Irradiation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
High-voltage electron irradiation of water produces
a large number of very reactive chemical species,
including the aqueous electron (e".^, the hydrogen
radical (H-), and the hydroxyl radical (OH-). These
short-lived intermediates break down organic
contaminants in aqueous wastes.
In the principal reaction, the aqueous electron
transfers to halogen-containing compounds,
breaking the halogen-carbon bond and liberating
halogen anions such as chloride (Cl") or bromide
(Bf). The hydroxyl radical can undergo addition
or hydrogen abstraction reactions, producing
organic free radicals that decompose in the
presence of other hydroxyl radicals and water. In
most cases, organics are converted to carbon
dioxide, water, and salts. Lower molecular weight
aldehydes, haloacetic acids, and carboxylic acids
form at low concentrations in some cases.
During the high-voltage electron irradiation
process, electricity generates high energy electrons.
The electrons are accelerated by the voltage to
approximately 95 percent of the speed of light.
They are then directed into a thin stream of water
or sludge. All reactions are complete in less than
0.1 second. The electron beam and waste flow are
adjusted to deliver the necessary dose of electrons.
Although this is a form of ionizing radiation, there
is no residual radioactivity.
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc.
(High Voltage), has developed a mobile facility to
demonstrate the treatment process (see photograph
below).
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This treatment process can effectively treat more
than 100 common organic compounds. These
compounds include the following:
The Mobile Electron Beam Hazardous Waste Treatment System
Page 86
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Trihalomethanes (such as chloroform),
which are found in chlorinated drinking
water
Chlorinated solvents, including carbon
tetrachloride, trichloroethane,
tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene
(TCE), ethylene dibromide, dibromo-
chloropropane, hexachlorobutadiene, and
hexachloroethane
Aromatics found in gasoline, including
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylene (BTEX)
Chlorobenzene and dichlorobenzenes
Phenol
Dieldrin, a persistent pesticide
Polychlorinated biphenyls
A variety of other organic compounds
The treatment process is appropriate for removing
various hazardous organic compounds from
aqueous waste streams and sludges.
STATUS:
The high-energy electron irradiation process was
accepted into the SITE Emerging Technology
Program (ETP) in June 1990. For further
information on the pilot-scale facility evaluated
under the ETP, refer to the Emerging
Technology Bulletins (EPA/540/F-93/502,
EPA/540/F-92/009, and EPA/540/F-93/509),
which are available from EPA. Based on results
from ETP, the process was invited to participate
in the Demonstration Program.
!
The ability of the technology to treat
contaminated soils, sediments, or sludges is also
being evaluated under the ETP. For further
information on this evaluation, refer to the the
High Voltage profile in the ETP section (ongoing
projects).
The treatment process was demonstrated at the
U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River
site in Aiken, South Carolina during two
different periods totaling 3 weeks in September
and November 1994. The demonstration of a
trailer-mounted treatment system took place on a
portion of the Savannah River site known as
M-Area.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration, the system treated
about 70,000 gallons of M-Area groundwater
contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOC). The principal groundwater contaminants
were TCE and PCE, which were present at
concentrations of about 27,000 and
11,000 micrograms per liter Cwg/L), respectively.
The groundwater also contained low levels of cis-
1,2-dichloroethene (40 ,ug/L). The following
compounds were also spiked into the influent
stream at approximately 500 /^g/L:
1,2-dichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, chloroform, and BTEX.
The highest VOC removal efficiencies were
observed for TCE (99.5 percent), PCE
(99.0 percent), and dichloroethene (greater than
99 percent). Removal efficiencies for chlorinated
spiking compounds ranged from 68 to
98 percent, and removal efficiencies for BTEX
ranged from 88 to 99.5 percent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Franklin Alvarez
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7631
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Cooper
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc.
9562 Doral Boulevard
Miami, PL 33178
305-593-5330
Fax: 305-593-0071
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 87
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
HORSEHEAD RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.
(Flame Reactor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc.
(EBRD), flame reactor system is a patented,
hydrocarbon-fueled, flash-smelting system that
treats residues and wastes contaminated with
metals (see figure below). The reactor processes
wastes with hot (greater than 2,000 °C) reducing
gases produced by combusting solid or gaseous
hydrocarbon fuels hi oxygen-enriched air.
In a compact, low-capital cost, water-cooled
reactor, the feed materials react rapidly, allowing
a high waste throughput. The end products are
glass-like slag; a potentially recyclable, heavy
metal-enriched oxide; and in some cases, a metal
alloy. The glass-like slag is not toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP)
leachable. The volatile metals are fumed and
captured in a baghouse; nonvolatile metals
partition to the slag or may be separated as a
molten alloy. Organic compounds should be
destroyed at the elevated temperature of the
flame reactor technology. Volume reduction (of
waste to slag plus oxide) depends on the chemical
and physical properties of the waste.
In general, the system requires that wastes be dry
enough (less than 5 percent total moisture) to be
pneumatically fed and fine enough (less than 200
mesh) to react rapidly. HRD claims larger
particles (up to 20 mesh) can be processed;
however, the efficiency of metals recovery is
decreased. The prototype system has a capacity
of 1 to 3 tons per hour. According to HRD,
individual units can be scaled to a capacity of 7
tons per hour.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The flame reactor system can be applied to
granular solids, soil, flue dusts, slags, and
sludges that contain heavy rnetals. HRD claims
that the flame reactor technology has successfully
treated the following wastes: (1) electric arc
furnace dust, (2) lead blast furnace slag, (3) soil,
Natural Gas
Oxygen + Air
FLAME
REACTOR
Solid-Waste Feed
Air
\ /
Off-Gas
SLAG
SEPARATOR
BAGHOUSE
Effluent Slag
Oxide Product
HRD Flame Reactor Process Flow
Page 88
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
(4) iron residues, (5) primary copper flue dust,
(6) lead smelter nickel matte, (7) zinc plant leach
residues and purification residues, (8) brass mill
dusts and fumes, and (9) electroplating sludges.
The system has treated wastes with the following
metal species and concentrations: zinc (up to
40 percent); lead (up to 10 percent); chromium
(up to 4 percent); cadmium (up to 3 percent);
arsenic (up to 1 percent); copper (up to
8 percent); cobalt; and nickel. According to
HRD, the system can also treat soils that are
contaminated with a variety of toxic organics.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1990. Currently, the
prototype flame reactor system operates as a
stationary unit at HRD's facility hi Monaca,
Pennsylvania. EPA and HRD believe that a
mobile system could be designed and constructed
for on-site treatment of hazardous waste.
The SITE demonstration was conducted in March
1991 using secondary lead smelter soda slag from
the National Smelting and Refining Company
(NSR) Superfund site in Atlanta, Georgia. The
demonstration was conducted at the Monaca,
Pennsylvania facility under a Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act research,
development, and demonstration permit. This
permit allows treatment of wastes containing high
concentrations of metals, but only negligible
concentrations of organics.
The major objectives of the SITE technology
demonstration were to investigate the reuse
potential of the recovered metal oxides, evaluate
the levels of contaminants in the residual slag and
their leaching potential, and determine the
efficiency and economics of processing.
A 30,000-standard-tons-per-year commercial
flame reactor system processes steel mill
baghouse dust (K061) at the North Star Steel
Mini Mill near Beaumont, Texas. The plant was
activated June 1, 1993 and is reported to be
performing as designed.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Approximately 72 tons of NSR waste material
were processed during the demonstration. Partial
test results are shown in the table below.
Metal Concentration Ranges in Influent and Effluent
Waste Effluent Oxide
Feed Slag Product
(mg/kg)'
(mg/kg)
* (mg/kg)
Arsenic
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Zinc
428-1,040
356-512
1,460-2,590
95,600-130,000
48,200-61,700
3,210-6,810
92.1-1,340
<2.3-13.5
2,730-3,890
167,000-228,000
1,560-11,400
709-1,680
1,010-1,170
1,080-1,380
1,380-1,780
29,100-35,600
159,000-184,000
10,000-16,200
milligrams per kilogram
All effluent slag passed toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure criteria. The oxide was
recycled to recover lead. The Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-91/005) and the
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-91/005) are available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7692
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Regis Zagrocki
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc.
Field Station - East Plant
Delaware Avenue
Palmerton, PA 18071
610-826-8818
Fax: 610-828-8872
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 89
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
HRUBETZ ENVmOINMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
(HRUBOUT® Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The HRUBOUT® process is a thermal, in situ
and ex situ treatment process designed to remove
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC) from
contaminated soils. The in situ process is shown
in the figure below. Heated air is injected into
the soil below the contamination zone,
evaporating soil moisture and removing volatile
and semivolatile hydrocarbons. As the water
evaporates, soil porosity and permeability
increase, further facilitating the air flow at higher
temperatures. As the soil temperature increases
further, the less volatile constituents volatilize or
are thermally oxidized.
Injection wells are drilled in a predetermined
distribution pattern to depths below the
contamination zone. The wells are equipped with
steel casing, perforated at the bottom, and
cemented into the hole above the perforations.
Heated, compressed air is introduced at
temperatures of up to 1,200 °F, and the pressure
is slowly increased. As the air progresses
upward through the soil, the moisture is
evaporated, removing the VOCs and SVOCs. A
surface collection system captures the exhaust
gases under negative pressure. These gases are
transferred to a thermal oxidizer, where the
hydrocarbons are thermally destroyed in an
incinerator at a temperature of 1,500 °F.
The air is heated hi an adiabatic burner at
2.9 million British thermal units per hour
(MMBtu/hr). The incinerator has a rating of
3.1 MMBtu/hr. The air blower can deliver up to
8,500 pounds per hour. The units employ a fully
modulating fuel train that is fueled by natural gas
or propane. All equipment is mounted on
custom-designed mobile units and can operate 24
hours per day.
TO ATMOSPHERE
HOT COMPRESSED AIR BURNER/BLOWER
(250 °-1200°F)
INCINERATOR
VENT GAS
COLLECTION
CHANNELS""^
^
1
\ A A U A A
\
\
\
\
\
'-^
^
\
— ~^^.
,
r
v^^V
/ V II 1\ COLLECTION
N
1
A A [_) A A
\ -1
\
1^
\ CONTAMINAT
\
r i
A A LJ A A /
1 /
=D ZONE /
_____/. —
/
fx ^
/ POINT
A A | | A A/ psig=u
^T >
~^ /
/ ' VADOSE
/ / ZONE
/'
X-----*
HOT AIR INJECTION WELLS
T=250°-1200°F
psig=5-22
HRUBOUT® Process
Page 90
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The HRUBOUT® process can remediate soils
contaminated with halogenated or nonhalogenated
organic volatiles and semivolatiles, such as
gasoline, diesel oil, jet fuel, heating oil, chemical
solvents or other hydrocarbon compounds.
STATUS:
The HRUBOUT® process was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in July 1992. The
technology was demonstrated at Kelly Air Force
Base in San Antonio, Texas from January
through February 1993. A 30-by-40-foot area of
an 80,000-gallon JP-4 jet fuel spill site was
chosen as the treatment area. Six heated air
injection wells, spaced on a 3-by-2 grid 10 feet
apart, were drilled to a depth of approximately
20 feet. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-93/524) is available from EPA.
In September 1993, an in situ project was
completed at the Canadian Forces military base
in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Levels up to 1,900
parts per million (ppm) of total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH) were encountered over a
17-by-17-foot area on the base. Five injection
wells were drilled to a depth of 30 feet. After 12
days of treatment, borehole samples ranged from
nondetect to 215 ppm TPH, meeting closure
requirements of 450 ppm TPH.
The containerized version of the HRUBOUT®
process was tested in July 1993 at a west Texas
site contaminated with Varsol, or naphtha. The
soil was excavated for treatment in Hrubetz's
insulated container. Analysis of untreated soil
revealed TPH at 1,550 ppm. Three loads were
treated for about 60 to 65 hours each.
Posttreatment samples ranged from nondetect to
7 ppm TPH, meeting the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission's background target
level of 37 ppm. Large-scale mobile container
units, holding up to 40 cubic yards and capable
of ex situ treatment of a load hi 8 hours, are
under development.
The ex situ version of the technology was
selected to remediate a site hi Toronto, Ontario,
Canada, which consisted of about 1,500 cubic
yards (yd3) of soil contaminated with gasoline
and diesel. Soil contamination was measured at
200 ppm TPH. Following treatment, seven soil
samples were collected. Two samples had
detectable concentrations of TPH (25 and 37
ppm) and the remaining five samples had
nondetectable levels of TPH, achieving the 100
ppm TPH cleanup goal.
About 100 yd3 of toluene-contaminated soil was
remediated in Orlando, Florida using the soil pile
process with a smaller 5-ton unit. A composite
analysis of the excavated soil found toluene at
concentrations of up to 1,470 parts per billion;
nondetect levels were required for closure. A
composite soil sample collected after 96 hours of
operation met the closure criteria.
Four patents have been granted, and additional
patents are pending. The process was approved
by the Texas Natural Resources Conservation
Commission hi 1991.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Gordon Evans
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7684
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Michael Hrubetz or Barbara Hrubetz
Hrubetz Environmental Services, Inc.
5949 Sherry Lane, Suite 525
Dallas, TX 75225
214-363-7833
Fax: 214-691-8545
E-Mail: psww68c@prodigy.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 91
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
HUGHES ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, INC.
(Steam Enhanced Recovery Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Steam Enhanced Recovery Process (SEEP)
removes most volatile organic compounds (VOC)
and semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC)
from perched groundwater and contaminated
soils both above and below the water table (see
figure below). The technology is applicable to
the in situ remediation of contaminated soils
below ground surface and below or around
permanent structures. The process accelerates
contaminant removal rates and can be effective in
all soil types.
Steam is forced through the soil by injection
wells to thermally enhance the recovery of VOCs
and SVOCs. Extraction wells are used for two
purposes: to pump and treat groundwater, and to
transport steam and vaporized contaminants to
the surface. Recovered nonaqueous liquids are
separated by gravity separation. Hydrocarbons
are collected for recycling, and water is treated
before being discharged to a storm drain or
sewer. Vapors can be condensed and treated by
any of several vapor treatment techniques (for
example, thermal oxidation and catalytic
oxidation). The technology uses readily available
components such as extraction and monitoring
wells, manifold piping, vapor and liquid
separators, vacuum pumps, and gas emission
control equipment.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SERF can extract VOCs and SVOCs from
contaminated soils and perched groundwater.
Compounds suitable for treatment are petroleum
hydrocarbons such as gasoline and diesel and jet
fuel; solvents such as trichloroethene,
trichloroethane, and dichlorobenzene; or a
mixture of these compounds. After application
of the process, subsurface conditions are
excellent for biodegradation of residual
contaminants. The process cannot be applied to
HYDROCARBON
LIQUID
LIQUIDS
(HYDROCARBONS/
WATER)
Steam Enhanced Recovery Process
Page 92
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
contaminated soil very near the ground surface
unless a cap exists.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1991. The
demonstration of the technology began in August
1991 and was completed in September 1993.
The demonstration took place in Huntington
Beach, California at a site contaminated by a
large diesel fuel spill. The Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/510), Technology
Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/510a), and Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/510) are available from EPA.
For more information regarding this technology,
see the profiles for Berkeley Environmental
Restoration Center (completed projects) or Praxis
Environmental Technologies, Inc., in the
Demonstration Program section (ongoing
profiles).
This technology is no longer available through a
vendor. For further information on the
technology, contact the EPA Project Manager.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Evaluation of the posttreatment data suggests the
following conclusions:
• The geostatistical weighted average for
total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH)
concentrations in the treated soils was
2,290 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
The 90 percent confidence interval for
this average concentration is 996 mg/kg
to 3,570 mg/kg, indicating a high
probability that the technology did not
meet the cleanup criterion. Seven
percent of soil samples had TPH
concentrations hi excess of 10,000
mg/kg.
• The geostatistical weighted average for
total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbon
(TRPH) concentrations was
1,680 mg/kg, with a 90 percent
confidence interval of 676 mg/kg to
2,680 mg/kg. Levels of benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes
(BTEX) were below the detection limit
(6 micrograms per kilogram) hi treated
soil samples; BTEX was detected at low
mg/kg levels in a few pretreatment soil
samples.
• Analysis of triplicate treated soil samples
showed marked variability in soil
contaminant concentration over short
distances. Analogous results for TPH
and TRPH triplicate samples suggest that
the contaminant concentration variability
exists within the site soil matrix and is
not the result of analytical techniques.
This variability is the reason that
confidence intervals for the average
concentrations are so large.
• The data suggest that lateral or
downward migration of contaminants did
not occur during treatment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercm.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 93
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
IIT RESEARCH INSTITUTE/
BROWN AND ROOT ENVIRONMENTAL
(Radio Frequency Heating)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Radio frequency heating (RFH) is an in situ
process that uses electromagnetic energy to heat
soil and enhance soil vapor extraction (SVE).
Developed by IIT Research Institute, the patented
RFH technique heats a discrete volume of soil
using rows of vertical electrodes embedded in soil
(or other media). Heated soil volumes are bounded
by two rows of ground electrodes with energy
applied to a third row midway between the ground
rows. The three rows act as a buried triplate
capacitor. When energy is applied to the electrode
array, heating begins at the top center and
proceeds vertically downward and laterally
outward through the soil volume. The technique
can heat soils to over 300 °C.
RFH enhances SVE in two ways: (1) contaminant
vapor pressures are increased by heating, and (2)
the soil permeability is increased by drying.
Extracted vapor can then be treated by a variety of
existing technologies, such as granular activated
carbon or incineration.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
RFH can treat petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile
organic compounds (VOC), semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOC), and pesticides in soils. The
technology is most efficient in subsurface areas
with low groundwater recharge. In theory, the
technology should be applicable to any polar
compound in any nonmetallic media.
STATUS:
The RFH technique was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1992. The
technique was demonstrated in August 1993 at
Adjusted in the
Field to Match
Contaminated Aluminum
RF Shield
Exciter Electrode
Row
Vapor from
Surface
Expanded Metal
RF Shield
8'
Vapor from
"Ground Row
Electrodes
Vapor Barrier and
RF Shield on Surface
Shielding Electrode
Rows
In Situ Radio Frequency Heating System
Page 94
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Kelly Air Force Base (AFB), Texas, as part of a
joint project with the U.S. Air Force. Brown and
Root Environmental was the prime contractor
evaluating and implementing RFH for the U.S. Air
Force. A field demonstration of the KAI
Technologies, Inc. (KAI), RFH technology was
completed in June 1994 at the same site for
comparison. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-94/527), Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-94/527a), and the Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-
94-527) are available from EPA. For
further information on the KAI technology,
see the profile in the Demonstration Program
section (completed projects).
In 1995, the RFH technique was tested at the
former chemical waste landfill at Sandia National
Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Approximately 800 cubic yards of silty soil was
heated. Preliminary results indicate that the
contaminant concentration in the extracted vapors
increased by a factor of 10 compared to in situ
venting.
Two previous field tests were completed using in
situ RFH. The first test was completed at a fire
training pit, located at the Volk Air National Guard
Base in Camp Douglas, Wisconsin. The sandy soil
in the pit was contaminated with jet fuel. The
second test was completed at Rocky Mountain
Arsenal in Colorado, where clayey soil was
contaminated by organochlorine pesticides.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Under the SITE demonstration, statistical analyses
for the design treatment zone indicate that total
recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons, pyrene, and
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate exhibited statistically
significant decreases (at the 95 and 97.5 percent
confidence levels). Chlorobenzene concentrations
appeared to increase during treatment, possibly due
to volatilization of chlorobenzene present in the
groundwater.
Significant concentrations of 2-hexanone,
4-methyl-2-pentanone, acetone, and methyl ethyl
ketone were found hi the treated soils, although
virtually no ketones were found before treatment.
Soil temperatures as high as 1,000 °C during the
demonstration may have caused partial oxidation of
petroleum hydrocarbons. Alternatively, the
ketones may have been volatilized from
groundwater. At this tune, insufficient data are
available to determine the source of ketones found
in treated soils.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Harsh Dev
JIT Research Institute
10 West 35th Street
Chicago, IL 60616-3799
312-567-4257
Fax: 312-567-4286
Captain Jeff Stinson
U.S. Air Force Armstrong Laboratory
Environmental Risk Management, AL/EQW-OL
139 Barnes Drive, Suite 2
Tyndall AFB, FL 32403-5323
904-283-6254
Fax: 904-283-6064
Clifton Blanchard
Brown and Root Environmental
800 Oak Ridge Turnpike
Jackson Plaza, A-600
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
423-483-9900
Fax: 423-483-2014
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 95
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
IONICS/RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMPANY
(B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Solvent extraction treats sludges, sediments, and
soils contaminated with a wide range of
hazardous contaminants including polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB), polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), pesticides, and herbicides.
The waste matrix is separated into three
fractions: oil, water, and solids. Organic
contaminants, such as PCBs, are concentrated in
the oil fraction, while metals are separated into
the solids fraction. The volume and toxicity of
the original waste is thereby reduced, and the
concentrated waste streams can be efficiently
treated for disposal.
The B.E.S.T. technology is a mobile solvent
extraction system that uses secondary or tertia.ry
amine solvents to separate organics from soils,
sediments, and sludges. The B.E.S.T. solvents
are hydrophobic above 20 °C and hydrophilic
below 20 °C. This property allows the process
to extract both aqueous and nonaqueous
compounds by changing the solvent temperature.
Pretreatment includes screening the waste to
remove particles larger than 1 inch in diameter,
which are treated separately.
The B.E.S.T. process begins by mixing and
agitating the solvent and waste in a mixer/settler.
Solids from the mixer/settler are then transferred
to the extractor/dryer vessel. (In most cases,
waste materials may be added directly to the
extractor/dryer and the mixer/settler is not
required.) Hydrocarbons and water in the waste
simultaneously solubilize with the solvent,
creating a homogeneous mixture. As the solvent
breaks the oil-water-solid emulsions in the waste,
the solids are released and settle by gravity. The
solvent mixture is decanted from the solids and
centrifuged to remove fine particles.
The solvent-oil-water mixture is then heated. As
the mixture's temperature increases, the water
separates from the organics and solvent. The
organics-solvent fraction is decanted and sent
to a solvent evaporator, where the solvent is
recycled. The organics are discharged for
PRIMARY SECONDARY
EXTRACTION/ I EXTRACTION/
DEWATERING ' SOLIDS
DRYING
pillar Caka
SOLVENT
STORAGE
SOLVENT
SEPARATION I
SOLVENT
RECOVERY
Spent Fines Centrate
Solvent Tank Tank
B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology
Page 96
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
recycling, disposal, or treatment. The water
passes to a steam stripping column where
residual solvent is recovered for recycling. The
water is typically discharged to a local
wastewater treatment plant.
The B.E.S.T. technology is modular, allowing
for on-site treatment. The process significantly
reduces the organic contamination concentration
in the solids. B.E.S.T. also concentrates the
contaminants into a smaller volume, allowing for
efficient final treatment and disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The B.E.S.T. technology can remove
hydrocarbon contaminants such as PCBs, PAHs,
pesticides, and herbicides from sediments,
sludges, or soils. System performance can be
influenced by the presence of detergents and
emulsifiers.
STATUS:
The B.E.S.T. technology was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program hi 1987. The
SITE demonstration was completed hi July 1992
at the Grand Calumet River site in Gary, Indiana.
The following reports are available from EPA:
• Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-92/079)
• Technology Evaluation Report - Volume I
(EPA/540/R-92/079a)
• Technology Evaluation Report - Volume n,
Part 1 (EPA/540/R-92/079b)
• Technology Evaluation Report - Volume n,
Part 2 (EPA/540/R-92/079c)
• Technology Evaluation Report - Volume n,
Part 3 (EPA/540/R-92/079d)
• Technology Demonstration Summary
(EPA/540/SR-92/079)
The first full-scale B.E.S.T. unit was used at the
General Refining Superfund site hi Garden City,
Georgia. A 75-ton-per-day B.E.S.T. unit is
being installed at Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory to extract organic contaminants from
mixed wastes.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration showed that the
B.E.S.T. process removed greater than 99
percent of the PCBs found hi river sediments
without using mechanical dewatering equipment.
Treated solids contained less than 2 milligrams
per kilogram PCBs. Comparable removal
efficiencies were noted for PAHs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Mark Meckes
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7348
Fax: 513-569-7328
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Heins
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company
3006 Northup Way, Suite 200
Bellevue, WA 98004
206-828-2400
Fax: 206-828-0526
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 97
-------
Technology Profile
%
1
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM |
KAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC./ -
BROWN AND ROOT ENVIRbNMENTAL |
(Radio Frequency Heating)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
•
most efficient in subsurface areas with low •
groundwater recharge. In theory, the technology •
Radio frequency heating (RFH) is an in situ
process that uses electromagnetic energy to heat
soil and enhance soil vapor extraction (SVE). The
patented RFH technique, developed by KAI
Technologies, Inc. (KAI), uses an antenna-like
applicator inserted in a single borehole to heat a
volume of soil. Large volumes of soil can be
treated by RFH employing a control system and an
array of applicators. When energy is applied by
the applicator to the soil, heating begins near the
borehole and proceeds radially outward. This
technique can achieve a soil temperature in excess
of250°C.
RFH enhances SVE in two ways: (1) contaminant
vapor pressures are increased by heating; and (2)
soil permeability is increased by drying. Extracted
vapor can then be treated by a variety of existing
technologies.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
should be applicable to any polar compound in any
nonmetallic medium. The flexible design permits •
easy access for in situ treatment of organics and |
pesticides under buildings or fuel storage tanks.
STATUS:
The KAI RFH technique was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in summer 1992. |
The technique
and July 1994
was demonstrated between January •
at Kelly Air Force Base, Texas as
part of a joint project with the U.S. Air Force •
Armstrong Laboratory. Brown and Root |
Environmental
was the prime contractor evaluating
and implementing RFH for the U.S. Air Force. A
field demonstration of the nT Research Institute •
RFH technology was completed in summer 1993 at •
the same site for comparison. The Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/528), Technology •
Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/528a), and Innovative |
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-94/528)
are available from EPA. For further information •
The RFH technique has been tested using pilot-
scale vertical and horizontal antenna orientations to
remove petroleum hydrocarbons and volatile and
semivolatile organics from soils. The technology is
w
TJ
| TD1&TD2Q
o
o
X
^
0 TD3 O
3
0
§ 1 5 • ( «P9
S" co "w ^^^^^••1 Switch {^^^^^^•i
1 1 ^ A1a •••••••• &^ •
o £ -jj E4 F3 ES
1 S N • •
§• F4 F5
E6 E7 E
OTDT&TDS
on the DT Research Institute technology, see the •
profile in the Demonstration Program section
(completed projects). —
1
^ = antenna •!
Q = pressure transducer ^1
^ = extraction welt
g= nftared temperature and
alactrlc field profiling walls ^m
• = thermowell ^1
x 3 thermocouple string ^H
1 - - • =* vapor collection lines
7C2 TD6 & TD3
n •
CD
" ox 0 0 !<
TC3 TD5&TD2 TD4 ~ * •
'a. •
1 §
a
* " "
1
KAI Antenna System
The SITE Program assesses but does not
Page 98 approve or endorse technologies.
|
1
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
For this demonstration, the original treatment
zone was 10 feet wide, 15 feet long, and 20 feet
deep. This treatment zone was based on RFH
operation at 13.56 megahertz (MHz); however,
RFH was applied at 27.12 MHz to the top 10 feet
of the original treatment zone to reduce the time
on site by half. Demonstration results were as
follows:
• Uniform heating within the revised
heating zone: significant regions had soil
temperatures in excess of 100 °C with
soil temperatures within a 3-foot radius
of the antenna exceeding 120 °C.
• Significant amounts of liquid were heated
to around 240 °C as strongly suggested
by a measurement of 233.9 °C on the
outside wall of the heating well liner.
• Soil permeability increased by a factor of
20 within the revised treatment zone.
• In the original treatment zone, the mean
removal for total recoverable petroleum
hydrocarbons (TRPH) was 30 percent at
the 90 percent confidence level.
Concentrations in the pretreatment
samples varied from less than 169 to
105,000 parts per million (ppm);
posttreatment concentrations varied from
less than 33 to 69,200 ppm.
• In the revised treatment zone, the mean
removal for TRPH was 49 percent at the
95 percent confidence level.
Concentrations hi the pretreatment
samples varied from less than 169 ppm
to 6,910 ppm; posttreatment
concentrations varied from less than 33
ppm to 4,510 ppm.
• Benzo(o)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene,
and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate exhibited
statistically significant removals within
the original treatment zone. Benzo(o)-
fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene,
pyrene, and fluoranthene exhibited
statistically significant removals within
the revised treatment zone.
• Contaminants may have migrated into
and out of the revised treatment zone due
to the design and operation of the SVE
system.
• Cleanup costs are estimated to range
from less than $100 per ton for large
scale to between $150 to $250 per ton
for small-scale (hot spot) treatments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Raymond Kasevich
KAI Technologies, Inc.
170 West Road, Suite 4
Portsmouth, NH 03801
603-431-2266
Fax: 603-431-4920
Captain Jeff Stinson
U.S. Air Force Armstrong Laboratory
Environmental Risk Management,
AL/EQW-OL
139 Barnes Drive, Suite 2
Tyndall AFB, PL 32403-5323
904-283-6254
Fax: 904-283-6286
Clifton Blanchard
Brown and Root Environmental
800 Oak Ridge Turnpike
Jackson Plaza, A-600
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
423-483-9900
Fax: 423-483-2014
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 99
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
MAGNUM WATER TECHNOLOGY
(CAV-OX® Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The CAV-OX® process uses a combination of
hydrodynamic cavitation and ultraviolet (UV)
radiation to oxidize contaminants in water. The
process (see figure below) is designed to remove
organic contaminants from wastewater and
groundwater without releasing volatile organic
compounds into the atmosphere.
The process generates free radicals to degrade
organic contaminants. The cavitation process
alone has been demonstrated to achieve
trichloroethene (TCE) reductions of up to
65 percent. UV excitation and, where necessary,
addition of hydrogen peroxide and metal
catalysts, provide synergism to achieve overall
reductions of over 99 percent. Neither the
cavitation chamber nor the UV lamp or hydrogen
peroxide reaction generates toxic by-products or
air emissions.
Magnum Water Technology (Magnum) estimates
the cost of using the CAV-OX® process to be
about half the cost of other advanced UV
oxidation systems and substantially less man
carbon adsorption. Because the process
equipment has one moving part, maintenance
costs are minimal. According to Magnum, the
CAV-OX® process does not exhibit the quartz
tube scaling common with other UV equipment.
GROUND WATER
HOLDING TANK
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process is designed to treat groundwater or
wastewater contaminated with organic
compounds. Contaminants such as halogenated
solvents; phenol; pentachlorophenol (PCP);
pesticides; polychlorinated biphenyls; explosives;
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes;
methyl tertiary butyl ether; other organic
compounds; and cyanide are suitable for this
treatment process. Bacteria and virus strains are
also eliminated.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1992 and was
demonstrated for 4 weeks hi March 1993 at
Edwards Air Force Base (AFB) Site 16 hi
California. The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/520), Technology Evaluation
Report (EPA/540/R-93/520), and a videotape are
available from EPA.
Magnum reports that improvements in UV lamp
and reactor technologies have improved the
efficiency of the CAV-OX® process three- to
five-fold, compared with the pilot-scale unit
tested at Edwards AFB under the SITE Program.
CAV-OX® I
L.E. UV REACTOR
CAV-OX® CAV-OX®
PUMP CHAMBER
The CAV-OX® Process
Page TOO
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
CAV-OX® recently (1996) has proven very
effective in potentiating ozone concentrations in
water reclamation applications. Ozone gas (O3)
is relatively insoluble in water. However,
hydrodynamic cavitation used in the CAV-OX®
process continuously develops micro bubbles
which enhances the dispersion of ozone in water.
Three O3 techniques are available to Magnum:
corona discharge with air feed, electrochemical
'water splitting' method, and electrochemical
anodic oxidation.
The CAV-OX® process has been tested at
several public and private sites. At a Superfund
site, the process treated leachate containing 15
different contaminants. PCP, one of the major
contaminants, was reduced by 96 percent in one
test series. The process has also been used to
remediate former gasoline station sites and
successfully reduced contaminants in process
streams at chemical and pharmaceutical plants.
The CAV-OX® unit is part of an ongoing
evaluation at the U.S. Army Aberdeen Proving
Ground. Features of the unit to be tested include
remote monitoring and control systems for pH;
flow; H2O2 flow rate, storage level, and pump
rate; UV lamp, main power, and CAV-OX®
pump function; and system shutdown control.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The CAV-OX® process achieved removal
efficiencies of greater than 99.9 percent for TCE,
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes.
SITE demonstration results for the CAV-OX®
process are shown in the table below. Results
are presented for both the CAV-OX® I (cavitation
chamber by itself) and CAV-OX® n (cavitation
chamber combined with ultraviolet radiation)
demonstrations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Eilers
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7809
Fax: 513-569-7111
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Dale Cox or Jack Simser
Magnum Water Technology
600 Lairport Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-322-4143 or 310-640-7000
Fax: 310-640-7005
Concen-
trations
ImalU'
33.1
23.4
4.9
48.3
6.0
4.9
5.9
5.9
6.1
0
0
Flow
loom)3
0.5
0.6
1.5
0.6
0.7
1.5
0.5
0.7
1.5
-
TCE
99.9
99.9
71.4
99.7
87.8
61.7
96.4
87.1
60.6
-
; hydrogen peroxide 2
CAV-OX® I
Removal Efficiencies (%)
Benzene Toluene Xvlene
>99.9 99.4
92.9 I
>99.9 >99.9 >99.9 |
88.6 , 87.4
65.6 |
>99.9 >99.9 >99.9 |
96.9 94.5
81.6 83.8
99.4 99.8
96.5 97.6
92.1 |
80.2 |
98.9 |
98.1 |
86.1 87.3 >99.9 ]
-
I
I
Flow TCE
(cmml 5-kW 10-kW
1.5
2.0
4.0
1.4
1.9
3.9
1.4
1.9
4.0
1.6
1.8
milligrams per liter 3 gallons per minute
CAV-OX®
99.6 99.2
99.7 99.7
87.7 98.1
99.8 99.7
98.4 99.3
85.1 97.1
99.6 99.4
97.8 99.2
86.3 98.9
94.1 99.2
80.6 97.6
4 kilowatts
CAV-OX® II
Removal Efficiencies (%)
Benzene Toluene
5-kW 1O-kW 5-kW 10-kW
99.4
99.5
89.7
99.8
98.8
89.5
99.6
99.4
93.5
49.1
38.5
98.8
99.6
98.7
99.8
99.3
97.8
99.6
99.5
99.5
68.1
60.5
>99.9
>99.9
88.8
>99.9
96.9
91.8
99.8
99.5
94.5
20.7
48.6
98.6
>99.9
97.1
>99.9
98.6
97.9
99.8
99.7
99.6
54.7
75.2
Xylene
5-kW 10-kW
>99.9 >99.9
>99.9 >99.9
78.7 87.2
98.7 >99.9
93.6 97.0
90.4 96.0
99.5 99.5
99.2 99.7
95.4 >99.9
43.3 46.7
56.9 83.8
Process Demonstration Results
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 101
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
MATRIX PHOTOCATALYTIC INC.
(Photocatalytic Water Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Matrix),
photocatalytic oxidation system, shown in die
photograph below, removes dissolved organic
contaminants from water and destroys them in a
continuous flow process at ambient temperatures.
When excited by light, the titanium dioxide
(TiO^ semiconductor catalyst generates hydroxyl
radicals that oxidatively break the carbon bonds
of hazardous organic compounds.
The Matrix system converts organics such as
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB); phenols;
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
(BTEX); and others to carbon dioxide, halides,
and water. Typically, efficient destruction
occurs between 30 seconds and 2 minutes actual
exposure time. Total organic carbon removal
takes longer, depending on the other organic
molecules and their molecular weights.
The Matrix system was initially designed to
destroy organic pollutants or to remove total
organic carbon in drinking water, groundwater,
and plant process water. The Matrix system also
destroys organic pollutants such as PCBs,
polychlorinated dibenzodioxins, polychlorinated
dibenzofurans, chlorinated alkenes, chlorinated
phenols, chlorinated benzenes, alcohols, ketones,
aldehydes, and amines. Inorganic pollutants such
as cyanide, sulphite, and nitrite ions can be
oxidized to cyanate ion, sulphate ion, and nitrate
ion, respectively.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Matrix system can treat a wide range of
concentrations of organic pollutants in industrial
wastewater and can be applied to the ultrapure
water industry and the drinking water industry.
The Matrix system can also remediate
groundwater.
10-Gallon-Per-Minute TiO2 Photocatalytic System Treating BTEX in Water
Page 102
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The system was accepted into the SITE Emerging
Technology Program (ETP) in May 1991.
Results from the ETP evaluation were published
in a journal article (EPA/540/F-94/503) available
from EPA. Based on results from the ETP,
Matrix was invited to participate in the
Demonstration Program.
During August and September 1995, the Matrix
system was demonstrated at the Department of
Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge,
Tennessee at the K-25 site. Reports detailing the
results from the demonstration will be available
in 1997.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the demonstration are detailed
below:
• In general, high percent removals (up to
99.9 percent) were observed for both
aromatic volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and unsaturated VOCs.
However, the percent removals for
saturated VOCs were low (between 40 and
21 percent).
• The percent removals for all VOCs
increased with increasing number of path
lengths and oxidant doses. At equivalent
contact times, changing the flow rate did
not appear to impact the treatment system
performance for all aromatic VOCs and
most unsaturated VOCs (except 1,1-
dichloroethene PCE]). Changing the flow
rate appeared to impact the system
performance for saturated VOCs.
• The effluent met the Solid Waste Disposal
Act maximum contaminant levels (MCL)
for benzene; cis-l,2-DCE; and 1,1-DCE at
a significant level of 0.05. However, the
effluent did not meet the MCLs for
tetrachloroethene (PCE); trichloroethane
(TCE); 1,1-dichloroethane (DCA); and
1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) at a significant
level of 0.05. The influent concentration
for toluene and total xylenes was below the
MCLs.
• In tests performed to evaluate the
effluent's acute toxicity to water fleas and
fathead minnows, more than 50 percent of
the organisms died. Treatment by the
Matrix system did not reduce the
groundwater toxicity for the test organisms
at a significant level of 0.05.
• In general, the percent removals were
reproducible for aromatic and unsaturated
VOCs when the Matrix system was
operated under identical conditions.
However, the percent removals were not
reproducible for saturated VOCs. The
Matrix system's performance was
generally reproducible in (1) meeting the
target effluent levels for benzene; cis-1,2-
DCE; and 1,1-DCE and (2) not meeting
the target effluent levels for PCE; TCE;
1,1-DCA; and 1,1,1-trichloroethane.
• Purgable organic compounds and total
organic halides results indicated that some
VOCs were mineralized in the Matrix
system. However, formulation of
aldehydes, haloacetic acids, and several
tentatively identified compounds indicated
that not all VOCs were completely
mineralized.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Eilers
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7809
Fax: 513-569-7111
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Bob Henderson
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc.
22 Pegler Street
London, Ontario, Canada
N5Z 2B5
519-660-8669
Fax: 519-660-8525
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 103
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
MAXYMILLIAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(formerly CLEAN BERKSfflRES, INC.)
(Thermal Desorption System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Maxymillian Technologies, Inc., Mobile
Thermal Desorption System (TDS) uses rotary
kiln technology to remove contaminants from
soils. The TDS can remediate soils contaminated
with volatile organic compounds (VOC),
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC), and
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). The
TDS is fully transportable, requires a footprint of
100-by-140 feet, and can be set up on site in 4 to
6 weeks. The system combines high throughput
with the ability to remediate mixed consistency
soil, including sands, silts, clays, and tars.
The TDS consists of the following components
(see figure below):
Waste feed system
Rotary kiln drum desorber
Cyclone
Afterburner
Quench tower
Baghouse
Fan and exhaust stack
• Multistage dust suppression system
• Process control room
Soil is first shredded, crushed, and screened to
achieve a uniform particle size of less than 0.75
hich. Feed soils are also mixed to achieve
uniform moisture content and heating value.
The thermal treatment process involves two
steps: contaminant volatilization followed by gas
treatment. During the volatilization step,
contaminated materials are exposed to
temperatures ranging from 600 to 1,000 °F hi a
co-current flow rotary kiln drum desorber;
contaminants volatilize to the gas phase. Clean
soils are then discharged through a multistage
dust suppression system for remoisturization and
are stockpiled for testing.
The gas and particulate stream passes from the
kiln to the cyclone, where coarse particles are
removed. The stream then enters the
afterburner, which destroys airborne
contaminants at temperatures ranging from 1,600
to 2,000 °F. The gas stream is cooled by
.. Atomizing A!r
"
1
don*
/
^
Afterburner
•• Make Up Water
Soil Food Rate
Kiln Entry Pressure
Kiln Gas Exit
Temporature
Soil Discharge
Tempiirature
AS Gas Exit
Tempisrature
Monitoring Points
8.
Quench Water Flow
Quench Exit
Temperature
Baghouse
Differential Pressure
9. ID Fan Differential
Pressure
10. Stack Gas Flow Rate
11. GEM (CO, CO,. O21
THC)
Mobile Thermal Desorption System
Page 104
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
quenching before passing through a high-
efficiency baghouse, where fine particles are
removed. The clean gas is then released to the
atmosphere through a 60-foot stack. Processed
soil, after discharge from the dust suppression
system, is stockpiled and allowed to cool prior to
sampling.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The TDS is designed to remove a wide variety of
contaminants from soil, including VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, coal tars, and cyanide.
STATUS:
The TDS was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1993. The
demonstration was conducted in November and
December 1993 at the Niagara Mohawk Power
Corporation Harbor Point site, a former gas plant
in Utica, New York. During the demonstration,
the TDS processed three replicate runs of four
separate waste streams. Stack emissions and
processed soil were measured to determine
achievement of cleanup levels. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/507)
and Technology Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/507a)
are available from EPA.
Following the SITE demonstration, the TDS was
chosen to remediate approximately 17,000 tons
of VOC-contaminated soil at the Fulton
Terminals Superfund site in Fulton, New York.
This project was completed in 1995. The system
has since been moved to a location in North
Adams, Massachusetts.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the SITE Demonstration are
summarized below:
• The TDS achieved destruction removal
efficiencies (DRE) of 99.99 percent or
better in all 12 runs using total xylenes
as a volatile principal organic hazardous
constituent (POHC).
• DREs of 99.99 percent or better were
achieved in 11 of 12 runs using
naphthalene as a semivolatile POHC.
• Average concentrations for critical
pollutants in treated soils were
0.066 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg)
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylene (BTEX); 12.4 mg/kg PAHs; and
5.4 mg/kg total cyanide.
• Comparison of the dry weight basis
concentration of pollutants in the feed
and treated soil showed the following
average removal efficiencies:
99.9 percent for BTEX; 98.6 percent for
PAHs; and 97.4 percent for total
cyanide.
• The TDS showed good operating
stability during the demonstration with
only a minor amount of downtime.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Neal Maxymillian
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc.
84 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
617-557-6077
Fax: 617-557-6088
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 105
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
MORRISON KNUDSEN CORPORATION/
SPETSTAMPONAZHGEOLOGIA ENTERPRISES
(Clay-Based Grouting Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Morrison Knudsen Corporation (MK) is working
under a joint venture agreement with
Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (STG) of
Ukraine to demonstrate the effectiveness of a
clay-based grouting technology. This technology
uses clay slurries as a base for grout solutions,
which are injected into bedrock fracture systems
to inhibit or eliminate groundwater flow in these
pathways. The clay slurries may also be used as
a base for slurry wall construction.
The MK/STG clay-based grouting technology is
an integrated method involving three primary
phases: obtaining detailed site characteristics;
developing a site-specific grout formulation; and
grout mixing and injection. The first phase, site
characterization, includes obtaining geophysical,
geochemical, mineralogical, and hydrogeological
information about the target area.
The second phase, a site-specific grout
formulation, is developed in the laboratory. The
overall properties of clay-based grout depend on
the physical and mechanical properties of the
clay, cement, and other additives. Formulated
clay-based grouts are viscoplastic systems
composed primarily of clay mineral mortar and
structure-forming cement. The clay is normally
a kaolin/illite obtained from a local source; other
additives may be required. The formulation is
laboratory-tested to determine suitability for the
desired application.
The third phase is grout mixing and placement.
The process for preparing and injecting the clay-
based grout is shown in the diagram below.
Boreholes drilled during the site characterization
phase may be used for grout placement.
Additional boreholes may be drilled to complete
the injection program. A quality assurance
program ensures that placement and project
DRY-PULVERIZED
CLAY SUPPLY
ADDITIVE(S)
SUPPLY
ADDITIVE(S)
BIN
CLAYSTORAC3E
& SLURRY
PREPARATION
WATER SUPPLY
SYSTEM
CEMENT STORAGE
& SLURRY
PREPARATION
. WATER
SUPPLY
CEMENT
'SUPPLY
MK/STG
CLAY-CEMENT
BASED GROUT
Process Flow Diagram of the Clay-Based Grouting Technology
Page 106
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
objectives are met. After injection, the clay-
based grout retains its plasticity and does not
crystallize, providing permanent underground
protection.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is suitable for providing a flow
barrier to groundwater contaminated with both
heavy metals and organics. The clay-based grout
can be formulated to withstand detrimental
conditions such as low pH. The technology can
be used at inactive mine sites that produce acid
mine drainage. Other potential applications
include liquid effluent control from landfills,
containment of groundwater contaminated with
chemicals or radionuclides, and reduction of
brine inflows.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in winter 1993. It was
partially installed hi fall 1994 at the abandoned
Mike Horse Mine site in Montana; operations
were suspended due to winter weather
conditions. The second phase, to complete
installation of the grout, was canceled due to
EPA budget constraints. The demonstration was
completed in 1996, but the technology was not
fully evaluated due to loss of accessibility to the
site.
Over 200 projects using this technology have
been completed during the last 20 years in the
former Soviet Union and Eastern block countries,
as well as in China and Australia. The
technology has not been applied in the United
States or western hemisphere other than at the
Mike Horse Mine site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Kathryn Levihn
Rick Raymond!
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/STG
P.O. Box 73
Boise, ID 83729
208-386-6115
Fax: 208-386-6669
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 1O7
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY
(Base-Catalyzed Decomposition Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The base-catalyzed decomposition (BCD) process
is a chemical dehalogenation technology developed
by the National Risk Management Research
Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. The process is
initiated in a medium-temperature thermal
desorber (MTTD) at temperatures ranging from
600 to 950 °F. Sodium bicarbonate is added to
contaminated soils, sediments, or sludge matrices
containing hazardous chlorinated organics
including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) and
polychlorinated dioxins and furans. Chlorinated
contaminants that are thermally desorbed from the
matrix are condensed and treated by the BCD
process. The BCD process chemically detoxifies
the condensed chlorinated organic contaminants by
removing chlorine from the contaminants and
replacing it with hydrogen.
ETG Environmental, Inc. (ETG), and Separation
and Recovery Systems, Inc. (SRS), developed the
THERM-O-DETOX® and SAREX® systems and
combined them with the BCD process chemistry.
The combined process begins by initiating solid-
phase dechlorination in the MTTD step (see figure
below). In addition to the dechlorination that
occurs in the MTTD, organics are thermally
desorbed from the matrix, and are condensed and
sent to the BCD liquid tank reactor (LTR).
Reagents are then added and heated to 600 to 650
°F for 3 to 6 hours to dechlorinate the
remaining organics. The treated residuals are
recycled or disposed of using standard,
commercially available methods. Treated, clean
soil can be recycled as on-site backfill.
ETG has continued to develop the THERM-O-
DETOX® system and now offers continuous
systems and batch vacuum systems. The batch
vacuum system offers greater operational
flexibility for removal and destruction of high
hazard,,high boiling point contaminants to ensure
that treatment standards are met. The vapor
recovery system can be set up to use noncontact
condensers or chillers and additional final polishing
steps to meet the most stringent air emission
standards.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The BCD process can treat soils, sediments, and
sludges contaminated with the following
chlorinated compounds: halogenated semivolatile
organic compounds (SVOC), including herbicides
and pesticides; PCBs; pentachlorophenol (PCP)
and other chlorinated phenols; and polychlorinated
dioxins and furans.
_Sp.tLPRETREAT}
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The combined BCD process was demonstrated
under the SITE Program at the Koppers
Company Superfund site in Morrisville, North
Carolina from August through September 1993.
The process removed PCP from clay soils to
levels below those specified hi the record of
decision. The process also removed dioxins and
furans from contaminated soil to 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins equivalent
concentrations less than the concentration
specified in the Record of Decision.
ETG is also currently operating the batch vacuum
system at a New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation cleanup site in
Binghamton, New York. Approximately 1500
cubic yards of soil contaminated with herbicides
pesticides, dioxins, and furans (F027 waste) are
being treated. The Michigan Department of
Natural Resources has also approved BCD for a
project involving treatment of about 200 cubic
yards of F027 soils. At another site, multiple
systems will treat soils contaminated with
chlorinated volatile organic compounds and high
boiling point (800-1150 °F) organic lubricants.
The batch vacuum system has also been used to
treat sludges at an operating refinery in Puerto
Rico and a chemical company in Texas.
For information on the SAREX® system, see the
profile for SRS in the Demonstration Program
section (ongoing projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration consisted of four test runs
in the MTTD and two test runs in the LTR. Feed
soil consisted of a dry, clayey silt and had a
residence time of 1 to 2 hours in the MTTD, which
was heated to 790 °F to 850° F. The MTTD off-
gases were treated by passing through an oil
scrubber, water scrubbers, and carbon filters. The
oil from the oil scrubber was transferred to the LTR
for BCD treatment. The oil in each LTR test run
was batch-processed for 3 to 4 hours at 600 to
630°F.
Key findings from the SITE demonstration are
summarized as follows:
• The MTTD achieved removal
efficiencies of 99.97 percent or better for
PCP and 99.56 percent or better for total
dioxins and total furans.
• The treated soils were well below
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
limits for SVOCs.
• Treated soil met the cleanup goals of
95 parts per million PCP in all test runs.
Treated soil also met a cleanup goal of 7
micrograms per kilogram 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin equivalents
hi all test runs.
• The LTR batch tests reduced PCP
concentrations by 96.89 percent or
better, and total dioxin and total furan
concentrations by 99.97 percent or
better.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Terrence Lyons
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7589
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
George Huffman
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive, MS-445
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7431
Fax: 513-569-7549
Yei-Shong Shieh or Steven Detwiler
ETG Environmental, Inc.
16 Hagerty Boulevard
West Chester, PA 19382-7594
610-431-9100
Fax: 610-431-9140
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 109
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NATIONAL BISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY
(Volume Reduction Unit)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The volume reduction unit (VRU) is a pilot-scale,
mobile soil washing system designed to remove
organic contaminants and metals from soil
through particle size separation and
solubilization. The VRU can process 100 pounds
of soil (dry weight) per hour.
The process subsystems consist of soil handling
and conveying, soil washing and coarse
screening, fine particle separation, flocculation-
clarification, water treatment, and utilities. The
VRU is controlled and monitored with
conventional industrial process instrumentation
and hardware.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The VRU can treat soils that contain organics
such as creosote, pentachlorophenol (PCP),
pesticides, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH), volatile organic compounds, and
semivolatile organic compounds. The VRU also
removes metals.
Dacon Trailer
m Boiler
Filter Package
Typical VRU Operational Setup
Page 110
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The VRU was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1992. The
demonstration was conducted in November 1992
at the former Escambia Treating Company in
Pensacola, Florida. The facility used PCP and
creosote PAHs to treat wood products from 1943
to 1982. The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/508) is available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration, the VRU operated at
a feed rate of approximately 100 pounds per hour
and a wash water-to-feed ratio of about six to
one. The following physical wash water
conditions were created by varying the
surfactant, pH, and temperature:
• Condition 1 - no surfactant, no pH
adjustment, no temperature adjustment
• Condition 2 - surfactant addition, no pH
adjustment, no temperature adjustment
• Condition 3 -' surfactant addition, pH
adjustment, and temperature adjustment
The table below summarizes the analytical data.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Richard Griffiths
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
Center Hill Facility
5595 Center Hill Road
Cincinnati, OH 45224
513-569-7832
Fax: 513-569-7879
Average PCP
Average PAH
1
removal 80
removal 79
Feed soil returned as washed soil 96
Mass balance
Mass balance
Mass balance
of total mass 104
ofPCPs 108
of PAHs 87
Condition {%)
1 3
93 97
84 96
96 81
113 98
60 24
60 17
Demonstration Data
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 111
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY
and INTECH 180 CORPORATION
(Fungal Treatment Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This biological treatment system uses lignin-
degrading fungi to treat excavated soils. These
fungi have been shown to biodegrade a wide
catalogue of organic contaminants.
The contaminated soil is inoculated with an
organic carrier infested with the selected fungal
strain. The fungi break down soil contaminants,
using enzymes normally produced for wood
degradation as well as other enzyme systems.
This technology has the greatest degree of
success when optimal growing conditions for the
fungi are used. These conditions include
moisture control (at 90 percent of field capacity),
and temperature and aeration control. Organic
nutrients such as peat may be added to soils
deficient in organic carbon.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This biological treatment system was initially
applied to soil contaminated with organic
chemicals found in the wood-preserving industry.
These contaminants are composed of chlorinated
organics and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH). The treatment system may remediate
different contaminants and combinations of
contaminants with varying degrees of success. In
particular, the SITE Demonstration Program
evaluated how well white rot fungi degrade
pentachlorophenol (PCP) in combination with
creosote PAHs.
STATUS:
This biological treatment system was accepted
into the SITE Demonstration Program in April
1991. In September 1991, a treatability study
was conducted at the Brookhaven Wood
Preserving site in Brookhaven, Mississippi. Site
soils were contaminated with 200 to 5,200
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) PCP and up to
4,000 mg/kg PAHs.
A full-scale demonstration of this fungal
treatment technology was completed in
November 1992 to obtain economic data. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/505) is
available from EPA.
The extent of treatment hi the full-scale
demonstration was disappointing for the time of
treatment. The full-scale demonstration was
hampered by excessive rainfall which did not
permit the treatment beds to be sufficiently tilled.
Without this processing, oxygen-depleted
conditions developed, leading to loss of fungal
biomass and activity. Soil bed applications of
this technology may not be suitable in climates of
high rainfall.
In Situ White Rot Fungal Treatment of Contaminated Soil
Page 112
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
Current costs of fungal treatment operation are
estimated at $150 to $200 per ton. Lower costs
may be achieved with new inoculum formulations
which permit reduction in the amount of
inoculum mass required for treatment.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The full-scale project involved a 0.25-acre plot of
contaminated soil and two smaller control plots.
The soil was inoculated with Phanaerochaete
sordida, a species of lignin-degrading fungus.
No other amendments were added to the
prepared soil. Field activities included tilling and
watering all plots. No nutrients were added.
The study was conducted for 20 weeks.
Some key findings from the demonstration were:
• Levels of PCP and the target PAHs
found in the underlying sand layer and
the leachate from each of the plots were
insignificant, indicating low teachability
and loss of these contaminants due to
periodic irrigation of the soil and heavy
rainfall.
• Levels of PCP, the target PAHs, and
dioxins in the active air samples collected
during the soil tilling events were
insignificant, indicating a very low
potential for airborne contaminant
transport.
• Air emissions data showed that soil
tilling activities did not pose significant
hazards to field technicians.
Contaminated soil, underlying sand, and
leachate had no significant
contamination.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
John Glaser
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7568
Fax: 513-569-7105
Richard Lamar
INTECH 180 Corporation
1770 N. Research Parkway, Suite 100
North Logan, UT 84341
801-753-2111
Fax: 801-753-8321
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 113
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY
and IT CORPORATION
(Debris Washing System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology was developed by EPA's
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
and IT Corporation (IT) for on-site
decontamination of metallic and masonry debris at
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act sites. The
entire system is mounted on three 48-foot flatbed
semi-trailers and can be readily transported from
site to site.
The full-scale debris washing system (DWS) is
shown in the figure below. The DWS consists of
dual 4,000-gallon spray-wash chambers that are
connected to a detergent solution holding tank
and rinse water holding tank. Debris is placed
into one of two 1,200-pound baskets, which in
turn is placed into one of the spray-wash
chambers using a 5-ton crane integral to the
DWS. If debris is large enough, the crane places
it directly into one of the two chambers. Process
water is heated to 160 °F using a diesel-fired,
2,000,000-British-thermal-unit-per-hour (Btu/hr)
water heater. The water is continuously
reconditioned using particulate filters, an oil-
water separator, and other devices such as
charcoal columns or ion-exchange columns.
About 8,000 to 10,000 gallons of water is
required for the decontamination process. The
system is controlled by an operator stationed hi a
trailer-mounted control room.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The DWS can be applied on site to various types
of debris (scrap metal, masonry, or other solid
debris such as stones) contaminated with
hazardous chemicals such as pesticides, dioxins,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), or hazardous
metals.
Contaminated
Debris
Pilot-Scale Debris Washing System
Page 114
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The first pilot-scale tests were performed in
September 1988 at the Carter Industrial
Superfund site in Detroit, Michigan. An
upgraded pilot-scale DWS was tested at a PCB-
contaminated Superfund site in Hopkinsville,
Kentucky hi December 1989. The DWS was
also field tested hi August 1990 at the Shaver's
Farm Superfund site in Walker County, Georgia.
The contaminants of concern were benzonitrile
and Dicamba. After being cut into sections, 55-
gallon drums were decontaminated hi the DWS.
Results from the SITE demonstration have been
published hi a Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/5-91/006a), entitled "Design and
Development of a Pilot-Scale Debris
Decontamination System" and hi a Technology
Demonstration Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/006).
In 1993, a manual version of the full-scale DWS
was used to treat PCB-contaminated scrap metal
at the Summit Scrap Yard hi Akron, Ohio.
During the 4-month site remediation, 3,000 tons
of PCB-contaminated scrap metal (motors, cast
iron blocks) was cleaned on site. The target level
of 7.7 jug/100 cm2 was met, hi most cases, after
a single treatment with the DWS. The cleaned
scrap was purchased by a scrap smelter for $52
per ton. The net costs for the on-site debris
decontamination ranged from $50 to $75 per ton.
The National Risk Management Research
Laboratory and IT estimate that the system can
decontaminate 50 to 120 tons of typical debris
per day.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
At the Carter Industrial Superfund site, PCB
reductions averaged 58 percent hi batch 1 and
81 percent hi batch 2. Design changes based on
these tests were made to the DWS before
additional field testing.
At the Hopkinsville, Kentucky site, PCB levels
on the surfaces of metallic transformer casings
were reduced to less than or equal to
10 micrograms PCB per 100 square centimeters
(jig/cm2). All 75 contaminated transformer
casings on site were decontaminated to EPA
cleanup criteria and sold to a scrap metal dealer.
At the Shaver's Farm Superfund site, benzonitrile
and Dicamba levels on the drum surfaces were
reduced from the average pretreatment
concentrations of 4,556 and 23 jug/100 cm2 to
average concentrations of 10 and 1 /^g/100 cm2,
respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Donald Sanning
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7875
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Michael Taylor or Majid Dosani
IT Corporation
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, OH 45246-4012
513-782-4700
Fax: 513-782-4807
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 115
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY,
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, and
(Hydraulic Fracturing)
INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Hydraulic fracturing is a physical process that
creates fractures in soils to enhance fluid or
vapor flow in the subsurface. The technology
places fractures at discrete depths with hydraulic
pressurization at the base of a borehole. These
fractures are placed at specific locations and
depths to increase the effectiveness of treatment
technologies such as soil vapor extraction, in situ
bioremediation, and pump-and-treat systems.
The technology is designed to enhance
remediation in less permeable geologic
formations.
The fracturing process begins by injecting water
into a sealed borehole until the water pressure
exceeds a critical value and a fracture is
nucleated (see photograph below). A slurry
composed of a coarse-grained sand, or other
granular material, and guar gum gel is then
injected as the fracture grows away from the
well. After pumping, the grains hold the fracture
open while an enzyme additive breaks down the
viscous fluid. The thinned fluid is pumped from
the fracture, forming a permeable subsurface
channel suitable for delivering or recovering a
vapor or liquid. These fractures function as
pathways for fluid movement, potentially
increasing the effective area available for
remediation.
The hydraulic fracturing process is used in
conjunction with soil vapor extraction technology
to enhance recovery of contaminated soil vapors.
Hydraulic fractures have recently been used to
improve recovery of light nonaqueous phase
liquids by increasing recovery of free product
and controlling the influence of underlying water.
Hydraulically induced fractures are used as
channels for fluids and nutrients during hi situ
bioremediation. The technology has the potential
to deliver nutrients and other materials to the
subsurface solids useful in bioremediation. Solid
nutrients or oxygen-releasing granules can be
injected into the fractures.
Hydraulic Fracturing Process (Well is at Center of Photograph)
Page 116
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Real-time techniques for measuring ground
surface deformation have been developed to
monitor the fracture positions in the subsurface.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Hydraulic fracturing is appropriate for enhancing
soil and groundwater remediation. The
technology can channel contaminants or wastes
for soil vapor extraction, bioremediation, or
pump-and-treat systems.
STATUS:
The hydraulic fracturing technology was accepted
into the SITE Demonstration Program in July
1991. Demonstrations have been conducted in
Oak Brook, Illinois and Dayton, Ohio. The
hydraulic fracturing process was integrated with
soil vapor extraction at the Illinois site and with
in situ bioremediation at the Ohio site. The
project was completed in September 1992. The
Technology Evaluation and Applications Analysis
Reports, which were published under one cover
(EPA/540/R-93/505), and the Technology
Demonstration Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/505)
are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The first demonstration was conducted at a Xerox
Corporation site in Oak Brook, Illinois, where a
vapor extraction system has been operating since
early 1991. The site is contaminated with
ethylbenzene, 1,1-dichloroethane, trichloro-
ethene, tetrachloroethene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
toluene, and xylene. In July 1991, hydraulic
fractures were created in two of the four wells, at
depths of 6, 10, and 15 feet below ground
surface. The vapor flow rate, soil vacuum, and
contaminant yields from the fractured and
unfractured wells were monitored regularly.
Results from this demonstration are as follows:
• Over a 1-year period, the vapor yield
from hydraulically fractured wells was
one order of magnitude greater than
from unfractured wells.
• The hydraulically fractured wells
enhanced remediation over an area 30
times greater than the unfractured wells.
• The presence of pore water decreased
the vapor yield from wells; therefore,
water must be prevented from infiltrating
areas where vapor extraction is
underway.
The technology was also demonstrated at a site
near Dayton, Ohio, which is contaminated with
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
(BTEX), and other petroleum hydrocarbons. In
August 1991, hydraulic fractures were created hi
one of two wells at 4, 6, 8, and 10 feet below
ground surface. Sampling was conducted before
the demonstration and twice during the
demonstration at locations 5, 10, and 15 feet
north of the fractured and unfractured wells.
Results from this demonstration are as follows:
• The flow of water into the fractured well
was two orders of magnitude greater
than in the unfractured well.
• The bioremediation rate near the
fractured well was 75 percent higher for
BTEX and 77 percent higher for total
petroleum hydrocarbons compared to the
rates near the unfractured well.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michael Roulier
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7796
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Slack
FRXInc.
P.O. Box 37945
Cincinnati, OH 45222
513-469-6040
Fax: 513-469-9747
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 117
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION/ENSR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING
and LARSEN ENGINEERS
(Ex Situ Biovault)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Ex Situ Biovault, developed by ENSR
Consulting and Engineering (ENSR) and Larsen
Engineers (Larsen), is a specially designed,
aboveground soil pile designed to treat soils
contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and semivolatile organic compounds
(SVOC). The biovault is enclosed by a double
liner system; the bottom half of the liner contains
a leak detection system. The bottom half of the
liner is supported by soil berms which serve as
side walls.
To construct a biopile, a layer of gravel
containing an air distribution system is placed on
the bottom liner. The soil to be treated is then
placed over the gravel. After placing the soil, a
layer of sand containing a second air distribution
system is placed on top of the soil. Soaker hoses
are also placed on top of the pile. Finally, the
top liner is placed on the pile and sealed at all
seams. The air distribution systems are designed
to control gas flows throughout the pile while the
soaker hoses add water and nutrients. A sump is
located in the lowest corner of the biovault with
a pump that removes the liquids that drain
through the soil pile. This liquid is amended
Water Piping
(Top)
30'-0'
Schematic of the Ex Situ Biovault System
with nutrients as needed and recirculated through
the soaker hoses. Together, the sump and soaker
hoses form the liquid management system
(LMS).
One of the control parameters for biovault
operation is the rate of air supply. For the SITE
demonstration, two identical vaults were
constructed. One vault was operated with a
continuous supply of air throughout the course of
treatment. In the other vault, air was supplied
intermittently; as a result, this biovault operated
under aerobic and anaerobic conditions.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ex situ biovault is intended to treat soil
contaminated with chlorinated and nonchlorinated
VOCs, as well as SVOCs. Soil contaminated
with VOCs was treated during the demonstration.
STATUS:
ENSR's and Larsen's ex situ biovault was
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program
in June 1994. The pilot-scale, multivendor
treatability demonstration (MVTD) was jointly
sponsored by the New York State Department of
LMS
Nutrient Addition-
Contaminated
Soil
Gravel
Cross Section of the
Ex Situ Biovault System
Page 118
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), the
New York State Center for Hazardous Waste
Management, and the SITE Program. The
objectives of the MVTD were to (1) generate
field data for biological processes, and (2)
evaluate the performance of each biological
process in meeting NYSDEC cleanup goals.
The demonstration was conducted from July to
December 1994 at the Sweden 3-Chapman site in
Sweden, New York and coincided with ongoing
remediation at the site. The soil at the site was
contaminated with elevated levels of acetone,
trichloroethene, tetrachloroethene, cis-1,2-
dichloroethene, 2-butanone, 4-methyl-2-
pentanone, and toluene..
In addition to the ENSR and Larsen process, the
following systems were also demonstrated:
• SBP Technologies, Inc., Vacuum-
Vaporized Well System
• R.E. Wright Environmental, Inc., In Situ
Bioventing Treatment System
For information on these technologies, refer to
the NYSDEC profiles in the Demonstration
Program section (completed projects).
The Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/524)
is available from EPA. The Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report, which provides
more detailed demonstration results, will be
available hi 1997.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The primary objective of the SITE demonstration
was to determine the effectiveness of the
biovaults hi reducing the concentrations of six
target VOCs. The results of the ex situ biovault
technology demonstration were as follows:
• Soil concentrations of six target VOCs
were significantly reduced over the 5-
month demonstration period, but the
treatment did not meet NYSDEC
criteria.
• Analytical results and field measurements
indicated that both biovaults supported
biological processes.
• The aerobic and" aerobic/anaerobic
biovaults performed similarly.
The biovault process is sensitive to ambient
temperatures, and cool temperatures during the
operating period may have negatively impacted
microbial activity. The developers suggest
initiating biovault operation hi the spring and
discontinuing operation when weather conditions
become too cold to sustain microbial activity.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Carolyn Acheson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7190
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Nick Kolak
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Room 268
Albany, NY 12233-7010
518-457-3372
Fax: 518-457-7743
David Ramsden
ENSR Consulting and Engineering
3000 Richmond Avenue
Houston, TX 77098
713-520-9900
Fax: 713-520-6802
N. Sathiyakumar
Larsen Engineers
700 West Metro Park
Rochester, NY 14623-2678
716-272-7310
Fax: 716-272-0159
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 119
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION/SBP TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Vacuum-Vaporized Well System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The SBP Technologies, Inc. (SBP), remediation
program uses an in situ Unterdruck-Verdampfer-
Brunnen (UVB) vertical groundwater circulation
well technology, which has been enhanced with
an in situ bioreactor to treat contaminated soil
and groundwater. This process consists of a
specially adapted groundwater circulation well,
reduced pressure stripping reactor, an in situ
bioreactor, and an aboveground vapor-phase
bioreactor.
The UVB technology was developed by IEG
mbH in Germany and is distributed in me U.S.
by EEG Technologies Corporation. SBP obtained
the exclusive rights to implement this technology
and enhanced it to create a more effective hi situ
bioremediation technology.
The microbiologically enhanced vertical
circulation well technology simultaneously treats
the vadose zone, capillary fringe, and saturated
zones. During the demonstration, a groundwater
convection (circulation) cell was created radially
within the aquifer around the 16-inch UVB well.
* •**.;*.•» *••*.- - xX1 •. i
lgp^:^l
Vacuum-Vaporized Well (UVB)
System Standard Circulation
The UVB well consisted of upper and lower
screens separated by a solid riser casing (see the
figure below). The lower screen was isolated
from the upper screen by a packer, creating two
separate screened zones. Contaminated
groundwater flowed into the lower screen of the
UVB well and was pumped to the upper section.
The water rose through the in situ fixed film
bioreactor, initially reducing the contaminant
load. Groundwater then flowed to the hi situ
aerator/stripping reactor, where fresh ambient air
was mixed with the contaminated groundwater.
The convection cell was developed by allowing
the treated groundwater to exit into the upper
aquifer. The untreated volatile organic
compounds (VOC) exiting the hi situ bioreactor
system were stripped before the groundwater
flowed out of the upper screen into the aquifer as
clean water. Oxygenated groundwater from the
shallow aquifer circulated to the deep aquifer
zone and through the fixed film bioreactor to
provide for aerobic degradation. This circulation
created an 80-foot-diameter remediation
circulation cell hi a glacial till geologic
formation.
In conjunction with the groundwater remediation,
the upper double-cased screen in the well allowed
for a one-way soil air flow from the vadose zone
to the UVB. This one-way soil venting, created
by the reduced pressure developed in the well by
the blower, remediated the contaminated
unsaturated and capillary fringe zones
simultaneously.
The off-gases from the in situ aerator/stripping
reactor passed through an ex situ gas phase
bioreactor for further biotreatment followed by
granular activated carbon treatment before being
vented. This bioreactor consisted of spirally
wound, microporous, polyvinyl chloride-silica
sheets that served as a biosupport for
Pseudomonas cepacia (strain 17616), a known
trichloroethene (TCE) degfader. VOCs in the
off-gases, such as toluene, benzene, xylene,
Page 120
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
TCE, and others were also biologically treated
through a cometabolic process in the gas phase
bioreactor.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology treats soil and groundwater
contaminated with chlorinated and nonchlorinated
VOCs.
STATUS:
The UVB system was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in June 1994. The pilot-
scale, multivendor treatability demonstration
(3VTVTD) was jointly sponsored by the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC), the New York State Center for
Hazardous Waste Management, and the SITE
Program. The objectives of the MVTD were to
(1) generate field data for three biological
processes, and (2) evaluate the performance of
each biological process in meeting NYSDEC
cleanup goals.
The demonstration took place at the Sweden
3-Chapman site in Sweden, New York. Field
work began in July 1994 and was completed in
fall 1995. Final reports from the demonstration
will be available in 1997.
The UVB demonstration coincided with the
remediation of the site. Soil at the site contained
elevated levels of TCE, acetone, tetrachloroethene,
dichloroethene, and toluene. The contaminants of
concern (COC) were monitored at 15 groundwater
monitoring wells, across the in situ bioreactor, the
vadose zone soils, and the ex situ bioreactor to
evaluate the system's performance. A dye tracer
test was conducted to determine the extent of the
groundwater circulation cell.
In addition to the SBP process, the following
technologies were also demonstrated:
• R.E. Wright Environmental, Inc., In Situ
Bioventing Treatment System
• ENSR Consulting and Engineering and
Larsen Engineers Ex Situ Biovault
For information on these technologies, refer to
the NYSDEC profiles in the Demonstration
Program section (completed projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration, an in situ vertical
groundwater circulation cell was established with
an effective radius of 40 feet. The UVB system
reduced the concentration of COCs in
groundwater. The in situ bioreactor provided
biotreatment of the COCs in the dissolved phase.
Also, removal of COCs from soils was
demonstrated. An ex situ bioreactor was
effective in treating off-gas vapors from the UVB
system prior to final polishing. Mass balance
calculations determined that at least 75 percent of
the target COCs in soil and groundwater, within
the UVB's radius of influence, were removed
during the demonstration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Nick Kolak
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Room 268
Albany, NY 12233-7010
518-457-3372
Fax: 518-457-7743
Richard Desrosiers
SBP Technologies, Inc.
106 Corporate Park Drive
White Plains, NY 10604
914-694-2280
Fax: 914-694-2286
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 121
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION/R.E. WRIGHT ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
(In Situ Bioventing Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The R.E. Wright Environmental, Inc. (REWEI),
process uses bioventing technology to induce
aerobic biological degradation of chlorinated
compounds. A series of extraction and injection
wells is used to amend the soil environment,
creating optimum growth conditions for the
indigenous bacteria. Anhydrous ammonia and
methane are injected into the subsurface to
stimulate the growth of methanotrophic
microorganisms. Methanotrophs have the
enzymatic capabilities to degrade chlorinated
solvents through a cometabolic process.
The treatment system consists of an injection and
extraction well field and a soil gas
extraction-amendment injection blower unit (see
photograph below). The blower unit is operated
in the vacuum mode long enough to adequately
aerate the subsoil and provide oxygen for the
aerobic bacteria. Injection wells are located
between the extraction wells and are manifolded
to the pressure port of the blower unit.
Anhydrous ammonia is periodically injected into
the subsoil to provide a source of nitrogen for the
aerobic bacteria. In addition, methane gas is
periodically injected to stimulate the growth of
methanotrophs. The positive displacement
blower unit is equipped with a moisture knockout
tank, an automatic water discharge pump, and a
control panel that allows remote operation of the
system. Air and water discharges are typically
treated with granular activated carbon prior to
final discharge.
Normal system monitoring consists of periodic
soil sampling and analysis and soil gas
monitoring. Soil samples are collected and
analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOC),
soil fertility parameters, and microbiological
parameters such as trichloroethene (TCE)
In Situ Bioventing Treatment System
Page 122
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
degraders and methanotrophs. In situ respiration
tests are conducted to determine the relative
activity of the bacteria in the soil.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology can treat both chlorinated and
nonchlorinated VOCs and semivolatile organic
compounds that are biodegradable. The REWEI
process was developed to treat volatile
chlorinated aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons
in the unsaturated soil zone.
STATUS:
The REWEI process was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in June 1994. The
REWEI process was part of a pilot-scale,
multivendor treatability demonstration (MVTD)
that was jointly sponsored by the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC), the New York State Center for
Hazardous Waste Management, and the SITE
Program. The objectives of the MVTD were to
(1) generate field data for three biological
processes, and (2) evaluate the performance of
each biological process in meeting NYSDEC
cleanup goals.
The demonstration took place from July to
December 1994 at the Sweden 3-Chapman site in
Sweden, New York and coincided with the
ongoing remediation of the site. Soil at the site
contained elevated levels of TCE, acetone,
tetrachloroethene, dichloroethene, and toluene.
The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-95/525) is available from
EPA. The Innovative Technology Evaluation
Report, which provides more detailed
demonstration results, will be available in 1997.
In addition to the REWEI process, the following
technologies were also demonstrated:
• SBP Technologies, Inc., Vacuum-
Vaporized Well system
• ENSR Consulting and Engineering and
Larsen Engineers Ex Situ Biovault
For information on these technologies, refer to
the NYSDEC profiles in the Demonstration
Program section (completed projects).
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration results indicated that the
REWEI process reduced contaminants in the soil.
The initial mass of TCE in the soil was reduced
by 92 percent with 80 percent removal attributed
to biodegradation and 12 percent removed by
vapor extraction. Results of the microbiological
analyses indicate that the number of total
heterotrophic, TCE-degrading, and methane-
degrading microorganisms increased during
treatment. The inorganic soil nitrogen content
increased due to the subsurface injection of
anhydrous ammonia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Greg Sayles
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
U.S. EPA
26 West Martin Luther Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7607
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Nick Kolak
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Room 268
Albany, NY 12233-7010
518-457-3372
Fax: 518-457-7743
. Richard Cronce
R.E. Wright Environmental, Inc.
3240 Schoolhouse Road
Middletown, PA 17057-3595
717-944-5501
Fax: 717-944-4044
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 123
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
NORTH AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.
(Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This hydrocarbon recovery technology is based
on an oleophilic, amine-coated ceramic chip that
separates suspended and dissolved hydrocarbons,
as well as most mechanical and some chemical
emulsions, from aqueous solutions. The
oleophilic chip is manufactured by grafting a
hydrophobic amine to a mineral support, in this
case a ceramic substrate. Each granule is 0.6 to
1 millimeter in diameter, but is very porous and
thus has a large surface area. The hydrophobic
property of the amine coating makes each
granule more effective for microfiltration of
hydrocarbons in an unstable emulsion.
The figure below illustrates the process; the
separator, filter, and coalescer unit is shown on
the next page. The pressure-sensitive filtering
bed is regenerated by automatic backflushing.
This automatic regeneration eliminates the
expense associated with regeneration of carbon
and similar filtration media. Recovered
hydrocarbons coalesce and can thus be removed
by simple gravity separation.
This technology provides cost-effective oil and
water separation, removes free and emulsified
hydrocarbon contaminants, and significantly
reduces hydrocarbon loading to air strippers and
carbon systems. The technology can achieve a
concentration of less than 7 parts per million oil
and grease in the treated effluent.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The amine-coated granules have proven effective
on a wide variety of hydrocarbons, including
gasoline; crude oil; diesel fuel; benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene and xylene mixtures; and
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. The unit
also removes hydrophobic chlorinated
hydrocarbons such as pentachlorophenol,
polychlorinated biphenyls, and trichloroethene,
as well as vegetable and animal oils.
Treatment systems incorporating this technology
have been designed for various applications,
including (1) contaminated groundwater pump-
and-treat systems; (2) in-process oil and water
separation; (3) filtration systems; (4) combined
/ X / \ /RackwaslX / \ / \ / \
Oleofilter
Pressurized
Feed
Pressurized
Clean Water
Out
arid Partial
Draw
Recycled
Upstream of
Primary
Separator
Backwash
Air In
Backwash
Water In
Heat When
Viscous
Hydrocarbons
Handled
Control
Cabinet
Schematic Diagram of the Oleofilter Technology
Page 124
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
oil and water separator-filter-coalescer systems
for on-site waste reduction and material
recovery; and (5) treatment of marine wastes
(bilge and ballast waters).
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in December 1992. The
SITE demonstration was completed in June 1994
at the Petroleum Products Corporation site in
Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The site is a former
oil recycling facility where groundwater has been
contaminated with a variety of organic and
inorganic constituents. The Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/525) and Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/525) are available from EPA.
The technology has been used for several full-
scale projects. Several separator-filter-coalescers
(see figure below) are in use treating industrial
process waters and oily wash waters.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
For the demonstration, five separate evaluation
periods (runs) were initiated. Each run used the
same feed oil, except run four. The oil for run
four was a 3:1 mixture of oil to kerosene. The
average total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbon
(TRPH) concentrations for the feed streams
ranged from 422 to 2,267 milligrams per liter
(mg/L). Preliminary data indicate that the system
removed at least 90 percent of the TRPH from
the emulsified oil and water feed stream.
For the runs where the system operated within
normal design parameters, TRPH concentrations
in the treated water effluent were reduced to
15 mg/L or less. The oleophilic granules
achieved a 95 percent reduction of TRPH
concentration for the runs with similar feed oil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Alan Bell
North American Technologies Group, Inc.
4710 Bellaire Boulevard, Suite 301
Bellaire, TX 77401
713-662-2699
Fax: 713-662-3728
Separator, Filter, and Coalescer
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 125
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NOVATERRA ASSOCIATES
(In Situ Soil Treatment [Steam and Air Stripping])
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology treats contaminated soils and
contained groundwater by the simultaneous in
situ injection of treatment agents below ground
during active mixing by augers or drilling blades
(see figure below). The in situ injection of steam
and air during mixing strips the volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and semivolatile organic
compounds (SVOC) from the soil and contained
groundwater. The removed organics are
captured at the surface and disposed of hi an
environmentally safe manner.
The technology is implemented by a drill unit
that can consist of a single or double blade or
auger mounted on a large crane or backhoe. The
diameter of the drill or auger can vary from 5 to
8 feet, and it is mounted on a kelly that reaches
depths of 60 feet.
The steam and air are carried down the center of
the kelly(s) and injected into the ground through
jets located on the blade or auger arms. The
steam is supplied by an oil- or natural gas-fired
boiler at 450 °F and 500 pounds per square inch
gauge (psig). The air heated by the compressor is
injected at 250 °F and 200 psig. The steam heats
the contaminants in the soil and contained water,
increasing the vapor pressure of the VOCs and
Air
Compressor
Containment
Device
Cutter
Blades'
I~T n n n
SVOCs and increasing their removal rates. The
direct application of the steam on the soil
thermally desorbs the VOCs and SVOCs,
increasing their removal percentage. Almost all
the VOCs and SVOCs of interest form azeotropes
with steam that boil below 212 °F and contain
low concentrations (such as a few percent) of
contaminants. These azeotropes significantly
increase contaminant removal rates, especially
for the higher-boiling-point SVOCs.
The VOC- and SVOC-laden air and steam vapor
stream removes the contamination to the surface
where it can be captured, if necessary, hi a metal
container. The container, which makes a tight
seal to the ground surface, is connected to a
process stream by piping. A suction blower
draws the waste stream to the process stream
where it is collected or destroyed. The blower
creates a slight vacuum in the container and
piping as well as a positive displacement inward
to the collection or destruction system, thus
protecting the outside environment from
contamination.
The simplest form of the process system uses a
catalytic oxidizer or thermal oxidizer to destroy
the contamination before exhausting to the
atmosphere. When treating chlorinated VOCs
and SVOCs, an acid scrubber can be added if
Steam
Generator
Bar
Atmosphere
Offgas Process
Treatment System
In Situ Soil Treatment Process Schematic
Page 126
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
required by the amount of material being
processed. Another simple process uses activated
carbon to recover the contamination. For the
carbon to work efficiently, a cooling system must
precede the carbon bed, so the process must also
treat contaminated water. If recovery and reuse
of the contamination is important or economically
desirable, a process system that condenses the
gas stream can be used.
The in situ soil treatment technology has also
treated contaminated soil by injecting and mixing
other agents. Chemical injection processes
include the stabilization and solidification of
heavy metals, neutralization of acids and bases,
and oxidation. The technology has been
successfully used to perform bioremediation.
The equipment is capable of injecting cement into
the soil and making slurry walls. The technology
has the unique feature of being able to inject two
materials simultaneously or sequentially.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can treat solid materials which
do not contain obstructions, including soils,
sludges, lagoons, and the liquids contained
within, such as water and dense and light
nonaqueous-phase liquids. The technology is
applicable to most VOCs and SVOCs, including
pesticides. It is particularly applicable to free
product and removal of highly concentrated
contamination. It is most effective for removals
of 95 to 99 percent of the contamination as a
result of the low temperature thermal desorption.
After treatment is completed, the soil can meet
construction engineering requirements by
compacting or injecting small amounts of cement.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1989. A SITE
demonstration was performed in September 1989
at the Annex Terminal, San Pedro, California.
Twelve soil blocks were treated for VOCs and
SVOCs. Liquid samples were collected during
the demonstration, and the operating procedures
were closely monitored and recorded. In January
1990, six blocks that had been previously treated
hi the saturated zone were analyzed by EPA
methods 8240 and 8270.
The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-90/008) was published hi June
1991. The technology remediated 30,000 cubic
yards at the Annex Terminal after completion of
the SITE demonstration and has been used at five
other contaminated sites.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE technology demonstration yielded the
following results:
• Removal efficiencies were greater than
85 percent for VOCs present in the soil.
• Removal efficiencies were greater than
55 percent for SVOCs present in the soil.
• Fugitive air emissions from the process
were low.
• No downward migration of contaminants
resulted from the soil treatment.
• The process treated 3 cubic yards of soil
per hour.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePerchi.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Phil La Mori
NOVATERRA Associates
2419 Outpost Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90068-2644
213-969-9788
Fax: 213-969-9782
E-mail: NOVATERRA@aol.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 727
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
OHM REMEDIATION SERVICES CORP.
(formerly CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.)
(X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The X*TRAX™ technology is a patented thermal
desorption process that removes organic
contaminants from soils, sludges, and other solid
media (see photograph below). X*TRAX™ is
not, however, an incinerator or a pyrolysis
system. Chemical oxidation and reactions are
discouraged by maintaining an inert environment
and low treatment temperatures. Combustion by-
products are not formed in X*TRAX™, as neither
a flame nor combustion gases are present in the
desorption chamber.
The organic contaminants are removed as a
condensed liquid, which is characterized by a
high heat rating. This liquid may then be
destroyed in a permitted incinerator or used as a
supplemental fuel. Low operating temperatures
of 400 to 1,200 °F and low gas flow rates
optimize treatment of contaminated media.
An externally fired rotary dryer volatilizes the
water and organic contaminants from the
contaminated media into an inert carrier gas
stream. The inert nitrogen carrier gas transports
the organic contaminants and water vapor out of
the dryer. The carrier gas flows through a duct
to the gas treatment system, where organic
vapors, water vapors, and dust particles are
removed and recovered. The gas first passes
through a high-energy scrubber, which removes
dust particles and 10 to 30 percent of the organic
contaminants. The gas then passes through two
condensers in series, where it is cooled to less
than 40 °F.
Most of the carrier gas is reheated and recycled
to the dryer. About 5 to 10 percent of the gas is
separated from the main stream, passed through
a particulate filter and a carbon adsorption
system, and then discharged to the atmosphere.
This discharge allows addition of make-up
nitrogen to the system to keep oxygen
concentrations below 4 percent (typically below
1 percent). The discharge also helps maintain a
small negative pressure within the system and
prevents potentially contaminated gases from
••"•"'j **»» *_it — t T=» * t T». .JRIK. iMB&irw:.* zap.
Full-Scale X*TRAX™ System
Page 128
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
leaking. The volume of gas released from this
process vent is approximately 700 times less than
from an equivalent capacity incinerator.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The X*TRAX™ process has been used to treat
solids contaminated with the following wastes:
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB); halogenated and
nonhalogenated solvents; semivolatile organic
compounds, including polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, pesticides, and herbicides; fuel
oils; benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene;
and mercury.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1989. The
demonstration was conducted in May 1992 at the
Re-Solve, Inc., Superfund site in Massachusetts.
After the demonstration, the full-scale X*TRAX™
system, Model 200, remediated 50,000 tons of
PCB-contaminated soil at the site. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/502),
which details results from the demonstration, is
available from EPA.
The full-scale system, Model 200, is presently
operating at the Sangamo-Weston Superfund site
in South Carolina. More than 45,000 tons of
PCB-contaminated soil, clay, and sludge have
been thermally treated at this site. Feed material
with PCB concentrations of more than 8,800
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) has been
successfully treated to produce (discharge) PCB
levels of less than 2 mg/kg. PCB removal
efficiency was demonstrated to be greater than
99.97 percent.
Laboratory-, pilot-, and full-scale X*TRAX™
systems are available. Two laboratory-scale,
continuous pilot systems are available for
treatability studies. More than 108 tests have
been completed since January 1988.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, X*TRAX™
removed PCBs from feed soil and met the site-
specific treatment standard of 25 mg/kg for
treated soils. PCB concentrations in all treated
soil samples were less than 1.0 mg/kg and were
reduced from an average of 247 mg/kg in feed
soil to an average of 0.13 mg/kg in treated soil.
The average PCB removal efficiency was 99.95
percent.
Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
polychlorinated dibenzofurans were not formed
within the X*TRAX™ system. Organic air
emissions from the X*TRAX™ process vent were
negligible (less than 1 gram per day). PCBs
were not detected in vent gases.
X*TRAX™ removed other organic contaminants
from feed soil. Concentrations of
tetrachloroethene, total recoverable petroleum
hydrocarbons, and oil and grease were reduced
to below detectable levels in treated soil. Metals
concentrations and soil physical properties were
not altered by the X*TRAX™ system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Chetan Trivedi
OHM Remediation Services Corp.
100 West 22nd Street, Suite 101
Lombard, IL 60148
630-261-3958
Fax: 630-261-3969
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 129
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
RADIAN INTERNATIONAL LLC
(formerly DOW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.)
(Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum Stripping)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The integrated AquaDetox/soil gas vapor
extraction/reinjection (SVE) system
simultaneously treats groundwater and soil
contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOC). The integrated system consists of (1) an
AquaDetox moderate vacuum stripping tower
that uses low-pressure steam to treat
contaminated groundwater, and (2) an SVE
process to treat contaminated soil. The two
processes form a closed-loop system that
simultaneously remediates contaminated
groundwater and soil in situ with virtually no air
emissions.
AquaDetox is a high-efficiency, countercurrent
stripping technology. A single-stage unit can
remove up to 99.99 percent of VOCs in water.
The SVE system uses a vacuum to treat VOC-
contaminated soil, inducing a flow of air through
the soil and removing vapor-phase VOCs with
the extracted soil gas. Carbon beds remove the
VOCs from the soil gas, which is then reinjected
into the ground. The AquaDetox and SVE
systems share a granulated activated carbon
(GAC) unit that decontaminates the combined
vapors from both systems (see photograph
below). By-products of the system are a free-
phase recyclable product and treated water. In
addition, mineral regenerable carbon will require
disposal after about 3 years.
A key element of the closed-loop system is the
vent header unit. This unit collects
noncondensable gases from the AquaDetox
system for treatment in the GAC units.
Conversely, the AquaDetox system condenses
and treats the steam used to regenerate the GAC
units.
Integrated AquaDetox/SVE System
Page 130
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes VOCs, including
chlorinated hydrocarbons, in groundwater and
soil. Sites with contaminated groundwater and
soils containing trichloroethene (TCE),
tetrachloroethene (PCE), and other VOCs are
suitable for this on-site treatment process.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1990. In September
1990, a SITE demonstration was conducted as
part of an ongoing remediation at the San
Fernando Valley Groundwater Basin Superfund
site in Burbank, California. The Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540/A5-91/002) and
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/002)
are available from EPA.
The AquaDetox/SVE system had been used for
over 3 years at the time of the SITE evaluation to
treat groundwater and soil gas at the Lockheed
Aeronautical Systems Company hi Burbank,
California. Contaminated groundwater was
treated at a rate of up to 1,200 gallons per minute
(gpm), while soil gas was removed and treated at
a rate of 300 cubic feet per minute. The system.
occupied about 4,000 square feet. It was
operational 95 percent of the time, with 5 percent
downtime for scheduled and nonscheduled
repairs.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the SITE demonstration, the AquaDetox/
SVE system achieved the following results:
• The technology treated groundwater and
soil gas contaminated with VOCs.
• Efficiencies ranged from 99.92 to 99.99
percent for removal of VOCs from
contaminated groundwater. VOC
removal efficiencies for soil gas ranged
from 98.0 to 99.9 percent when the GAC
beds were regenerated according to the
specified frequency (8-hour shifts).VOC
removal efficiencies dropped to as low as
93.4 percent when the GAC beds were
regenerated less frequently.
• The technology produced effluent
groundwater that complied with
regulatory discharge requirements for
TCE and PCE (5 micrograms per liter
for each compound).
• The GAC beds removed VOCs from
contaminated soil gas even after 24 hours
of continuous operation without steam
regeneration.
• The system's steam consumption
dropped with decreasing tower
pressures. During the demonstration, the
system was more efficient at lower
operating tower pressures.
• The 500-, 1,000-, and 3,000-gpm
systems are estimated to cost about $3.2,
$4.3, and $5.8 million, respectively.
The total annual operation and
maintenance costs are about $410,000,
$630,000 and $1,500,000 for the 500-,
1,000-, and 3,000-gpm systems,
respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Gordon Evans
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7684
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
David Bluestein
Radian International LLC
1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 500
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
510-988-1125
Fax: 510-932-7130
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 131
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Liquid and solids biological treatment (LST) is a
process that remediates soils and sludges
contaminated with biodegradable organics (see
figure below). The process is similar to activated
sludge treatment of municipal and industrial
wastewaters, but it treats suspended solids
concentrations greater than 20 percent. First, an
aqueous slurry of the waste material is prepared,
and environmental conditions such as nutrient
concentrations, temperature, and pH are
optimized for biodegradation. The slurry is men
mixed and aerated for a sufficient time to degrade
the target waste constituents.
Several physical process configurations are
possible, depending on site- and waste-specific
conditions. Waste can be treated continuously or
in batches in impoundment-based reactors. This
configuration is sometimes the only practical
option for projects greater than 10,000 cubic
yards. Alternatively, tank-based systems may be
constructed.
Constituent losses due to volatilization must be
controlled during LST operations. The potential
for emissions is greatest in batch treatment
systems and lowest in continuously stirred tank
reactor systems, particularly those with long
residence times. Technologies such as carbon
adsorption and biofiltration can control
emissions.
LST may require pre- and posttreatment
operations. However, in situ applications that
store treated sludge residues do not require
multiple unit operations.
Overall bioremediation in a hybrid system
consisting of LST and land treatment systems can
provide an alternative to landfilling treated solids.
This combination rapidly degrades volatile
constituents in a contained system, rendering the
waste suitable for landfilling.
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (ReTeC), has
constructed a mobile LST pilot system for field
demonstrations. The system consists of two
Contaminated
Soil
i
x
•>>
,. Lj
T
«={=>
Water
K
x"
Nutrients
Microbes
Cleaned
Soil
Dewatering
Return Soils
to Site
Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment
Page 132
The SITE F'rogram assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
reactors, two 2,000-gallon holding tanks, and
associated process equipment. The reactors are
aerated using coarse bubble diffusers and mixed
using axial flow turbine mixers. The reactors
can operate separately, or as batch or continuous
systems. Oxygen and pH are continuously
monitored and recorded. Additional features
include antifoaming and temperature control
systems.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology treats sludges, sediments, and
soils containing biodegradable organic materials.
To date, the process has mainly treated sludges
containing petroleum and wood preservative
organics such as creosote and pentachlorophenol
(PCP). LST has treated polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), PCP, and a broad range of
petroleum hydrocarbons in the laboratory and the
field.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1987. The
technology was demonstrated under SITE at the
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation facility at
Harbor Point in Utica, New York from June
through August 1995. The following equipment
was used for the demonstration: (1) a 10,000-
gallon cylindrical tank (12-foot diameter) with
bottom-mounted air diffusers that provided
aeration and assisted in suspending solids; (2) a
tank cover outfitted with exhaust piping that
contained and channeled air discharge; and (3) a
spray system that recircultated liquid from within
the tank to disperse foam buildup.
ReTeC has applied the technology hi the field
over a dozen times to treat wood preservative
sludges with impoundment-type LST systems. In
addition, LST has treated petroleum refinery
impoundment sludges hi two field-based pilot
demonstrations and several laboratory treatability
studies.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Analytical results from the SITE demonstration
showed a reduction in oil and grease
concentrations from 14,500 to 3,100 milligrams
per kilogram (mg/kg), or 79 percent; total PAH
concentrations were reduced from 137 to 51
mg/kg, or 63 percent; and total benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylene concentrations were
reduced from 0.083 to 0.030 mg/kg, or 64
percent. PAH leachability hi the solids was
reduced to nondetect levels after treatment.
Toxicity of the solids to earthworms was also
decreased by the treatment. Only 24 percent of
the earthworms survived when added to untreated
contaminated soil, while earthworms placed hi
treated soil showed no toxic effects.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Merv Cooper
Remediation Technologies, Inc.
1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207
Seattle, WA 98134
206-624-9349
Fax: 206-624-2839
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 133
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
RETECH, M4 ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT INC.
(Plasma Arc Vitrification)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Plasma arc vitrification occurs in a plasma arc
centrifugal treatment (PACT) system, where heat
from a transferred plasma arc torch creates a
molten bath that detoxifies the feed material (see
figure below). Solids are melted into the molten
bath while organics are evaporated and
destroyed. Metallic feed material can either form
a separate liquid phase underneath the metal
oxide slag layer or can be oxidized and become
part of the slag layer.
Waste material is fed into a sealed centrifuge,
where* a plasma torch heats solids to
approximately 3,200 °F and gas headspace to a
minimum of 1,800 °F. Organic material is
evaporated and destroyed. Off-gases travel
through a gas-slag separation chamber to a
secondary chamber, where the temperature is
maintained at over 2,000 °F for at least
2 seconds. The off-gases then flow through an
off-gas treatment system.
Inorganic material is reduced to a molten phase
that is uniformly heated and mixed by the
centrifuge and the plasma arc. Material can be
added in-process to control slag quality. When
the centrifuge slows, the molten material is
discharged as a homogeneous, nonleachable,
glassy slag into a mold or drum in the slag
collection chamber. When cooled, the resulting
product is a nonleachable, glassy residue which
meets toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) criteria.
The off-gas treatment system removes
particulates, acid gases, and volatilized metals.
Off-gas monitoring verifies that all applicable
environmental regulations are met. The design
of the off-gas treatment system depends on the
waste material.
The entire system is hermetically sealed and
operated below atmospheric pressure to prevent
leakage of process gases. Pressure relief valves
connected to a closed surge tank provide relief if
LOOJO Material
or Drum Feeder
Plasma Arc Centrifugal Treatment (PACT) System
Page 134
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
gas pressures in the system exceed safe levels.
Vented gas is held hi the tank, then recycled
through the PACT system.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology can process organic and
inorganic solid and liquid wastes. It is most
appropriate for mixed, transuranic, and chemical
plant wastes; soil containing both heavy metals
and organics; incinerator ash; and munitions,
sludge, and hospital waste.
Waste may be loose (shredded or flotation
process) or contained in 55-gallon drums. It can
be hi almost any physical form: liquid, sludge,
metal, rock, or sand. Volatile metals in the
waste, such as mercury, are recovered by the off-
gas treatment system.
STATUS:
The PACT-6 System, formerly PCF-6, was
demonstrated under the SITE Program in July
1991 at the Component Development and
Integration Facility of the U.S. Department of
Energy in Butte, Montana. During the
demonstration, about 4,000 pounds of waste was
processed. The waste consisted of heavy metal-
bearing soil from Silver Bow Creek Superfund
site spiked with 28,000 parts per million (ppm) of
zinc oxide, 1,000 ppm of hexachlorobenzene,
and a 90-to-10 weight ratio of No. 2 diesel oil.
All feed and effluent streams were sampled. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/007),
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-91/007), and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-9 l/007b) are
available from EPA.
During subsequent testing at the Component
Development and Integration Facility, the
PACT-6 system achieved the following results:
• Hexachlorobenzene was at or below
detection limits hi all off-gas samples.
The minimum destruction removal
efficiency ranged from 99.9968 percent
to greater than 99.9999 percent.
• The treated material met TCLP standards
for organic and inorganic constituents.
• Particulates in the off-gas exceeded the
regulatory standard. The off-gas
treatment system is being modified
accordingly. Particulate emissions from
another PACT-8 system in Switzerland
were measured at l/200th of the U.S.
regulatory limit.
• Nitrous oxide (NOX) levels were very
high during the demonstration, but can
meet stricter standards. While NOX
concentrations during the demonstration
exceeded 5,000 ppm, the NOX
concentrations hi the off-gas from the
PACT-8 furnace hi Switzerland was
reduced to 19 ppm.
Two PACT-2 systems are in use hi Europe, while
three PACT-8 systems are under construction for
European and domestic nuclear and commercial
applications. Two PACT-1 bench-scale systems
are also hi domestic use for nuclear and
shipboard testing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Ronald Womack or Leroy Leland
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc.
P.O. Box 997
100 Henry Station Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
707-462-6522
Fax: 707-462-4103
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 135
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ROCHEM SEPARATION SYSTEMS, INC.
(Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System uses
membrane separation to treat aqueous solutions
rangjng from seawater to leachate contaminated with
organic solvents. The system uses osmosis through
a semipenneable membrane to separate pure water
from contaminated liquids.
Osmotic theory implies that a saline solution may
be separated from pure water by a semipermeable
membrane. The higher osmotic pressure of the
salt solution causes the water (and other
compounds having high diffusion rates through the
selected membrane) to diffuse through the
membrane into the salt water. Water will continue
to permeate the salt solution until the osmotic
pressure of the salt solution equals the osmotic
pressure of the pure water. At this point, the salt
concentrations of the two solutions are equal,
eliminating any additional driving force for mass
transfer across the membrane.
However, if external pressure is exerted on the salt
solution, water will flow in the reverse direction
from the salt solution into the pure water.
This phenomenon, known as reverse osmosis
(RO), can separate pure water from contaminated
matrices. RO can treat hazardous wastes by
concentrating the hazardous chemical constituents
in an aqueous brine, while recovering pure water
on the other side of the membrane.
Fluid dynamics and system construction result in
an open-channel, fully turbulent feed and
water-flow system. This configuration prevents
accumulation of suspended solids on the separation
membranes, ensuring high efficiency filtration for
water and contaminants. Also, the design of the
disc tubes allows easy cleaning of the filtration
medium, providing a long service life for the
membranes.
LEGEND
Indicates Permeate
Flow Path
HIGH-PRESSURE
FEED PUMP
120 BAR
REVERSE a
>„
1
/I
3MOSIS MOC
/
/
/
ULE BLOCK
>„
J
^^^tmmm
BRINE
TANK
HIGH-PRESSURE
FEED PUMP
60 Bar
I 71
REVERSE OSMOSIS MODULE BLOCK
V
PERMEATEi
TANK
Three-Stage, Reverse Osmosis Flow Path
Page 136
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
A general flow path for the Rochem Disc Tube™
Module System as applied at the SITE
demonstration is shown on the previous page.
Waste feed, process permeate, and rinse water
are potential feed materials to the RO modules.
The modules are skid-mounted and consist of a
tank and a high-pressure feed system. The high-
pressure feed system consists of a centrifugal
feed pump, a prefilter cartridge housing, and a
triplex plunger pump to feed the RO modules.
The processing units are self-contained and
require electrical and interconnection process
piping before operation.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Many types of waste material can be treated with
this system, including sanitary and hazardous
landfill leachate containing both organic and
inorganic chemical species.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in July 1991. The
demonstration was conducted hi August 1994 at
the Central Landfill Superfund site in Johnston,
Rhode Island. The system was used to treat
landfill leachate from a hazardous waste landfill.
During the demonstration, approximately
4 gallons per minute of contaminated waste was
processed over a 3-week period. All feed and
residual effluent streams were sampled to
evaluate the performance of this technology. The
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-96/507), the Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-96/507a), and the Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-96/507) are available
from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Preliminary results from the demonstration
suggest the following:
• Over 99 percent of total dissolved
solids, over 96 percent of total organic
carbon, and 99 percent of all target
metals were removed. In addition, the
average percent rejection for volatile
organic compounds was greater than the
test criteria of 90 percent.
• The average water recovery rate for the
Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System
during the demonstration was
approximately 75 percent. The test
criterion was 75 percent treated water
recovery rate.
• The Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System
operated for 19 days at up to 8 hours per
day. Daily operation hours were not as
long as planned due to weather and field
operational difficulties. However, the
system operated long enough to evaluate
the technology's performance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Douglas Grosse
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7844
Fax: 513-569-7585
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
David LaMonica
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc.
3904 Del Amo Boulevard, Suite 801
Torrance, CA 90503
310-370-3160
Fax: 310-370-4988
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 137
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
SBP TECEtNOLOGIES, INC.
(Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
SBP Technologies, Inc. (SBP), has developed a
hazardous waste treatment system consisting of
(1) a membrane filtration system that extracts and
concentrates contaminants from groundwater,
surface water, wash water, or slurries; and (2) a
bioremediation system that treats concentrated
groundwater, wash water, and soil slurries (see
photograph below). These two systems treat a
wide range of waste materials separately or as
parts of an integrated waste handling system.
The membrane filtration system removes and
concentrates contaminants by pumping
contaminated liquids through porous stainless
steel tubes coated with specifically formulated
membranes. Contaminants are collected inside
the tube membrane, while "clean" water
permeates the membrane and tubes. Depending
on local requirements and regulations, the clean
permeate can be discharged to the sanitary sewer
for further treatment at a publicly owned
treatment works (POTW). The concentrated
contaminants are collected in a holding tank and
fed to the bioremediation system.
Contaminated water or slurry can also flow
directly into the bioremediation system and be
polished in the membrane filtration system. The
bioremediation system consists of one or more
bioreactors that are inoculated with specially
selected, usually indigenous microorganisms to
produce effluent with low to nondetectable
contaminant levels. Integrating the two systems
allows removal and destruction of many
contaminants.
Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation
Page 138
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The membrane filtration system concentrates
contaminants and reduces the volume of
contaminated materials from a number of waste
streams, including contaminated groundwater,
surface water, storm water, landfill leachates,
and industrial process wastewater.
The bioremediation system can treat a wide range
of organic contamination, especially wood-
preserving wastes and solvents. A modified
version can also treat polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH) such as creosote and coal
tar; pentachlorophenol; petroleum hydrocarbons;
and chlorinated aliphatics, such as
trichloroethene.
The two technologies can be used separately or
combined, depending on site characteristics and
waste treatment needs. For example, for waste-
waters or slurries contaminated with inorganics
or materials not easily bioremediated, the
membrane filtration system can separate the
material for treatment by another process. Both
the membrane filtration system and the
bioremediation system can be used as part of a
soil cleaning system to handle residuals and
contaminated liquids.
STATUS:
The membrane filtration system, accepted into
the SITE Program hi 1990, was demonstrated in
October 1991 at the American Creosote Works in
Pensacola, Florida. The Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-92/014) and Applications Analysis
Report (EPA/540/AR-92/014) are available from
EPA. A full-scale SITE Program demonstration
of the bioremediation system was canceled.
However, a smaller-scale field study was
conducted at the site; results are available
through the developer.
SBP is marketing its bioremediation and
membrane filtration systems to industrial and
governmental clients for on-site treatment of
contaminated soil, sludge, and water.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the SITE demonstration are
summarized as follows:
• The system effectively concentrated the
PAHs into a smaller volume.
• The process removed 95 percent of the
PAHs found in creosote from the feed
and produced a permeate stream that was
acceptable for discharge to a POTW.
• The membrane removed 25 to 35 percent
of smaller phenolic compounds.
• The system removed an average of about
80 percent of the total concentrations of
creosote constituents (phenolics and
PAHs) in the feedwater and permeate.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
John Martin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7758
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Clayton Page
SBP Technologies, Inc.
6149 North Shore Drive
Baton Rouge, LA 70817
504-755-7711
Fax: 504-755-7711
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 139
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
J.R. SIMPLOT COMPANY
(The SABRE™ Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The patented Simplot Anaerobic Biological
Remediation (SABRE™) process reduces
contamination through on-site bioremediation of
soils contaminated with the herbicide dinoseb (2-
jec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol) or nitroaromatic
explosives. The biodegradation process begins
when contaminated soil is placed in a bioreactor
and flooded with buffered water. A source of
carbon and a nitroaromatic-degrading consortium
of anaerobic bacteria are then added to the
bioreactor. Anaerobic conditions are quicldy
established, allowing the bacteria to degrade the
target compounds while preventing
polymerization of intermediate breakdown
products. A photograph of the technology in
operation is shown below.
Soil can be treated in above- or in-ground
containment ponds. Temperature, pH, and redox
potential hi the bioreactor are monitored during
treatment. A hydromixing system has been
engineered to efficiently solubilize the target
compound from the soil while maintaining
anaerobic conditions. Frequency of mixing
depends upon the contaminants present,
concentration, soil heterogeneity, and soil type.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is designed to treat soils
contaminated with nitroaromatic pesticides and
explosives. This contamination most often
occurs at rural crop dusting aircraft sites and at
ordnance handling and manufacturing facilities.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in January 1990.
Based on bench- and pilot-scale results from the
Emerging Technology Program, this technology
was accepted in the SITE Demonstration
Bioreactors and Soil Mixing System at a TNT-Contaminated Site in Bangor, Washington
Page 140
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Program in winter 1992. Demonstrations for
dinoseb and the explosive TNT (2,4,6-
trinitrotoluene) were performed at Bowers Field
in Ellensberg, Washington and at Weldon Spring
Ordnance Works in Weldon Spring, Missouri,
respectively. A Technology Capsule describing
the dinoseb project (EPA/540/R-94/508a) and an
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
describing the TNT project (EPA/540/R-95/529)
are available from EPA.
Since then, the process has been evaluated at
several other sites. During the winters of 1994
and 1995, two 10-cubic-yard (yd3) batches of
soils from Bangor Naval Submarine Base,
Washington were treated using the SABRE™
Process. One batch contained TNT, while the
other was contaminated with TNT and RDX.
Cost savings were realized by using in-ground
ponds for bioreactors and efficient mixing.
Heaters were also installed to maintain optimum
biological activity during the sub-freezing
temperatures. Treatment goals were met or
surpassed in the 90 days allowed for the project.
A full-scale remediation of 321 yd3 of dinoseb-
contaminated soils was completed in October
1995. The site was a former herbicide
distributor located near Reedley, California. The
treatment was performed in an aboveground
containment already existing on site.
Concentrations ranging from 40 to 100
milligrams per kilogram were reduced to
nondetect after 28 days of treatment. The soil
was mixed three times during treatment using a
full-scale, expandable hydromixing system.
A larger evaluation was conducted in fall 1996 at
Naval Weapons Station - Yorktown. About 500
yd3 of soil were contained in an in-ground pond
measuring 86 feet by 150 feet deep. A full-scale
hydromixing system was used to periodically
slurry the soil and water mixture.
Process optimization work is ongoing.
Collaborative projects with the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station and
the U.S. Army Environmental Center are
underway.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the Weldon Spring demonstration, TNT
was reduced from average concentrations of
1,500 parts per million (ppm) to an average of
8.7 ppm, for an average removal rate of
99.4 percent. Toxicity testing, which included
early seedling growth, root elongation, and
earthworm reproduction tests, showed that soil
toxicity was significantly reduced. The Weldon
Spring demonstration showed the effectiveness of
this process even in unfavorable conditions. The
treatment time was lengthened by unseasonably
cool ambient temperatures. Temperatures hi the
bioreactor were as low as 4 °C; ideal
temperatures for the SABRE™ process are 35 to
37 °C.
During the Ellensburg demonstration, dinoseb
was reduced from 27.3 ppm to below the
detection limit, a greater than 99.8 percent
removal. Other pesticides were also degraded hi
this process, highlighting the effectiveness of the
process even in the presence of co-contaminants.
The process was completed in just 23 days,
despite 18 °C temperatures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Wendy Davis-Hoover
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7206
Fax: 513-569-7879
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Russell Kaake or Tom Yergovich
J.R. Simplot Company
P.O. Box 912
Pocatello, ID 83201
208-235-5620 or 208-238-2850
Fax: 208-235-5699
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 141
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
SMITH ElWmONMENTAL
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
(formerly CANONIE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CORPORATION)
(Low Temperature Thermal Aeration [LTTA®!)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Low Temperature Thermal Aeration
(LTTA®) technology is a low-temperature
desorption process (see figure below). The
technology removes organic contaminants from
contaminated soils into a contained air stream,
which is extensively treated to collect or
thermally destroy the contaminants.
A direct-fired rotary dryer heats an air stream
which, by direct contact, desorbs water and
organic contaminants from the soil. Soil can be
heated to up to 800 °F. The processed soil is
quenched to reduce temperatures and mitigate
dust problems. The processed soil is then
discharged into a stockpile. The hot air stream
that contains vaporized water and organics is
treated by one of two air pollution control
systems. One system removes the organic
contaminants from the air stream by adsorption
on granular activated carbon (GAC) and includes
the following units hi series: (1) cyclones and
baghouse for particulate removal; (2) wet
scrubber for acid gas and some organic vapor
removal; and (3) GAC adsorption beds for
organic removal.
The second air pollution control system can treat
soils containing high concentrations of petroleum
hydrocarbons. The system includes the following
units in series: (1) cyclones for particle removal;
(2) thermal oxidizer-afterburner for destruction
of organics; (3) quench tower for cooling of air
stream; (4) baghouse for additional particle
removal; and (5) wet scrubber for acid gas
removal.
The LTTA® technology generates no wastewater
or waste soils. Cyclone fines and baghouse dust
are combined with treated soil and quenched with
treated scrubber water. The treated soil, once
verified to meet the treatment criteria, is
backfilled on site without restrictions. GAC beds
used for air pollution control are regenerated or
incinerated when spent.
TREATED MATERIAL
IMPACTED MATERIAL
Low Temperature Thermal Aeration (LTTA®) Technology
Page 142
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
LTTA® can remove volatile organic compounds
(VOC), semivolatile organic compounds
(SVOC), organochlorine pesticides (OCP),
organophosphorus pesticides (OPP), and total
petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) from soils,
sediments, and some sludges. LTTA® has been
used at full scale to remove VOCs such as
benzene, toluene, tetrachloroethene,
tnchloroethene, and dichloroethene; SVOCs such
as acenaphthene, chrysene, naphthalene, and
pyrene; OCPs such as DDT, DDT metabolites,
and toxaphene; OPPs such as ethyl parathion,
methyl parathion, merphos, and mevinphos; and
TPHs.
STATUS:
Residual levels of all the pesticides in the
treated soil were generally below or
close to the laboratory detection limit,
with the exception of 4,4'-DDE, which
was found at residual concentrations of
0.1 to 1.5 mg/kg. Removal efficiencies
for pesticides found in the feed soil at
quantifiable concentrations are
summarized below:
Compound
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
Endrin
Toxaphene
Endosulfan 1
Efficiency
> 99.97%
90.26%
99.97%
> 99.85%
> 99.83%
> 99.98%
The LTTA® technology was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in summer 1992.
LTTA® was demonstrated in September 1992 on
soils contaminated with OCPs during a full-scale
remediation at a pesticide site in Arizona. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/504)
and Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/504) are available from EPA.
The full-scale LTTA® system has remediated
contaminated soils at six sites, including three
Superfund sites. The system has treated more
than 117,000 tons of soil.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Key findings from the demonstration are
summarized below:
• The LTTA® system achieved the
specified cleanup criteria for the site, a
sliding scale correlating the
concentrations of DDT family
compounds (DDT, DDE, and ODD)
with concentrations of toxaphene. The
maximum allowable pesticide
concentrations in the treated soil were
3.52 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) of
DDT family compounds and 1.09 mg/kg
oftoxaphene.
• The LTTA® process did not generate
dioxins or furans as products of
incomplete combustion or thermal
transformation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Joseph Button
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation
304 Inverness Way South, Suite 200
Englewood, CO 80112
303-790-1747
Fax: 303-799-0186
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 143
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
SOILTECH ATP SYSTEMS, INC.
(Anaerobic Thermal Processor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (SoilTech),
anaerobic thermal processor (ATP) uses a rotary
kfln to desorb, collect, and recondense contaminants
or recyclable hydrocarbons from a wide variety of
feed material (see figure below).
The proprietary kiln contains four separate internal
thermal zones: preheat, retort, combustion, and
cooling. In the preheat zone, water and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) are vaporized. The hot
solids and heavy hydrocarbons then pass through a
proprietary sand seal to the retort zone. The sand
seal allows solids to pass and inhibits gas and
contaminant movement from one zone to the other.
Concurrently, hot treated soil from the combustion
zone enters lie retort zone through a second sand
seal. This hot treated soil provides the thermal
energy necessary to desorb the heavy organic
contaminants. The vaporized contaminants are
removed under slight vacuum to the gas handling
system. After cyclones remove dust from the
gases, the gases are cooled, and condensed oil and
water are separated into their various fractions.
The coked soil passes through a third sand seal
from the retort zone to the combustion zone.
Some of the hot treated soil is recycled to the retort
zone through the second sand seal as previously
described. The remainder of the soil enters the
cooling zone. As the hot combusted soil enters the
cooling zone, it is cooled in the annular space
between the outside of the preheat zone and the
kiln shell. Here, the heat from the combusted soils
is transferred indirectly to the soils in the preheat
zone. The cooled, treated soil exiting the cooling
zone is quenched with water and conveyed to a
storage pile.
Flue gases from the combustion zone pass through
the cooling zone to an emission control system.
The system consists of a cyclone and baghouse to
remove particulates, a wet scrubber to remove acid
gases, and a carbon adsorption bed to remove trace
organic compounds.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The system treats soils, sediments, and sludges
contaminated with compounds that vaporize at
temperatures up to 1,100 °F. Treated solids are
free of organics and suited for backfill on site.
Applicable contaminants include the following:
• Petroleum hydrocarbons: fuel, oil, lube
oil, semivolatile organic compounds
(SVOC), VOCs
• Halogenated hydrocarbons:
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), dioxins,
furans, pesticides, herbicides
Clean Stack Gas
Discharge To Atmosphere
*£L,
t
Fud
Hydrocarbons w^
^
Nonconden sable
Gases
Condensab'on
Separab'on
1
Water
On-SIte
Treatment
>
f
Recovered organic
to off-site
treatment or recycle
Treated Water
reused as
process water
Anaerobic Thermal Processor (ATP)
Page 144
8 ^'^ Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Aromatic hydrocarbons:
residues, polynuclear
hydrocarbons (PAH)
Volatile metals: mercury
coal tar
aromatic
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1991. The ATP has
been demonstrated at two sites. At the first
demonstration, in May 1991, a full-scale unit
dechlorinated PCB-contaminated soil at the Wide
Beach Development Superfund site in Brant,
New York. At the second demonstration,
completed in June 1992, a full-scale unit
remediated soils, and sediments at the Waukegan
Harbor Superfund site in Waukegan, Illinois.
Two additional Superfund sites in Ohio and
Kentucky have since been remediated by the
ATP. Soils at these sites were contaminated with
PCBs, PAHs, and pesticides.
The ATP has been used to treat more than
100,000 tons of waste on four separate sites.
The system has operated in compliance with state
and federal regulations in New York, Illinois,
Ohio, and Kentucky. SoilTech is currently
negotiating with a confidential client to remediate
25,000 cubic yards of trichloroethene- (TCE) and
PCB-contaminated soil at a site located in
Pennsylvania.
SoilTech is continuing its research into more
diverse organic remediation applications and
bitumen recovery.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Test results from both SITE demonstrations
indicate the following:
• The SoilTech ATP removed over
99 percent of the PCBs in the
contaminated soil, resulting in PCB
levels below 0.1 part per million (ppm)
at the Wide Beach Development site and
averaging 2 ppm at the Waukegan
Harbor site.
• Dioxin and furan stack gas emissions
were below the site-specific standards.
• PCB stack gas emissions were equivalent
to 99.99 percent destruction and removal
efficiency at the Waukegan Harbor site.
• No volatile or semivolatile organic
degradation products were detected in
the treated soil. Also, no leachable
metals, VOCs, or SVOCs were detected
in the treated soil.
• For the Wide Beach Development and
Waukegan Harbor remediation projects,
soil treatment costs were approximately
$265 and $155 per ton, respectively.
The regulatory support, mobilization,
startup, and demobilization costs totaled
about $1,400,000 for each site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Joseph Hutton
Smith Environmental Technologies
Corporation
304 Inverness Way South, Suite 200
Englewood, CO 80112
303-790-1747
Fax: 303-799-0186
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 145
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
SOLIDITECH, INC.
(Solidification and Stabilization)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This solidification and stabilization process
immobilizes contaminants in soils and sludges by
binding them in a concrete-like, leach-resistant
matrix. Contaminated waste materials are
collected, screened to remove oversized material,
and introduced to the batch mixer (see figure
below). The waste material is then mixed with
water; Urrichem, a proprietary chemical reagent;
proprietary additives; and pozzolanic material (fly
ash), kiln dust, or cement. After it is thoroughly
mixed, the treated waste is discharged from the
mixer. Treated waste is a solidified mass with
significant unconfined compressive
strength (UCS), high stability, and a rigid texture
similar to that of concrete.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process treats soils and sludges contaminated
with organic compounds, metals, inorganic
compounds, and oil and grease. Batch mixers of
various capacities can treat different volumes of
waste.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1988. The
solidification and stabilization process was
demonstrated hi December 1988 at the Imperial
Oil Company/Champion Chemical Company
Superfund site hi Morganville, New Jersey. This
site formerly contained both chemical processing
and oil reclamation facilities. Soils, filter cakes,
and oily wastes from an old storage tank were
treated during the demonstration. These wastes
were contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), other organic
chemicals, and heavy metals. The Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-89/005a),
Applications Analysis ' Report
(EPA/540/A5-89/005), and Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/M5-89/005) are available from EPA.
INTERNAL VIEW OF MIXER
FRONT END LOADER
(LOADING CONTAMINATED SOIL)
CONTROl PANEL •
TREATED WASTE
Soliditech Processing Equipment
Page 146
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
This technology is no longer available through a
vendor. Contact the EPA Project Manager for
further information.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Key findings from the Soliditech demonstration are
summarized below:
• Extract and leachate analyses showed that
heavy metals in the untreated waste were
immobilized.
• The process solidified both solid and liquid
wastes with high organic content (up to 17
percent), as well as oil and grease.
• Volatile organic compounds in the original
waste were not detected in the treated
waste.
• Physical test results of the solidified waste
showed (1) UCS ranging from 390 to 860
pounds per square inch (psi); (2) very
little weight loss after 12 cycles of wet and
dry and freeze and 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. Because of
solidification, the bulk density of the waste
material increased by about 35 percent.
• Semivolatile organic compounds (phenols)
were detected in the treated waste and the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(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 hi the waste treatment
mixture.
• The oil and grease content of the untreated
waste ranged from 2.8 to 17.3 percent
(28,000 to 173,000 parts per million
[ppm]). The oil and grease content of the
TCLP extracts from 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 hi any extracts or
leachates from the treated waste.
• Visual observation of solidified waste
revealed bulk oily material about 1
millimeter hi diameter.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 147
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
SONOTECH, INC.
(Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Sonotech, Inc., frequency-tunable pulse
combustion system (Sonotech system) is designed
to significantly improve batch- and continuous-
mode combustion or thermal processes such as
incineration by creating large-amplitude, resonant
pulsations inside the combustion chamber. This
technology can be applied to new or existing
combustion systems. The technology is used in
fossil fuel combustion devices, residential natural
gas furnaces, and industrial combustion systems.
It should prove similarly beneficial to hazardous
waste incineration and soil remediation
applications.
The Sonotech system (see photograph below)
consists of an air inlet, a combustor section, a
tailpipe, a control panel, and safety features. This
system is designed to improve an incinerator's
performance by (1) increasing mixing rates
between the fuel and air, (2) increasing mixing
rates between reactive gas pockets and ignition
sources, and (3) increasing rates of heat and mass
transfer between the gas and the burning waste.
These improvements should (1) reduce the
amount of excess air required to completely burn
the waste, (2) increase destruction and removal
efficiencies (DRE) of principal organic hazardous
constituents, (3) minimize the formation of
products of incomplete combustion, and (4)
eliminate or minimize detrimental emissions or
"puffs."
The Sonotech system has achieved sound
amplitudes as high as 170 decibels and
frequencies of 100 to 500 hertz within the
combustion chamber. The high frequencies and
Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System Installed
at EPA's Incineration Research Facility
Page 148
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December J996
Completed Project
velocities of these gas oscillations help mix the
gases in the chamber and thus reduce or
eliminate stratification effects.
The Sonotech system can function alone or as a
supplemental retrofit to an existing combustion
system. In the latter application, the frequency-
tunable pulse combustion system can supply as
little as 2 to 10 percent of the total energy
requirements. The total fuel supplied to the main
burner and the Sonotech system should be less
than the amount of fuel supplied to the main
burner before retrofitting.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can be used with any material
that can be treated in a conventional incinerator.
Sonotech, Inc., believes that the technology is
ready for incineration of hazardous, municipal,
and medical waste.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1992. The 6-week
demonstration evaluated whether the technology
improved the performance of a larger scale
incineration system. To meet this goal, the pilot-
scale rotary kiln incinerator at EPA's Incineration
Research Facility (IRF) in Jefferson, Arkansas
was retrofit with a Sonotech system. The
demonstration took place from September to
October 1994. The retrofit incinerator was used
to treat coal- and oil-gasification wastes,
traditionally incinerated with conventional
technology. The Technology Capsule
(EPA/540/R-95/502a) is available from EPA.
More detailed results will be available from EPA
in early 1997.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The Sonotech system increased the incinerator
waste feed rate capacity by 13 to 21 percent
compared to conventional combustion. As the
demonstration waste had significant heat content,
the capacity increase was equivalent to a
reduction in the auxiliary fuel needed to treat a
unit mass of waste from 21,100 British thermal
unit/pound (Bru/lb) for conventional combustion
to 18,000 Btu/lb for the Sonotech system. Visual
observations indicated improved mixing in the
incinerator cavity with the Sonotech system
operating.
Benzene and naphthalene DREs were greater
than 99.99 percent. The average concentration
of carbon monoxide exiting the afterburner,
corrected to 7 percent oxygen, decreased from 20
parts per million (ppm) with conventional
combustion to 14 ppm with the Sonotech system.
The average afterburner exit nitrogen oxides
concentration, corrected to 7 percent oxygen,
decreased from 82 ppm with conventional
combustion to 77 ppm with the Sonotech system.
Average soot emissions exiting the afterburner,
corrected to 7 percent oxygen, were reduced
from 1.9 milligrams per dry standard cubic meter
(mg/dscm) for conventional combustion to less
than 1.0 mg/dscm with the Sonotech system.
Total system combustion air requirements,
determined from stoichiometric calculations,
were lower with the Sonotech system in
operation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7692
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
BenZinn
Sonotech, Inc.
3656 Paces Valley Road
Atlanta, GA 30327
404-894-3033
Fax: 404-894-2760
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 149
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
STC REMEDIATION, A DIVISION OF
OMEGA ENVIRONkENTAL, INC.
(formerly SILICATE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION)
(Organic Stabilization and Chemical Fixation/Solidification)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
STC Remediation, a division of Omega
Environmental, Inc. (STC Remediation), has
developed both chemical organic stabilization and
chemical fixation/solidification technologies mat
treat inorganic and organic solid hazardous
wastes (see photograph below). Leachable
organic contaminant concentrations are reduced
to well below regulatory limits. The chemical
fixation/solidification technology forms insoluble
chemical compounds, reducing leachable
inorganic contaminant concentrations in soils and
sludges.
STC Remediation's technology has been
successfully implemented on numerous full-scale
hazardous waste remediation projects involving
up to 100,000 cubic yards of waste per project.
These sites include Superfund sites and industrial
sites across the United States and in Italy.
STC Remediation has evaluated various materials
handling and mixing systems for use on full-scale
remediation projects. Materials handling
processes consist of pretreatment processes for
screening and crushing contaminated soils, and
placement and conveying systems for handling
treated material. Mixing systems consist of
various batching plants, pug mills, and high-
shear batch mixing systems to properly meter and
mix reagents with contaminated soils. STC
Remediation provides full on-site technical
support to ensure effective application of the
treatment technologies, documentation, and
quality assurance/quality control procedures
during the treatment process.
Treatment of Contaminated Soil
Page 150
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 199€
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
STC Remediation's technology can treat a wide
variety of hazardous soils, sludges, and
wastewaters, including the following:
• Soils and sludges contaminated with
inorganics, including most metals,
cyanides, fluorides, arsenates,
chromates, and selenium
• Soils and sludges contaminated with
organics, including halogenated
aromatics, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, and aliphatic compounds
• Wastewaters contaminated with heavy
metals and emulsified and dissolved
organic compounds, excluding low-
molecular-weight organic contaminants
such as alcohols, ketones, and glycols
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1988. STC
Remediation's demonstration project was
completed in November 1990 at the Selma
Pressure Treating (SPT) Superfund site in Selma,
California. STC Remediation was subsequently
selected for the full-scale remediation of the SPT
site, which is contaminated with organics, mainly
pentachlorophenol (PCP), and inorganics, mainly
arsenic, chromium, and copper. The SPT site
was remediated in 1993 using STC Remediation's
treatment process. The Applications Analysis
Report (EPA/540/AR-92/010) is available
through the National Technology Information
Service (Order No. PB93-172948). The
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-92/010) and Demonstration Bulletin
(EPA/540/MR-92/010) are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The SITE demonstration yielded the following
results:
• The organic stabilization technology
reduced total extractable PCP
concentrations up to 97 percent. The
chemical fixation/stabilization technology
stabilized the residual PCP
concentrations to very low leachable
levels (from 5 to less than 0.3 milligrams
per liter).
• STC Remediation's technology
immobilized arsenic and copper, while
chromium remained well within
regulatory limits.
• Long-term monitoring at 18 and
32 months following the demonstration
project provided comparable results for
PCP, arsenic, and copper, while
chromium remained well within
regulatory limits.
• The treated wastes had moderately high
unconfined compressive strength,
averaging 300 pounds per square inch
(psi) after 28 days, increasing to more
man 700 psi after 18 months.
• Permeability of the treated waste was
low (less than 1.7 x 10"7 centimeters per
second). The relative cumulative weight
loss after 12 wet/dry and 12 freeze/thaw
cycles was negligible (less than 1
percent).
• Treatment costs depend on specific waste
characteristics.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Edward Bates
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7774
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Scott Larsen or Stephen Pegler
STC Remediation
7650 East Redfield Road, Suite D-5
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
602-948-7100
Fax: 602-991-3173
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 151
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
TERRA-KLEEN RESPONSE GROUP, INC.
(Solvent Extraction Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Terra-Kleen),
developed the solvent extraction treatment system
to remove semivolatile and nonvolatile organic
contaminants from soil. This batch process system
uses a proprietary solvent blend to separate
hazardous constituents from soils, sediments,
sludge, and debris.
A flow diagram of the Terra-Kleen treatment
system is shown below. Treatment begins after
excavated soil is loaded into the solvent extraction
tanks. Clean solvent from the solvent storage tank
is pumped into the extraction tanks. The soil and
solvent mixture is held in the extraction tanks long
enough to solubilize organic contaminants into the
solvent, separating them from the soil. The
contaminant-laden solvent is then removed from
the extraction tanks and pumped into the
sedimentation tank. Suspended solids settle or are
flocculated in the sedimentation tank, and are then
removed.
Following solvent extraction of the organic
contaminants, any residual solvent in the soil is
removed using soil vapor extraction and biological
treatment. Soil vapor extraction removes the
majority of the residual solvent, while biological
treatment reduces residual solvent to trace levels.
The treated soils are then removed from the
extraction tanks.
Contaminant-laden solvents are cleaned for reuse
by Terra-Kleen's solvent regeneration process.
The solvent regeneration process begins by
pumping contaminant-laden solvent from the
sedimentation tank through a microfiltration unit
and a proprietary solvent purification station. The
microfiltration unit first removes any fines
remaining in the solvent. The solvent purification
station separates organic contaminants from the
solvent and concentrates them, reducing the
amount of hazardous waste for off-site disposal.
The solvent is pumped into the solvent storage tank
for use in treating additional soil.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Terra-Kleen solvent extraction treatment
system is a waste minimization process designed to
remove the following organic contaminants from
soils: polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
chlorinated pesticides, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), pentachlorophenol, creosote,
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD), and
polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF). The
technology also has the capacity to remove organic
contaminants, such as PCBs, from low-level
radioactive wastes. The system is transportable
Unseated Soil Untreated Soil ' UnVeSedSoil
Untreated Soil
Untreated Soil
1 II1
,, * A xl(»B -iAc i»D ^
IE
SOLVENT SOLVENT SOLVENT SOLVENT SOLVENT
EXTRACTION EXTRACTION EXTRACTION EXTRACTION EXTRACTION
TANK __ TANK __ TANK TANK | TANK I
CONTAMNANT-LADEN ,r u ,
SOLVENT
VACUUM EXTRACTION SYSTEM y
"^..-.Pl JR^Q.L S p
ATMOSPHERE bJ y M | (^_[j^xWf ^ >
^^____^y^ I
CONTAMlMflNT-LACEN
SOLVENT
PUMP>-\
LEGEND atui«c«i«K«i»m. HK.RonLTRATIOM 'SOLVEN'f CLEAN SOLVENT
^ UnM«UdSoil UNIT PURIFICATION STORAGE TAWK
> WllhSok/int STATION
•> AkandSdvantVapor
Solvent Extraction Treatment System
_ -firo The SITE Program assesses but does not
Page i02 approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
and can be configured to treat small quantities of
soil (1 to 1,000 cubic yards) as well as large
volumes generated at remedial sites.
STATUS:
The solvent extraction treatment system was
demonstrated during May and June 1994 at Naval
Air Station North Island (NASNI) Site 4 in San
Diego, California. Soils at Site 4 are contaminated
with heavy metals, volatile organic compounds
(VOC), PCBs (Aroclor 1260), and furans. The
Technology Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/521a) and
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/521) are
available from EPA. The Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report will be available in 1997.
Several full-scale solvent extraction units are in
operation at this time. Terra-Kleen has removed
PCBs from 10,000 tons of soil at three sites within
NASNI, and completed cleanup of a remote Air
Force Base PCB site in Alaska. A full-scale system
has also removed DDT, ODD, and DDE from
clay soil at the Naval Communication Station in
Stockton, California.
Terra-Kleen has been selected to participate in the
Rapid Commercialization Initiative (RCI). RCI
was created by the Department of Commerce,
Department of Defense, Department of Energy
(DOE), and EPA to assist hi the integration of
innovative technologies into the marketplace.
Under RCI, Terra-Kleen is expanding its
capabilities to process PCBs and VOCs in low-
level radioactive wastes. The pilot project for this
effort will begin hi early 1997 at DOE's Fernald
Plant near Cincinnati, Ohio.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Findings from the SITE demonstration are
summarized as follows:
• NASNI untreated soil contained a
moisture content of 0.83 percent; a
particle size distribution of 80 percent
sand, 15 percent gravel, and 5 percent
clay; and an overall oil and grease
concentration of 780 mg/kg.
• Hexachlorodibenzofuran and
pentachlorodibenzofuran concentrations
were reduced by 92.7 percent and 84.0
percent, respectively. Oil and grease
concentrations were reduced by 65.9
percent.
Additional data were collected at the Naval
Communication Station in Stockton, California.
The system treated soil contaminated with
chlorinated pesticides at concentrations up to
600 mg/kg. Samples taken during system
operation indicated that soil contaminated with
ODD, DDE, and DDT was reduced below 1
mg/kg, an overall removal efficiency of 98.8 to
99.8 percent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Mark Meckes or Terrence Lyons
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7348 or 513-569-7589
Fax: 513-569-7328 or 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Alan Cash
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 2504
Del Mar, CA 92014
619-558-8762
Fax: 619-558-8759
PCB Aroclor 1260 concentrations were
reduced from an average of 144
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) to less
than 1.71 mg/kg, an overall removal
efficiency of 98.8 percent.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 153
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
TERRA VAC
(In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
In situ or ex situ vacuum extraction is a process
that removes volatile organic compounds (VOC)
and many semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC)
from the vadose, or unsaturated, soil zone. These
compounds can often be removed from the vadose
zone before they contaminate ground-water. Soil
piles also may be cleaned by ex situ extraction
vacuum. The hi situ vacuum extraction process
has been patented by others and licensed to Terra
Vac and others in the United States.
The extraction process uses readily available
equipment, including extraction and monitoring
wells, manifold piping, air-liquid separators, and
vacuum pumps. Vacuum extraction systems may
vent directly to the atmosphere or through an
emission control device. After the contaminated
area is generally characterized, extraction wells
are installed and connected by piping to the
vacuum extraction and vapor treatment systems.
First, a vacuum pump creates a vacuum hi the soil
causing in situ volatilization and draws air through
the subsurface. Contaminants are removed from
the extraction wells and pass to the air-liquid
separator. The vapor-phase contaminants may be
treated with an activated carbon adsorption filter,
a catalytic oxidizer, or another emission control
system before the gases are discharged to the
atmosphere. Subsurface vacuum and soil vapor
concentrations are monitored with vadose zone
monitoring wells.
The technology can be used in most
hydrogeological settings and may reduce soil
contaminant levels from saturated conditions to
nondetectable. The process also works in
fractured bedrock and less permeable soils (clays)
with sufficient permeability. The process may be
used to enhance bioremediation (bioventing). It
also may be used in conjunction with dual vacuum
extraction, soil heating, pneumatic fracturing, and
chemical oxidation to recover a wide range of
contaminants. The figure below illustrates one
possible configuration of the process.
Typical contaminant recovery rates range from 20
to 2,500 pounds (10 to 1,000 kilograms) per day,
depending on the degree of site contamination and
the design of the vacuum extraction system.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The vacuum extraction technology may treat soils
containing virtually any VOC. It has removed
over 40 types of chemicals from soils and
VAPOR PHASE
CARBON CANISTERS
DUALVACUUU
EXTRACTION WELLS
In Situ Dual Vacuum Extraction Process
Page 154
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
ground-water, including solvents and gasoline- and
diesel-range hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
The process was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1987. The process was
demonstrated under the SITE Demonstration
Program at the Groveland Wells Superfund site in
Groveland, Massachusetts, from December 1987
through April 1988. The technology remediated
soils contaminated with trichloroethene (TCE).
The Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/5-89/003a) and Applications Analysis
Report (EPA/540/A5-89/003) are available from
EPA.
The vacuum extraction process was first
demonstrated at a Superfund site in Puerto Rico in
1984. Terra Vac has since applied the technology
at more than 20 additional Superfund sites and at
more than 700 other waste sites throughout the
United States, Europe, and Japan.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the Groveland Wells SITE demonstration,
four extraction wells pumped contaminants to the
process system. During a 56-day period,
1,300 pounds of VOCs, mainly TCE, were
extracted from both highly permeable strata and
less permeable (10~7 centimeters per second) clays.
The vacuum extraction process achieved
nondetectable VOC levels at some locations and
reduced the VOC concentration in soil gas by
95 percent. Average reductions of soil
concentrations during the demonstration program
were 92 percent for sandy soils and 90 percent for
clays. Field evaluations yielded the following
conclusions:
• Permeability of soils is a major
consideration when applying this
technology. Ideal measured hydraulic
conductivities are 10"4 to 10~8 centimeters
per second.
• Pilot demonstrations are necessary at sites
with complex geology or contaminant
distributions.
• Treatment costs are typically $40 per ton
of soil but can range from less than $10 to
$80 per ton of soil, depending on the size
of the site and the requirements for gas
effluent or wastewater treatment.
• Contaminants should have a Henry's
constant of 0.001 or higher.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Loren Martin
Terra Vac
Windsor Industrial Park, Building 15
92 N. Main Street
P.O. Box 468
Windsor, NJ 08561-0468
609-371-0070
Fax: 609-371-9446
James Malot
Terra Vac
356 Fortaleza Street
P.O. Box 1591
San Juan, PR 00902-1591
787-723-9171
Fax: 787-725-8750
E-Mail: jim@pr.terravac.com
Home page: www.terravac.com
• VOCs can be reduced to nondetectable
levels; however, some residual VOC
concentrations many remain in the treated
soils.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 155
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
TEXACO INC.
(Texaco Gasification Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Texaco Gasification Process (TOP) is an
entrained-bed, noncatalytic, partial oxidation
process in which carbonaceous substances react
at elevated temperatures and pressures,
producing a gas containing mainly carbon
monoxide and hydrogen (see figure below). This
product, called synthesis gas, can be used to
produce other chemicals or can be burned as
fuel. Inorganic materials in the feed melt are
removed as a glass-like slag.
This technology has operated commercially for
over 40 years with feedstocks such as natural gas,
heavy oil, coal, and petroleum coke. The TOP
processes waste feedstocks at pressures above 20
atmospheres and temperatures between 2,200 and
2,800 °F.
Slurried wastes are pumped to a specially
designed injector mounted at the top of the
refractory-lined gasifier. The waste feed,
oxygen, and an auxiliary fuel such as coal react
and flow downward through the gasifier to a
quench chamber that collects the slag. The slag
is eventually removed through a lockhopper. A
scrubber further cools and cleans the synthesis
gas. Fine particulate matter removed by the
scrubber may be recycled to the gasifier; a sulfur
recovery system may also be added.
After the TOP converts organic materials into
synthesis gas, the cooled, water-scrubbed product
gas, consisting mainly of hydrogen and carbon
monoxide, essentially contains no hydrocarbons
heavier than methane. Metals and other ash
constituents become part of the glassy slag.
Oxldant
Water
Feed
| Burner
Solids-Free
Synthesis Gas
Scrubber
Recycle
Purge Water
to Treatment
or Recycle
Solids to Disposal
or Recycle
Texaco Gasification Process
Page 156
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December T99G
Completed Project
Texaco is designing a transportable system to
process about 100 tons of hazardous waste per
day. This system would produce about 6 million
standard cubic feet of usable synthesis gas per
day with a heating value of approximately 250
British thermal units per standard cubic foot.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The TOP can treat the following wastes:
• Contaminated soils, sludges, and
sediments that contain both organic and
inorganic constituents
• Chemical wastes
• Petroleum residues
Solids in the feed are ground and pumped in a
slurry containing 40 to 70 percent solids by
weight and 30 to 60 percent liquid, usually
water.
Texaco has demonstrated gasification of coal
liquefaction residues, petroleum production tank
bottoms, municipal sewage sludge, and surrogate
contaminated soil. Texaco is operating a
gasification facility at its El Dorado, Kansas
refinery that will convert up to 170 tons per day
of petroleum coke and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act-listed refinery wastes into
usable synthesis gas.
STATUS:
The TOP was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in July 1991. A
demonstration was conducted in January 1994 at
Texaco's Montebello Research Laboratory in
California using a mixture of clean soil, coal, and
soil from the Purity Oil Sales Superfund site,
located in Fresno, California. The mixture was
slurried and spiked with lead, barium, and
chlorobenzene. Forty tons of slurry was gasified
during three demonstration runs. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/514),
Technology Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/514a), and
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-94/514) are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Findings from the SITE demonstration are
summarized below:
• The average composition of the dry
synthesis gas product from the TOP
consisted of 37 percent hydrogen,
36 percent carbon monoxide, and
21 percent carbon dioxide. The only
remaining organic contaminant greater
than 0.1 part per million (ppm) was
methane at 55 ppm.
• The destruction and removal efficiency
for the volatile organic spike
(chlorobenzene) was greater than the
99.99 percent goal.
• Samples of the primary TOP solid
product, coarse slag, averaged below the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) limits for lead (5 milligrams per
liter [mg/L]) and barium (100 mg/L).
Volatile heavy metals tended to partition
to and concentrate in the secondary TOP
solid products, fine slag and clarifier
solids. These secondary products were
above the TCLP limit for lead.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7692
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
John Winter
Alternate Energy Department
Texaco Inc.
329 N. Durfee Avenue
S. El Monte, CA 91733
310-908-7387
Fax: 310-699-7408
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 157
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
TORONTO HARBOUR COMMISSION
(Soil Recycling)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Toronto Harbour Commission's (THC) soil
recycling process removes inorganic and organic
contaminants from soil to produce a reusable fill
material (see photograph below). The process
consists of three technologies operating in series:
a soil washing technology; a technology that
removes inorganic contamination by chelation;
and a technology that uses chemical and
biological treatment to reduce organic
contaminants.
The process uses an attrition soil wash plant to
remove relatively uncontaminated coarse soil
fractions using mineral processing equipment
while concentrating the contaminants in a fine
slurry which is routed to the appropriate process
for further treatment. The wash process includes
a trommel washer to remove clean gravel,
hydrocyclones to separate the contaminated fines,
an attrition scrubber to free fines from sand
particles, and a density separator to remove coal
and peat from the sand fraction.
If only inorganic contaminants are present, the
slurry can be treated in the inorganic chelator
unit. This process uses an acid leach to free the
inorganic contaminant from the fine slurry and
then removes the metal using solid chelating
agent pellets in a patented countercurrent
contactor. The metals are recovered by
electrowinning from the chelation agent
regenerating liquid.
Organic removal is accomplished by first
chemically pretreating the slurry from the wash
plant or the metal removal process. Next,
biological treatment is applied in upflow slurry
reactors using the bacteria which have developed
Soil Washing Plant (Metal Extraction Screwtubes in Foreground
and Bioslurry Reactors in Background)
Page 158
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
naturally in the soils. The treated soil is
dewatered using hydrocyclones and returned to
the site from which it was excavated.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology is designed to reduce organic and
inorganic contaminants in soils. The process
train approach is most useful when sites have
been contaminated as a result of multiple uses
over a period of time. Typical sites where the
process train might be used include refinery and
petroleum storage facilities, sites with metal
processing and metal recycling histories, and
manufactured gas and coal or coke processing
and storage sites. The process is less suited to
soils with undesirable high inorganic constituents
which result from the inherent mineralogy of the
soils.
STATUS:
The THC soil recycling process was accepted
into the SITE Demonstration Program in 1991.
The soil recycling process was demonstrated at a
site within the Toronto Port Industrial District
that had been used for metals finishing and
refinery products and petroleum storage.
Demonstration sampling took place in April and
May 1992.
Results have been published in the Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/520-MR-92/015), the Applications
Analysis Report (EPA/540-AR-93/517), the
Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-93/517), and the Technology
Demonstration Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/517).
These reports are available from EPA.
This technology is no longer available through a
vendor. For further information on the
technology, contact the EPA Project Manager.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The demonstration results showed that soil
washing produced clean coarse soil fractions and
concentrated the contaminants in the fine slurry.
The chemical treatment process and biological
slurry reactors, when operated on a batch basis
with a nominal 35-day retention time, achieved at
least a 90 percent reduction in simple
polyaromatic hydrocarbon compounds such as
naphthalene, but did not meet the approximately
75 percent reduction in benzo(a)pyrene required
to achieve the cleanup criteria.
The biological process discharge did not meet the
cleanup criteria for oil and grease, and the
process exhibited virtually no removal of this
parameter. THC believes that the high outlet oil
and grease values are the result of the analytical
extraction of the biomass developed during the
process.
The hydrocyclone dewatering device did not
achieve significant dewatering. Final process
slurries were returned to the excavation site in
liquid form.
The metals removal process achieved a removal
efficiency for toxic heavy metals such as copper,
lead, mercury, and nickel of approximately
70 percent.
The metals removal process equipment and
chelating agent were fouled by free oil and
grease contamination, forcing sampling to end
prematurely. Biological treatment or physical
separation of oil and grease will be required to
avoid such fouling.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 159
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
U.S. FILTER/ZIMPRO, INC.
(formerly ULTROX, A DIVISION OF ZIMPRO ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.)
(Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This ultraviolet (UV) radiation and oxidation
technology uses UV radiation, ozone, and
hydrogen peroxide to destroy toxic organic
compounds, particularly chlorinated
hydrocarbons, in water. The technology oxidizes
compounds that are toxic or refractory (resistant
to biological oxidation) to parts per million (ppm)
or parts per billion (ppb) levels.
The UV radiation and oxidation system consists
of the UV-oxidation reactor, an air compressor
and ozone generator module, and a hydrogen
peroxide feed system (see figure below). The
system is skid-mounted and portable, and permits
on-site treatment of a wide variety of liquid
wastes. Reactor size is determined by the
expected wastewater flow rate and the necessary
hydraulic retention time needed to treat the
contaminated water. The approximate UV
intensity, and ozone and hydrogen peroxide
doses, are determined from pilot-scale studies.
Reactor influent is simultaneously exposed to UV
radiation, ozone, and hydrogen peroxide to
oxidize the organic compounds. Off-gas from
the reactor passes through a catalytic ozone
destruction Deeompozon™ unit, which reduces
ozone levels before air venting. The
Treated Off-Gas
Deeompozon™
Unit
Ozone
Generator
Treated
Effluent
ULTROX®
UV/Oxidation Reactor
Groundwater
Hydrogen Peroxide
from Feed Tank
UV Radiation and Oxidation System (Isometric View)
Page 160
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Decompozon™ unit also destroys volatile organic
compounds (VOC) stripped off in the reactor.
Effluent from the reactor is tested and analyzed
before disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The UV radiation and oxidation system treats
contaminated groundwater, industrial
wastewaters, and leachates containing
halogenated solvents, phenol, pentachlorophenol,
pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, explosives,
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, methyl
tertiary butyl ether, and other organic
compounds. The system also treats low-level
total organic carbon and reduces chemical
oxygen demand and biological oxygen demand.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1989. A field-scale
demonstration of the system was completed in
March 1989 at the Lorentz Barrel and Drum
Company site in San Jose, California. The
testing program was designed to evaluate system
performance while varying five operating
parameters: (1) influent pH, (2) retention time,
(3) ozone dose, (4) hydrogen peroxide dose, and
(5) UV radiation intensity. The Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/012), Technology
Demonstration Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/012),
Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/A5-89/012), and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/5-89/012) are
available from EPA.
The technology is fully commercial, with over 30
systems installed. Units with flow rates ranging
from 5 gallons per minute (gpm) to 1,050 gpm
are in use at various industries and site
remediations, including aerospace, U.S.
Department of Energy, U.S. Department of
Defense, petroleum, pharmaceutical, automotive,
woodtreating, and municipal facilities.
UV radiation and oxidation technology has been
included in records of decision for several
Superfund sites where groundwater pump-and-
treat remediation methods will be used.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Contaminated groundwater treated by the system
during the SITE demonstration met regulatory
standards at the appropriate parameter levels.
Out of 44 VOCs in the wastewater,
trichloroethene, 1,1-dichloroethane, and
1,1,1-trichloroethane were chosen as indicator
parameters. All three are relatively refractory to
conventional oxidation.
The Decompozon™ unit reduced ozone to less
than 0.1 ppm, with efficiencies greater than
99.99 percent. VOCs present in the air within
the treatment system were not detected after
passing through the Decompozon™ unit. The
system produced no harmful air emissions. Total
organic carbon removal was low, implying
partial oxidation of organics without complete
conversion to carbon dioxide and water.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7665
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Himebaugh
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc.
7755 Center Avenue, Suite 1120
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
714-545-5557
Fax: 714-557-5396
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 161
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
(Excavation Techniques and Foam Suppression Methods)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Excavation techniques and foam suppression
methods have been developed through a joint
EPA effort involving the National Risk
Management Research Laboratory (Cincinnati,
Ohio), Air and Energy Engineering Research
Laboratory (Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina), and EPA Region 9 to evaluate control
technologies during excavation operations.
In general, excavating soil contaminated with
volatile organic compounds (VOC) results in
fugitive air emissions. When using this
technology, the area to be excavated is
surrounded by a temporary enclosure (see
photograph below). Air from the enclosure is
vented through an emission control system before
being released to the atmosphere. For example,
in the case of hydrocarbon and sulfur dioxide
emissions, a scrubber and a carbon adsorption
unit would be used to treat emissions. As an
additional emission control method, a vapor
suppressant foam can be applied to the soil
before and after excavation.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is suitable for controlling VOC
and sulfur dioxide emissions during excavation of
contaminated soil.
STATUS:
This technology was demonstrated at the McColl
Superfund site in Fullerton, California, in June
and July 1990. An enclosure 60 feet wide,
160 feet long, and 26 feet high was erected over
an area contaminated with VOCs and sulfur
dioxide. A backhoe removed the overburden and
Excavation Area Enclosure
Page 162
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
excavated underlying waste. Three distinct types
of waste were encountered during excavation:
oily mud, tar, and hard coal-like char.
The following documents, which contain results
from the demonstration, are available from EPA:
• Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-92/015)
• Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-93/015)
• Demonstration Summary
(EPA/540/SR-92/015)
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During excavation, the 5-minute average air
concentrations within the enclosed area were up
to 1,000 parts per million (ppm) for sulfur
dioxide and up to 492 ppm for total hydrocarbons
(THC). The air pollution control system
removed up to 99 percent of the sulfur dioxide
and up to 70 percent of the THCs.
The concentrations of air contaminants inside the
enclosure were higher than expected. These high
concentrations were due in part to the inability of
the vapor suppressant foams to form an
impermeable membrane over the exposed wastes.
The foam reacted with the highly acidic waste,
causing the foam to degrade. Furthermore,
purge water from foaming activities made
surfaces slippery for workers and equipment.
A total of 101 cubic yards of overburden and 137
cubic yards of contaminated waste was
excavated. The tar waste was solidified and
stabilized by mixing with fly ash, cement, and
water in a pug mill. The char wastes did not
require further processing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 163
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA - LINCOLN
(Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Spray irrigation technology with "Center Pivots"
and "Linear" systems can be used to remediate
groundwater contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOC). The technology is
commonly used to apply irrigation water to
vegetable and row crops. While the systems
were introduced to irrigate hilly terrain and
excessively well-drained soils, the technology has
been adapted in both groundwater quality and
quantity management areas as a best management
practice. This technology severely reduces water
application rates and leaching relative to flood
irrigation techniques.
The systems consist of an elevated pipeline with
nozzles placed at close intervals. Groundwater is
pumped through the pipeline and sprayed
uniformly over a field as the pipeline pivots or
linearly passes over the cropped area. The
typical pump rate is between 800 and 2,000
gallons per minute (gpm). These self-propelled
systems are highly mechanized and have low
labor andoperating requirements. The systems
do not require level ground and startup costs are
low.
The sprinkler method applies water over the
irrigated area with a fine spray (see the
photograph below). Water coverage over the
irrigated area is controlled by the speed with
which the "pivot" or "linear" systems travel
across the field. The heart of the sprinkler
irrigation system is the nozzle, which is a small
opening through which a high-velocity stream of
water is emitted. As the high-velocity water
stream leaves the nozzle, it strikes an impact pad
and forms a thin film of water.
The system used in the SITE demonstration
program was a center pivot and was located on a
seed corn field in Hastings, Nebraska. The
system was equipped with off-the-shelf, fog-
producing impact pads for improved
volatilization efficiency. The thin film of water
produced by these pads breaks up into small
droplets as it leaves the impact pad. Droplet size
Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System
Page 164
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December T99G
Completed Project
depends on the stream pressure and design of the
impact pad.
A stratified water droplet collector (SWDC)
simultaneously collected spray at four fall heights
above ground level, and was specifically
contracted for this project by the Dutton-Lainson
Company in Hastings, Nebraska. With this
device, droplets were collected at heights of 1.5,
4.5, 7.5, and 10.5 feet above the ground surface.
Twelve SWDCs were installed parallel to the
pivot arm to determine average volatilization
efficiencies along the 340 nozzles on the pivot
arm.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The sprinkler irrigation system is capable of
remediating VOC-contaminated groundwater.
Removal rates in excess of 95 percent have been
demonstrated for groundwater containing
ethylene dibromide (EDB), trichloroethene
(TCE), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), and carbon
tetrachloride (CT). The method will efficiently
volatilize all common volatiles in groundwater
which may originate from landfills, degreasers,
dry cleaners, electrical industries, gas stations, or
refineries. The residuals are transferred to the
atmosphere, where they are dispersed and most
are rapidly degraded in ultraviolet light.
The technique may be limited to individual
groundwater VOC concentrations that are less
than 1 part per million if residual concentrations
of VOCs are mandated to be near or below the
maximum contaminant level prior to reaching the
ground surface. Otherwise, the technique can be
used in any agricultural setting where sufficient
groundwater and irrigatable land are available.
STATUS:
The Center Pivot Spray Irrigation system was
accepted into the SITE Program in late 1995.
Under a University of Nebraska project funded
by the Cooperative State Research Service of the
Department of Agriculture, field tests were
completed in the summers of 1994 and 1995 in a
seed corn field hi Hastings, Nebraska.
The technology was demonstrated under the
SITE Program in July 1996 at the North Landfill
Subsite in Hastings, Nebraska. The 50-acre site
is a furrow-irrigated corn field underlain by
commingled plumes of groundwater containing
EDB, TCE, TCA, CT, 1,1-dichloroethene, trans-
1,2-dichloroethene, and chloroform. The
primary goal of the demonstration was to
determine the efficiency of the system to
remediate VOCs in groundwater to
concentrations below the maximum contaminant
levels. The results of this demonstration will be
available in a Demonstration Bulletin and
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report to be
published early in 1997.
Clients involved in large pump-and-treat projects
at several military bases are investigating the
suitability of the system to their specific site
situations. Potential clients include the U.S.
Navy, the Army Corp of Engineers, and several
state agencies. The technology is currently being
used at the Lindsey Manufacturing site hi
Nebraska and at some grain elevators being
remediated by Argonne Laboratory.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
EPA SITE Project Manager
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Roy Spalding
University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Water Center/Environmental Programs
103 Natural Resources Hall
P.O. Box 830844
Lincoln, NE 68583-0844
402-472-7558
Fax: 402-472-9599
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 165
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
WASTECH, INC.
(Solidification and Stabilization)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology solidifies and stabilizes organic
and inorganic contaminants in soils, sludge, and
liquid wastes. First, a proprietary reagent
chemically bonds with contaminants in wastes.
The waste and reagent mixture is then mixed
with pozzolanic, cementitious materials, which
combine to form a stabilized matrix. Reagents
are selected based on target waste characteristics.
Treated material is a nonleaching, high-strength,
stabilized end-product.
The WASTECH, Inc. (WASTECH), technology
uses standard engineering and construction
equipment. Because the type and dose of
reagents depend on waste characteristics,
treatability studies and site investigations must be
conducted to determine the proper treatment
formula.
Treatment usually begins with waste excavation.
Large pieces of debris in the waste must be
screened and removed. The waste is then placed
into a high shear mixer, along with premeasured
quantities of water and SuperSet®, WASTECH's
proprietary reagent (see figure below).
Next, pozzolanic, cementitious materials are
added to the waste-reagent mixture, stabilizing
the waste and completing the treatment process.
The WASTECH technology does not generate
by-products. The process may also be applied in
situ.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The WASTECH technology can treat a wide
variety of waste streams consisting of soils,
sludges, and raw organic streams, including
lubricating oil, evaporator bottoms, chelating
agents, and ion-exchange resins, with
contaminant concentrations ranging from parts
per million levels to 40 percent by volume. The
technology can also treat wastes generated by the
petroleum, chemical, pesticide, and wood-
preserving industries, as well as wastes generated
by many other chemical manufacturing and
industrial processes. The WASTECH technology
can also be applied to mixed wastes containing
organic, inorganic, and radioactive contaminants.
SUPERSET*
WASTE MATERIAL SIZING WASTE
STOCKPILE
PUMP PROCESSED PROCESSED
MATERIAL TO MATERIALS
EXCAVATION PLACED TO
SPECIFICATIONS
WASTECH Solidification and Stabilization Process
Page 166
The SITE F'rogram assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December J996
Completed Project
STATUS: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
The technology was accepted into the SITE EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Demonstration Program hi spring 1989. A field Terrence Lyons
demonstration at Robins Air Force Base hi U.S. EPA
Warner Robins, Georgia was completed hi National Risk Management Research
August 1991. WASTECH subsequently Laboratory
conducted a bench-scale study hi 1992 under 26 West Martin Luther King Drive
glovebox conditions to develop a detailed mass Cincinnati, OH 45268
balance of volatile organic compounds. The 513-569-7589
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report will be Fax: 513-569-7676
available hi 1997. The technology is being
commercially applied to treat hazardous wastes
contaminated with various organics, inorganics,
and mixed wastes.
This technology is no longer available from the
vendor. For further information about the
process, contact the EPA Project Manager.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 167
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
ROY F. WESTON, INC.
(Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Roy F. Western, Inc. (Weston), low
temperature thermal treatment (LT3®) system
thermally desorbs organic compounds from
contaminated soil without heating the soil to
combustion temperatures. The transportable
system (see photograph below) is assembled on
three flat-bed trailers and requires an area of
about 5,000 square feet, including ancillary and
support equipment. The LT3® system consists of
three segments: soil treatment, emissions
control, and water treatment.
The LT3® thermal processor consists of two
jacketed troughs, one above the other. Each
trough houses four intermeshed, hollow screw
conveyors. A front-end loader feeds soil or
sludge onto a conveyor that discharges into a
surge hopper above the thermal processor. Hot
oil circulating through the troughs and screws
heats the soil to 400 to 500 °F, removing
contaminants. A second stage indirect heater is
available to achieve 1,000 °F discharge
temperatures. Soil is discharged from the
thermal processor into a conditioner, where a
water spray cools the soil and minimizes dust
emissions.
A fan draws desorbed organics from the thermal
processor through a fabric filter baghouse.
Depending on contaminant characteristics, dust
collected on the fabric filter may be retreated,
combined with treated material, or drummed
separately for off-site disposal. Exhaust gas from
the fabric filter is drawn into an air-cooled
condenser to remove most of the water vapor and
organics. The gas is then passed through a
second, refrigerated condenser and treated by
carbon adsorption.
Condensate streams are typically treated in a
three-phase, oil-water separator to remove light
and heavy organic phases from the water phase.
Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT3®) System
Page 168
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
The water phase is then treated in a carbon
adsorption system to remove residual organic
contaminants. Treated condensate is often used
for soil conditioning, and only the organic phases
are disposed of off site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This system treats soils and sludges contaminated
with volatile and semivolatile organic compounds
(VOC and SVOC). Bench-, pilot-, and full-scale
LT3® systems have treated soil contaminated with
the following wastes: coal tar, drill cuttings (oil-
based mud), No. 2 diesel fuel, JP-4 jet fuel,
leaded and unleaded gasoline, petroleum
hydrocarbons, halogenated and nonhalogenated
solvents, VOCs, SVOCs, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls,
pesticides, herbicides, dioxins, and furans.
STATUS:
The LT3® system was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in September 1991. In
November and December 1991, the LT3® system
was demonstrated under the SITE Program as
part of a proof-of-process test for full-scale
remediation of the Anderson Development
Company (ADC) Superfund site in Adrian,
Michigan. The system was tested on lagoon
sludge from the ADC site. This sludge was
contaminated with VOCs and SVOCs, including
4,4-methylene bis(2-chloroaniline) (MBOCA).
The Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/019)
and Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-92/019) are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the demonstration, the system throughput
was approximately 2.1 tons per hour. Six
replicate tests were conducted, each lasting
approximately 6 hours. The SITE demonstration
yielded the following results:
• The LT3® system removed VOCs to
below method detection limits (less than
0.060 milligram per kilogram [mg/kg]
for most compounds).
• The LT3® system achieved MBOCA
removal efficiencies greater than
88 percent; MBOCA concentrations in
the treated sludge ranged from 3.0 to
9.6 mg/kg.
• The LT3® system decreased the
concentrations of all SVOCs in the
sludge, with the exception of phenol,
which increased possibly due to
chlorobenzene.
• Dioxins and furans were formed in the
system, but the 2,3,7,8-tetra-
chlorodibenzo-p-dioxin isomer was not
detected in treated sludges.
• Stack emissions of nonmethane total
hydrocarbons increased from 6.7 to
11 parts per million by volume during
the demonstration; the maximum
emission rate was 0.2 pound per day
(ppd). The maximum particulates
emission rate was 0.02 ppd, and no
chlorides were measured in stack gases.
The economic analysis of the LT3® system's
performance compared the costs associated with
treating soils containing 20, 45, and 75 percent
moisture. The treatment costs per ton of material
were estimated to be $37, $537, and $725,
respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Avenue
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Mike Cosmos
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380-1499
610-701-7423
Fax: 610-701-5035
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 169
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ROY F. WESTON, INC./IEG TECHNOLOGIES
(UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Unterdruck-Verdampfer-Brunnen (UVB)
vacuum vaporizing well is an in situ system for
remediating contaminated aquifers, especially
those contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOC). The UVB system uses a
combination of chemical, physical, and biological
processes.
A UVB system consists of a specially adapted
groundwater well, a negative pressure stripping
reactor, an aboveground mounted blower, and a
waste air decontamination system such as
activated carbon beds (see figure below).
Activated Carbon Filter
Off Air
The water level rises about 1 foot inside the well
due to negative pressure generated by a blower.
Fresh air is drawn into the system through a pipe
leading to the stripping reactor, and passes up
through the raised water. The rising air bubbles
enhance the suction effect at the bottom of the
well, creating air-lift. A specific flow direction
can be induced by adding a support pump to
produce an upward or downward vertical flow
within the well.
The contaminants vaporize into the air bubbles
and are removed from the well by the air flow.
The oscillating hydraulic pressure forces the
water horizontally into the aquifer through the
Ambient Air
Monitoring Wells
Working GW Level yRestlng GW
Stripping Zone
Unsatu rated
Zone
Capillary / ,
Zona
UVB Standard Circulation
Page 170
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
top screened well segment. In the surrounding
aquifer, a circulation system develops; water
enters at the well base and leaves through the
upper screened segment, or vice versa,
depending on the desired flow direction.
A flow pattern with a calculable horizontal and
vertical component is produced in the aquifer to
compensate for the directed water flow within the
UVB well. Thus, treated groundwater circulates
through the circulation cell within the aquifer
before returning to the well.
The UVB technology can extract soil gas during
groundwater treatment. The amount of soil gas
and groundwater passing through the
decontamination system can be adjusted
according to the type of contamination and the
well construction.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The UVB technology is designed to remove
VOCs from groundwater. Depending on the
circumstances, the UVB system may also
remediate semivolatile organic compounds and
heavy metals.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1993. The
demonstration at March Air Force Base,
California was completed in May 1994. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/500),
Technology Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/500a), and
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/005) are available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Demonstration results indicate that the UVB
system reduced trichloroethene (TCE) in
groundwater by an average of greater than
94 percent. The average TCE concentration
from the outlet of the UVB system in the treated
groundwater was approximately 3 micrograms
per liter (/ig/L), with only one event above
5 /^g/L. The inlet TCE concentration averaged
40 jtig/L.
Results of a dye-tracer study conducted during
the demonstration indicated that the radius of the
circulation cell was at least 40 feet.
Modeling of the radius of the circulation cell by
Roy F. Weston, Inc., suggests that it may extend
to approximately 83 feet, which compares to a
conventional pumping well radius of influence of
60 feet.
In general, TCE in the shallow and intermediate
screened wells showed a concentration reduction
both vertically and horizontally during the
demonstration. TCE concentrations in these
wells appeared to homogenize as indicated by
their convergence and stabilization. Variations in
TCE concentrations were noted in the deep
screened wells.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
JeffBannon
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
14724 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1000
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
818-971-4900
Fax: 818-971-4901
Eric Klingel
IEG Technologies
5015D West W.T. Harris Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28269
704-599-4818
Fax: 704-599-4815
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 171
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
WHEELABRATOR GLEAN AIR SYSTEMS, INC.
(formerly CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.)
(PO*WW*ER™ Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PO*WW*ER™ technology is used to treat
and reduce complex industrial and hazardous
wastewaters containing mixtures of inorganic
salts, metals, volatile and nonvolatile organics,
volatile inorganics, and radionuclides. The
proprietary technology combines evaporation
with catalytic oxidation to concentrate and
destroy contaminants, producing a high-quality
product condensate.
Wastewater is first pumped into an evaporator,
where most of the water and contaminants are
vaporized and removed, concentrating the
contaminants into a small volume for further
treatment or disposal. The contaminant vapors
then pass over a bed of proprietary robust
catalyst, where the pollutants are oxidized and
destroyed. Depending on the contaminant vapor
composition, effluent vapors from the oxidizer
may be treated hi a scrubber. The vapors are
then condensed to produce water (condensate)
that can be used as either boiler or cooling tower
makeup water, if appropriate. Hazardous
wastewater can thus be separated into a small
contaminant stream (brine) and a large clean
water stream without using expensive reagents or
increasing the volume of the total stream. The
photograph below illustrates a PO*WW*ER™ -
based wastewater treatment plant.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The PO*WW*ER™ technology can treat
wastewaters containing a mixture of the
following contaminants:
Organic
• Halogenated volatiies
• Halogenated semivolatiles
• Nonhalogenated volatiies
• Nonhalogenated semi-
volatiles
• Organic pesticides/
herbicides
• Solvents
• Benzene, toluene, ethyl-
benzene, and xylene
• Organic cyanides
• Nonvolatile organics
, Inorganic
Heavy metals
Nonmetallic
toxic elements
Cyanides
Ammonia
Nitrates
Salts
Radioactive
Plutonium
Americium
Uranium
Technetium
Thorium
Radium
Barium
PO*WW*ER™-Based Wastewater Treatment Plant
Page 772
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Suitable wastewaters for treatment by the
PO*WW*ER™ technology include landfill
leachates, contaminated groundwaters, process
wastewaters, and low-level radioactive mixed
wastes.
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1991. The
demonstration took place in September 1992 at
the Chemical Waste Management, Inc., Lake
Charles, Louisiana facility. Landfill leachate, an
F039 hazardous waste, was treated in a pilot-
scale unit. The Applications Analysis Report
(EPA/540/AR-93/506) and Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R93/506) are
available from EPA.
A commercial system with a capacity of
50 gallons per minute is in operation at Ysing Yi
Island, Hong Kong. A pilot-scale unit, with a
capacity of 1 to 1.5 gallons per minute, is
available and can treat radioactive, hazardous,
and mixed waste streams.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The ability of the PO*WW*ER™ system to
concentrate aqueous wastes was evaluated by
measuring the volume reduction and
concentration ratio achieved. The volume of
brine produced during each 9-hour test period
was about 5 percent of the feed waste volume
processed in the same period. The concentration
ratio, defined as the ratio of total solids (TS)
concentration in the brine to the TS concentration
hi the feed waste, was about 32 to 1.
The feed waste contained concentrations of
volatile organic compounds (VOC) ranging from
320 to 110,000 micrograms per liter Oug/L);
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC) ranging
from 5,300 to 24,000 /j.g/L; ammonia ranging
from 140 to 160 milligrams per liter (mg/L); and
cyanide ranging from 24 to 36 mg/L. No VOCs,
SVOCs, ammonia, or cyanide were detected in
the product condensate.
The PO*WW*ER™ system removed sources of
feed waste toxicity. The feed waste was acutely
toxic with median lethal concentrations (LC50)
consistently below 10 percent. The product
condensate was nontoxic with LC50 values
consistently greater than 100 percent, but only
after the product condensate was cooled and its
pH, dissolved oxygen level, and hardness or
salinity were increased.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Myron Reicher
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc.
1501 East Woodfield Road,
Suite 200 West
Schaumberg, IL 60173
847-706-6900
Fax: 847-706-6996
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 173
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
XEROX CORPORATION
(2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process was
developed as an alternative to conventional
pump-and-treat technology, particularly in low
conductivity formations such as silts and clays
that are impacted by volatile organic compounds
(VOC). 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION uses a high-
vacuum source applied to an extraction tube
within a water well to increase groundwater
removal rates (consequently the dissolved phase
of contamination) and to volatilize and extract
that portion of contaminant from the sorbed or
free product phases. Vacuum lift of water is not
a limiting factor in the application of the
technology. Since a mixed vapor-liquid column
is extracted from the well, the 2-PHASE™
EXTRACTION technology allows a single piece
of equipment (a high vacuum source) to remove
contaminants in both the liquid and vapor phases.
To extract both groundwater and soil vapor from
a single extraction well, the 2-PHASE™
EXTRACTION process uses a vacuum pump to
apply a high vacuum (generally 18 to 29 inches
Contaminated
Groundwater
& Soil Vapor
Ground
Surface.
of mercury) through a central extraction tube,
which extends down the well. Soil vapor drawn
into the well by the vacuum provides for a high
velocity vapor stream at the bottom tip of the
extraction tube, which entrains the contaminated
groundwater and lifts it to ground surface. As
groundwater moves through the extraction
system, as much as 95 percent of the VOCs in
the water phase are transferred to the vapor
phase. The vapor and water phases are then
separated at the surface in a separator tank. The
water phase requires only carbon polishing prior
to discharge, provided that the compounds are
adsorbable. With some compounds the water
carbon treatment can be eliminated. The vapor
phase is subjected to carbon treatment,
bioremediation, resin regeneration, catalytic
oxidation, or other vapor phase treatment (based
on contaminant characteristics, mass loadings,
and economics) prior to release to atmosphere.
A kick-start system can induce flow and help
dewater the well. The flow of atmospheric air
can be regulated by adjustment of the gate valve
to: (1) optimize the air-to-water flow ratio to
Vapor
Pump
2-PHASE™
EXTRACTION
Well
Vapor Phase
Treatment
Groundwater Phase
*• Treatment
Separator
Tank
Screened
Interval
Groundwater
Pump
Static Water
Level
LEGEND
G ro u n d wate r
Phase
Groundwater &
Soil Vapor
Schematic of the 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process
Page 174
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
minimize water "slug" production at startup (the
term slug refers to an irregular pulsation of water
through the extraction tube which indicates
irregular water flow); (2) maximize tube
penetration into the saturated zone; and (3)
maximize the groundwater flow rate by
optimizing the applied vacuum to the well's
annular space.
Typical installation activities require connection
of a power supply, piping and vacuum system
leveling, connection to the extraction well(s), and
connection of vapor and liquid-phase discharge
connections to the final treatment process(es).
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is designed to remove VOCs
from groundwater and soils.
STATUS:
The Xerox 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION process
was accepted into the SITE Demonstration
Program in summer 1994. The demonstration
began in August 1994 at a contaminated
groundwater site at McClellan Air Force Base in
Sacramento, California and was completed in
February 1995. The demonstration was
conducted in support of the McClellan Public-
Private Partnership coordinated by Clean Sites,
Inc. Reports of the demonstration are in
preparation.
The Xerox 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION process
is a patented technology. Six patents were issued
from 1991-1995 and several patents are pending.
The 2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION process
technology is available under license and is being
used extensively in the United States, Canada,
South America, Great Britain, and Europe.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Results from the demonstration are detailed
below:
• The total contaminant (trichloroethene,
tetrachloroethene, Freon 133™) mass
removal during the 6-month
demonstration was estimated at 1600
pounds, of which 99.7 percent was
extracted from the vapor phase.
• The system simultaneously extracted 1.4
million gallons of groundwater and 24.4
million cubic feet of soil vapor.
• The radius of capture in the groundwater
extended from 100 to 300 feet from the
extraction well. The radius of influence
in the vadose zone extended 200 feet
from the extraction well.
• The estimated cost of using the 2-
PHASE™ EXTRACTION process was
$28 per pound compared to an estimated
$1370 per pound for a conventional
pump and treat system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ron Hess
Xerox Corporation
800 Phillips Road
Building 304-13S
Webster, NY 14580
716-422-3694
Fax: 716-422-9211
E-mail: ronald hess@wb.xerox
Web Site: www.xerox.com/ehs/remed.html
TECHNOLOGY USER CONTACT:
Phil Mook
SM-ALC/EMR
5050 Dudley Boulevard, Suite 3
McClellan AFB, CA 95652-1389
916-643-5443
Fax: 916-643-0827
E-mail: mook.phil@smal .mcclellan.af.mil
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 175
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL INC.
(Cross-Flow Pervaporation System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZENON),
cross-flow pervaporation technology is a
membrane-based process that removes volatile
organic compounds (VOC) from aqueous
matrices. The technology uses an organophilic
membrane made of nonporous silicone rubber,
which is permeable to organic compounds, and
highly resistant to degradation.
In a typical field application, contaminated water
is pumped from an equalization tank through a
prefilter to remove debris and silt particles, and
then into a heat exchanger that raises the water
temperature to about 165°F (75°C). The heated
water then flows into a pervaporation module
containing the organophilic membranes. The
composition of the membranes causes organics in
solution to adsorb to them. A vacuum applied to
the system causes the organics to diffuse through
the membranes and move out of the
pervaporation module. This material is then
passed through a condenser generating a highly
concentrated liquid called permeate. Treated
water exits the pervaporation module and is
discharged from the system. The permeate
separates into aqueous and organic phases.
Aqueous phase permeate is sent back to the
pervaporation module for further treatment,
while the organic phase permeate is discharged to
a receiving vessel.
Pilot-Scale Cross-Flow Pervaporation System
Page 176
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Because emissions are vented from the system
downstream of the condenser, organics are kept
in solution, thus minimizing air releases. The
condensed organic materials represent only a
small fraction of the initial wastewater volume
and may be subsequently disposed of at
significant cost savings. This process may also
treat industrial waste streams and recover
organics for later use.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Pervaporation can be applied to aqueous waste
streams such as groundwater, lagoons, leachate,
and rinse waters that are contaminated with
VOCs such as solvents, degreasers, and gasoline.
The technology is applicable to the types of
aqueous wastes treated by carbon adsorption, air
stripping, and steam stripping.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program (ETP) in January
1989. The Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/F-93/503), which details results from
the ETP evaluation, is available from EPA.
Based on results from the ETP, ZENON was
invited to demonstrate the technology in the
Demonstration Program. A pilot-scale
pervaporation system, built by ZENON for
Environment Canada's Emergencies Engineering
Division, was tested over a 2-year period (see
photograph on previous page). During the
second year, testing was carried out over several
months at a petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated
site in Ontario, Canada.
A full-scale SITE demonstration took place in
February 1995 at a former waste disposal area at
Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego,
California. The demonstration was conducted as
a cooperative effort among EPA, ZENON, the
Naval Environmental Leadership Program,
Environment Canada, and the Ontario Ministry
of Environment and Energy.
Organics were the primary groundwater
contaminant at the site, and trichloroethene
(TCE) was selected as the contaminant of
concern for the demonstration. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/511)
and Demonstration Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/511a) are
available from EPA.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
Analysis of demonstration samples indicate that
the ZENON pervaporation system was about
98 percent effective in removing TCE from
groundwater. The system achieved this removal
efficiency with TCE influent concentrations of up
to 250 parts per million at a flow rate of
10 gallons per minute (gpm) or less. Treatment
efficiency remained fairly consistent throughout
the demonstration; however, the treatment
efficiency decreased at various times due to
mineral scaling problems.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Turner
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7775
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Chris Lipski
ZENON Environmental Inc.
845 Harrington Court
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
L7N 3P3
905-639-6320
Fax: 905-639-1812
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 177
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL INC.
(ZenoGem™ Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
ZENON Environmental Inc.'s, ZenoGern™
Process integrates biological treatment with
membrane-based ultrafiltration (see figure
below). This innovative system treats high
strength wastes at long sludge retention time but
short hydraulic residence time. As a result, the
bioreactor's size is significantly reduced.
Membrane filtration reduces the turbidity of the
treated wastewater to less than 1 nephelometric
turbidity unit.
In the ZenoGem™ Process, wastewater
contaminated with organic compounds first enters
the bioreactor, where contaminants are
biologically degraded. Next, the process pump
circulates the biomass through the ultrafiltration
membrane system, or ultrafilter. The ultrafilter
separates treated water from biological solids and
soluble materials with higher molecular weights,
including emulsified oil. The solids and soluble
materials are then recycled to the bioreactor.The
ZenoGem™ Process captures higher molecular
weight materials that would otherwise pass
through conventional clarifiers and filters. The
ZenoGem™ Process pilot-scale system is mounted
on a 48-foot trailer and consists of the following
six major components:
• Polyethylene equalization/holding tank:
reduces the normal flow concentration
fluctuations in the system
• Polyethylene bioreactor tank: contains
the bacterial culture that degrades
organic contaminants
• Process and feed pumps: ensures proper
flow and pressure for optimum system
performance
• Ultrafiltration module: contains rugged,
clog-free, tubular membranes that
remove solids from treated water
• Clean-in-place tank: includes all the
necessary valves, instrumentation, and
ZenoGem™ Process
Page 178
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
controls to clean the membrane filters
• Control panel and computer: monitors
system performance
The treatment capacity of the pilot-scale, trailer-
mounted system is about 500 to 1,000 gallons of
wastewater per day; however, a full-scale system
can treat much larger quantities of wastewater.
The trailer is also equipped with a laboratory that
enables field personnel to conduct tests to
evaluate system performance. The system is
computer-controlled and equipped with alarms to
notify the operator of mechanical and operational
problems.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ZenoGem™ Process is designed to remove
biodegradable materials, including most organic
contaminants, from wastewater to produce a high
quality effluent. The process consistently
nitrifies organics and can denitrify organics with
the addition of an anoxic bioreactor. The process
is limited to aqueous media and may be used to
treat high strength leachates, contaminated
groundwater, and soil washing effluent.
STATUS:
The ZenoGem™ Process was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in summer 1992.
The ZenoGem™ Process was demonstrated at the
Nascolite Superfund site in Millville, New Jersey
from September through November 1994.
Groundwater at this 17.5-acre site is
contaminated with methyl methacrylate (MMA)
and other volatile organic compounds from
manufacturing polymethyl methacrylate plastic
sheets, commonly known as Plexiglas. The
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/503)
and Technology Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/503a)
are available from EPA. The Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report will be available
in 1997.
Since the development of the ZenoGem™
technology in 1987, ZENON has performed pilot
tests for government and private clients on
several different types of wastewater, including
oily wastewater, metal finishing wastes, cleaning
solutions containing detergents, alcohol-based
cleaning solutions, landfill leachate, aqueous
paint-stripping wastes, and deicing fluids.
Information about the two demonstrations
conducted in Canada and the United States is
available from ZENON.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
During the 3-month demonstration, sampling
results showed that the system achieved average
removal efficiencies of greater than 99.9 percent
for MMA and 97.9 percent for chemical oxygen
demand. MMA concentrations measured in the
off-gas emission stream indicated insignificant
volatilization. The ultrafiltration system
effectively dewatered the process sludge, which
yielded a smaller waste volume for off-site
disposal. Sludge dewatering resulted in an
approximate volume reduction of 60 percent and
a solids increase from 1.6 to 3.6 percent. The
process effluent was clear and odorless, and
accepted for discharge by the local publicly
owned treatment works. During the
demonstration, the system was left unattended at
night and on weekends, demonstrating that
computer control is practical for extended
operating periods.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Daniel Sullivan
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-321-6677
Fax: 908-321-6640
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
F.A. (Tony) Tonelli or Philip Canning
ZENON Environmental Inc.
845 Harrington Court
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
L7N 3P3
905-639-6320
Fax: 905-639-1812
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 179
-------
TABLE 2
Ongoing SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
AllicdSignal Environmental
Systems and Services, Inc.,
Des Plaines, IL (003)'
Arctic Foundations Inc.,
Anchorage, AK (010A)
CF Systems Corporation/
Morrison Knudsen,"
Cleveland, OH (008)
Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment
(developed by Colorado
School of Mines),"*
Denver; CO (OQ5)/(E01)
EET, Inc.,
Bellaire.TX (009)
EG&G Environmental, Inc.,
Pittsburgh, PA (Q09)
Electrokinetics, Inc.,*"
Baton Rouge, LA (009)/(E03)
Geotech Development
Corporation,
Newark, NI (009)
Lasagna Public-Private
Partnership,
Cincinnati, OH (010A)
Technology
Biological Air Treatment
System
Cryogenic Barrier
Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction
(LG-SX) Technology
Constructed Wetlands-Based
Treatment
TECHXTRACT® Process
NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping
Technology
Electrokinetic Soil Processing
Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification
of Chromium-Contaminated
Soils
Lasagna In Situ Soil
Remediation
Technology Contact
Stephen Lupton
847-391-3224
800-462-4544
Andra Moffett
201-455-5894
800-626-4974
Ed Yarmak
907-562-2741
Chris Shallice
216-523-6581
303-466-4489
James Lewis
303-692-3383
Michael Bonem
713-662-0727
James Beninati
412-920-5401
Elif Acar
504-753-8004
Thomas Tate
610-337-8515
William Librizzi
201-596-5846
Michael Roulier
513-569-7796
SaHo
314-694-5179
EPA Project
Manager
donald Lewis
513-569-7856
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Mark Meckes
513-569-7348
Edward Bates
513-569-7774
Dennis Timberlake
513-569-7547
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Marta K. Richards
513-569-7692
Ronald Turner or
Michelle Simon
513-569-7775 or
513-569-7469
Applicable
Media
Air, Vapor
Exhaust
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment,
Wastewater
Acid Mine
Drainage
Porous Solid
Materials
Groundwater
Soil, Sediment
Solids, Ash, Slag
Groundwater, Soils
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Mot Applicable
Nonspecific Inorganics
Not Applicable
Metals
Heavy Metals,
Radionuclides
Soluble Metals
Heavy Metals and
Other Inorganics,
Radionuclides
Hexavalent Chromium,
Heavy Metals
Nonspecific Inorganics
Organic
Biodegradable Organic
Compounds, PAHs, Diesel
Fuel, Chlorobenzene
Nonspecific Organics
VOCs, SVOCs, PAHs,
PCBs, Dioxins, PCP
Not Applicable
PCBs, Hydrocarbons
BTEX, TCE, DCE, PAHs
Alcohols, Ketones
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Organics
§
Solicitation number
An additional demonstration is planned for this technology. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program section (completed projects) for more information.
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
Ongoing SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Lockheed Martin Missiles and
Space Co. and Geokinetics
International, Inc.,
Palo Alto, CA (009)
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc.,'"
London, Ontario, Canada
(009)/(EOS)
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, OH (006)
Phytokinetics, Inc.,
North Logan, UT (010A)
Phytotech,
Monmouth Junction, NJ (010A)
Pintail Systems Incorporated,
Aurora, CO (009)
Praxis Environmental
Technologies, Inc.,
Burlingame, CA (008)
Process Technologies, Inc.,
Boise, ID (009)
Recycling Sciences
International, Inc.,
Chicago, IL (009)
RKK, Ltd.,
Arlington, WA (009)
Technology
Electrokinetic Remediation
Process
Photocatalytic Air Treatment
Bioventing
Phytoremediation Process
Phytoremediation Technology
Spent Ore Bioremediation
Process
In Situ Thermal Extraction
Process
Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-
Phase Halogens
Desorption and Vapor
Extraction System
CRYOCELL®
Technology Contact
Steven Schwartzkopf
415-424-3176
Bob Henderson
519-660-8669
Paul McCauley
513-569-7444
Ari Ferro.
801-750-0985
801-755-0891
Michael Blaylock or
John Ehrler
908-438-0900
Leslie Thompson
303-367-8443
Lloyd Stewart
415-548-9288
Captain Jeff Stinson
904-283-6254
Mike Swan
208-385-0900
Phil Mook
916-643-5443
William Meenan
312-663-4242
Ronald Krieg
360-653-4844
EPA Project
Manager
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Jack Hubbard
513-56.9-7507
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Air
Soil
Soil, Sediment,
Groundwater
Soil, Groundwater,
Sediment
Spent Ore, Waste
Rock, Mine
Tailings, Mining
Process Water
Soil, Groundwater
Air, Gases
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals,
Radionuclides
Cyanide
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Volatile Inorganics
sfonspeclfic Inorganics
Organic
Polar Organics
VQCs, SVOCs
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
VOCs and SVOCs,
Hydrocarbons, Solvents
VOCs, CPCs, HCFCs
VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs,
PAHs, PCP, Pesticides
Nonspecific Organics
••4
00
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
TABLE 2 (Continued)
Ongoing SITE Demonstration Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Sandia National Laboratories,
Albuquerque, NM (009)
Selentec Environmental
Technologies, Inc.,
Atlanta. GA (010A)
Sevenson Environmental
Services, Inc.,
Munster, IN (009)
PITTE" O™.r!n«^
otVJLii oci yiv«j
Dixon, CA (009)
SOLUCORP Industries,
West Nyack, NY (009)
Terra Kleen Response
Group, Inc.,"
Del Mar, GA (010A)
U.S. Air Force,
Wright Patterson Air Force
Base, OH (010A)
Vortec Corporation,'"
Colleeeville. PA (609V(E04)
Western Research Institute,'"
Laramie, WY (005)/(E04)
Wheelabrator Technologies Inc.,
Hampton, NH (008)
Technology
n Situ Electrokinetic Extraction
System
Selentec MAG*SEP3M
Technology
MAECTITE® Chemical
Treatment Process
Steam Injection and Vacuum
Extraction
Molecular Bonding System®
Solvent Extraction Treatment
System
Phytoremediation of TCE-
Contaminated Shallow
Groundwater
Oxidation and Vitrification
Process
Contained Recovery of Oily
Wastes
WES-PHix9 Stabilization
Process
Technology Contact
iric Lindgren
505-844-3820
Earl Mattson
505-856-3311
Steve Weldoft
770-640-7059
Karl Yost
219-836-0116
Douglas Dieter
916-678-8358
Robert Kuhn
914-623-2333
Alan Cash
619-558-8762
Greg Harvey
513-255-7716,
ext. 302
James Hnat
610-489-2255
Lyle Johnson
307-721-2281
Mark Lyons
603-929-3403
pPA Project
Manager
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Thomas Holdsworth
513-569-7675
Terrence Lyons
513-569-7589
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Eugene Harris
513-569-7862
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Applicable
Media
Soil
Water, Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Solids
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Ash
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Groundwater, Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment'
Soil, Groundwater
Municipal Waste
Combustion Ash,
Soil, Sludge
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Anionic Heavy Metals,
iexavalent Chromium
3eavy Metals,
iladionuclides
Lead, Other Heavy
Metals
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals, Other
Nonspecific Inorganics
Not Applicable
Lead, Cadmium,
Copper, Zinc, other
Heavy Metals
Organic
*lot Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
VOCs, SVOCs
Not Applicable
PCBs, PCP, PAH,
Creosote, Chlorinated
Pesticides, PCDD, PCDF
TCE, Petroleum,
Munitions, Halogenated
Hydrocarbons
Nonspecific Organics
Coal Tars, Petroleum
By-Products, PCP,
Chlorinated Solvents
Not Applicable
ho
An additional demonstration is planned for this technology. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program section (completed projects) for more information.
From Emerging Technology Program
-------
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
ALLIEDSIGNAL ENVIRONMENTAL
SYSTEMS AND SERVICES, INC.
(Biological Air Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and
Services, Inc. (AlliedSignal), has developed a
biological air treatment (BAT) system that purifies
contaminated air streams (see figure below).
This system uses a biomass support matrix
consisting of porous polyurethane foam with a
surface area-to-volume ratio greater than 200
square feet per cubic foot. This support matrix
is coated with powdered activated carbon (PAC)
using a proprietary procedure that maintains the
carbon in an activated state.
The carbon-coated foam support matrix is then
mixed with polypropylene spacers, yielding a
"mixed media" packing. The mixed media
packing gives the support base rigidity and
provides spaces between adjacent carbon-coated
porous foam blocks. This open spacing gives the
BAT system good distribution and mass transfer
characteristics. It also results in low back
pressures at gas retention times as low as 30 to
60 seconds.
The BAT's unique support matrix has been used
in conjunction with spacers such as HiFlow pall
rings, which enable the BAT system to achieve
removal rates greater than 92 percent for
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
(BTEX). These removal rates have been
achieved at loading rates up to 60 grams BTEX
per cubic meter per hour while maintaining back
pressures of less than 4 pounds per square inch at
a linear minute space velocity of 0.5 minute.
Moisture content, nutrient levels, and pH are
controlled by introducing a slow downward flow
of water countercurrent to the air flow. The
water then exits the reactor and enters a small
holding reservoir where the pH of the water is
monitored and automatically readjusted to pH 7.
Discharge
Water Flow
Biological Air Treatment System
Page 184
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
The water can then be recycled to the reactor.
High initial organic loading rates result in
considerable acid generation, and pH control is
essential. Nitrogen (in the form of ammonia or
nitrate) and phosphate nutrients are monitored
and added to the reservoir to ensure that organic
pollutants continue to biodegrade. The
conductivity of the water in the reservoir is also
monitored, and a portion of the water is
periodically replaced to prevent buildup of
dissolved salts.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The BAT system can be applied to any air or
vapor exhaust system that contains biodegradable
organic contaminants, including aromatic
hydrocarbons such as BTEX and naphthalene, as
well as biodegradable chlorinated organics such
as trichloroethene (TCE). Several commercial
BAT units are being used to treat exhaust gases
from creosote wood preserving operations.
These systems have reduced total volatile organic
compound emissions by more than 90 percent
and have dramatically reduced odor problems at
these sites. Other applications include treatment
of soil vapor extraction systems, commercial
bakeries, pharmaceutical plants, food processing
plants, and chemical plants.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted in the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1995. The BAT
system is being demonstrated at the AlliedSignal
St. Joseph, Michigan Superfund site.
Demonstration activities began in August 1995
and will continue through fall and whiter 1996.
The technology is being used in conjunction with
a soil vapor extraction system to remove TCE
and other chlorinated ethenes.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stephen Lupton
AlliedSignal Environmental
Systems and Services, Inc.
50 East Algonquin Road
P.O. Box 5016
Des Plaines, IL 60017-5016
847-391-3224
800-462-4544
Fax: 847-391-3750
TECHNOLOGY VENDOR CONTACT:
Andra Moffett
AlliedSignal Environmental
Systems and Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 1053
Morristown, NJ 07962-1053
201-455-5894
800-626-4974
Fax: 201-455-5722
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 185
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
ARCTIC FOUNDATIONS INC.
(Cryogenic Barrier)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Long-term containment and immobilization of
hazardous wastes using ground-freezing
technology is a relatively new field, even though
ground-freezing has been used as a temporary
construction aid for several years. Ground-
freezing is ideally suited to control waterborne
pollutants, since changing water from a liquid to
a solid has an obvious immobilizing effect. The
challenge for conventional ground-freezing
technologies is to be technically and economically
viable in the long-term. Arctic Foundations, Inc.
(API), has developed a ground-freezing
technology that has been used as a permanent,
long-term solution for containing and
immobilizing hazardous wastes.
Membrane Boot
New Spray-Applied Membrane
Existing Crushed
Limestone Base
Existing Clay Soils
and Shale Bedrock
Buried hazardous waste may be totally confined
by surrounding it with a frozen barrer. A frozen
barrier is created by reducing the ground
temperature around the waste to the correct
freezing temperature and subsequently freezing
the intervening waste. Artificial injection of
water is usually unnecessary since moisture is
present hi sufficient quantities in most soils. The
ground-freezing process is, naturally suited to
controlling hazardous waste because in-ground
moisture is transformed from serving as a
potential waste mobilizing agent to serving as a
protective agent.
A typical containment system consists of multiple
thermoprobes, and active (powered) condenser, an
interconnecting piping system, two-phase working
Refrigeration Supply and
Return Manifolds
Cryogenic Barrier Insulation Plan
Page 186
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1396
Ongoing Project
fluid, and a control system. The thermoprobes
(API's heat removal devices) and piping are
inserted into the soil on all sides and underneath
the waste. Two-phase working fluid circulates
through the piping and reduces the temperature of
the surrounding soil, creating a fozen barrier
around the waste. The thermoprobes may be
installed in any position and spacing to create a
frozen barrier wall of almost any required shape
and size. The selection of working fluids depends
on the specific waste application, site conditions,
and desired soil temperatures, and may consist of
freon, butane, propane, carbon dioxide, or
ammonia.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The cryogenic barrier can provide subsurface
containment for a variety of sites and wastes,
including the folio whig: underground storage
tanks; nuclear waste sites; plume control; burial
trenches, pits, and ponds; in situ waste treatment
areas; chemically contaminated sites; and spent
fuel storage ponds. The barrier is adaptable to
any geometry; drilling technology presents the
only constraint.
STATUS:
The system was accepted in the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1996. The
demonstration will evaluate the barrier's ability
to contain radionuclides from the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL) Waste Area
Grouping 9 Homogeneous Reactor Experiment
(HRE) pond. Hydrological data indicate that
radioactive contaminants are being released from
the HRE pond to the groundwater and surface
water.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ed Yarmak
Arctic Foundations Inc.
5621 Arctic Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99518
907-562-2741
Fax: 907-562-0153
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 187
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
(developed by COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES)
(Constructed Wetlands-Based Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The constructed wetlands-based treatment
technology uses natural geochemical and
microbiological processes inherent in an artificial
wetland ecosystem to accumulate and remove
metals from influent waters. The treatment
system incorporates principal ecosystem
components found in wetlands, such as organic
materials (substrate), microbial fauna, and algae.
Influent waters with high metal concentrations
flow through the aerobic and anaerobic zones of
the wetland ecosystem. Metals are removed by
ion exchange, adsorption, absorption, and
precipitation through geochemical and microbial
oxidation and reduction. Ion exchange occurs as
metals in the water contact humic or other organic
substances in the soil medium. Oxidation and
reduction reactions that occur in the aerobic and
anaerobic zones, respectively, precipitate metals
as hydroxides and sulfides. Precipitated and
adsorbed metals settle in quiescent ponds or are
filtered out as the water percolates through the
soil or substrate.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The constructed wetlands-based treatment process
is suitable for acid mine drainage from metal or
coal mining activities. These wastes typically
contain high metals concentrations and low pH.
Wetlands treatment has been applied with some
success to wastewater in the eastern United
States. The process may have to be adjusted to
account for differences hi geology, terrain,
7 oz. GEOFABRIC
GEOGRID
SUBSTRATE'
7 oz. GEOFABRIC
PERF. EFFLUENT
PIPING TIE TO
GEOGRID
PERF. INFLUENT
PIPING
7 oz. GEOFABRIC
GEONET
SUBSTRATE
''
^^
-SAND
SUBGRADE
HOPE LINER
GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER
16 oz. GEOFABRIC -
Schematic Cross Section of Pilot-Scale Upflow Cell
Page 188
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
trace metal composition, and climate in the metal
mining regions of the western United States.
STATUS:
Based on the SITE Emerging Technology
Program (ETP) results, the constructed wetlands-
based treatment process was selected for the
SITE Demonstration Program in 1991. For
further information on the ETP evaluation, refer
to the Emerging Technology Summary
(EPA/540/SR-93/523), the Emerging Technology
Report (EPA/540/R-93/523), or the Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/001),
which are available from EPA.
Studies under the Demonstration Program are
evaluating process effectiveness, toxicity
reduction, and biogeochemical processes at the
Burleigh Tunnel, near Silver Plume, Colorado.
Treatment of mine discharge from the Burleigh
Tunnel is part of the remedy for the Clear
Creek/Central City Superfund site. Construction
of a pilot-scale treatment system began in
summer 1993 and was completed in November
1993.
The pilot-scale treatment system is about 4,200
square feet and consists of an upflow cell (see
figure on previous page) and a downflow cell.
Each cell treats about 7 gallons per minute of
flow. Preliminary results indicate high removal
efficiency (between 80 to 90 percent) for zinc,
the primary contaminant in the discharge during
summer operation. Zinc removal during the first
winter of operation ranged from 60 to 80
percent. The demonstration is scheduled to run
through the summer of 1997.
In 1994, removal efficiency of dissolved zinc for
the upflow cell between March and September
remained above 90 percent; however, the
removal efficiency between September and
December declined to 84 percent due to the
reduction in microbial activity in the winter
months. The downflow cell removal efficiency
dropped to 68 percent in the whiter months and
was between 70 and 80 percent during the
summer months. The 1995 removal efficiency of
dissolved zinc for the upflow cell declined from
84 percent to below 50 percent due to substrate
hydrologic problems originating from attempts to
insulate this unit during the whiter months. The
1995 removal efficiency of the downflow cell
declined from 80 percent during the summer
months to 63 percent during the whiter again as
a result of reduced microbial activity. The 1996
removal efficiency of dissolved zinc calculated
for the downflow cell increased from a January
low of 63 percent to over 95 percent from May
through August. The reason for the increase in
the downflow removal efficiency is related to
reduced flow rates through the downflow
substrate which translates to increased residence
time.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Edward Bates
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7774
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
James Lewis
Colorado Department of Health
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
HMWMD-RP-B2
Denver, CO 80220-1530
303-692-3383
Fax: 303-759-5355
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 189
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TIOI\! PROGRAM
EET, INC.
(TECHXTRACT® Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The TECHXTRACT® process employs proprietary
chemical formulations in successive steps to
remove polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), toxic
hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and radionuclides
from the subsurface of porous materials such as
concrete, brick, steel, and wood. Each
formulation consists of chemicals from up to 14
separate chemical groups, and each formulation
can be specifically tailored to each contaminated
site.
The process is performed ha multiple cycles.
Each cycle consists of three stages: surface
preparation, extraction, and rinsing. Each stage
employs a specific chemical mix.
The surface preparation step uses a solution that
contains buffered organic and inorganic acids,
sequestering agents, wetting agents, and special
hydrotrope chemicals. The extraction formula
includes macro- and microemulsifiers in addition
to electrolyte, flotation, wetting, and sequestering
agents. The rinsing formula is pH-balanced and
contains wetting and complexing agents.
Emulsifiers in all the formulations help eliminate
fugitive releases of volatile organic compounds
or other vapors.
The chemical formulation in each stage is
sprayed on the contaminated surface as a fine
mist and worked into the surface with a stiff
bristle brush or floor scrubber. The chemicals
are allowed to penetrate into the subsurface and
are then rinsed or vacuumed from the surface with
a high-efficiency, particulate air-filtered, barrel-
vacuum. No major capital equipment is
required.
Contaminant levels can be reduced from 60 to 90
percent per cycle. One cycle can take up to 24
1. EET's proprietary
TECHHTRACTT'
blends are applied
in sequence.
Contaminants
entrained in spent
solution are
vacuumed and
drumed for disposal.
2. Chemicals
penetrate
through pores
and capillaries
4. Contaminants
are released
from substrate
and drawn to
surface.
3. Electrochemical bonds holding
contaminants to substrate are
attacked and broken.
Process Flow Diagram of the TECHXTRACT* Process
Page 190
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
hours. The total number of cycles is determined
from initial contaminant concentrations and final
concentration target levels.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The TECHXTRACT® process is designed to treat
porous solid materials contaminated with PCBs;
toxic hydrocarbons; heavy metals, including lead
and arsenic; and radionuclides. Because the
contaminants are extracted from the surface, the
materials can be left in place, reused, or
recycled. After treatment, the contaminants are
concentrated in a small volume of liquid waste.
In commercial applications, the process has
reduced PCB concentrations from
1,000,000 micrograms per 100 square
centimeters C"g/100 cm2) to concentrations less
than 0.2 ^g/100 cm2. The TECHXTRACT®
process has been used on concrete floors, walls
and ceilings, tools and machine parts, internal
piping, valves, and lead shielding. The
TECHXTRACT* process has removed lead,
arsenic, technetium, uranium, cesium, tritium,
and thorium.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the. SITE
Demonstration Program hi summer 1994. EET,
Inc.'s (EET) demonstration is on hold pending
site selection and notice to proceed by EPA.
The technology has been used in over
200 successful decontamination projects for the
U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Department of
Defense; the electric, heavy manufacturing, steel,
and aluminum industries; and other applications.
Further research is underway to apply the
technology to soil, gravel, and other loose
material. EET also plans to study methods for
removing or concentrating metals in the extracted
liquids.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Dennis Timberlake
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7547
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Michael Bonem
EET, Inc.
4710 Bellaire Boulevard, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 77401
713-662-0727
Fax: 713-662-2322
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 191
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
EG&G ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
(NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
EG&G Environmental, Inc., has developed the
patented NoVOCs™ in-well stripping technology
for the hi situ removal of volatile organic
compounds (VOC) from groundwater (see figure
below). NoVOCs™ combines air-lift pumping
with in-well vapor stripping to remove VOCs
from groundwater without the need to remove,
treat, and discharge a wastewater stream. The
process can also be adapted to remove both
VOCs and soluble metals from groundwater.
NoVOCs™ consists of a well screened both
beneath the water table and in the vadose zone.
An air line within the well runs from an
aboveground blower and extends below the
watertable. Pressurized air injected below the
watertable aerates the water within the well,
creating a density gradient between the aerated
water and the more dense water hi the
surrounding aquifer. As a result, dense water
flows in through the lower well screen and forces
the aerated water upward within the well, while
becoming aerated itself. The result is a rising
column of aerated water within the well, or an
air-lift pump.
As the aerated groundwater column rises within
the well, VOC mass transfer occurs from the
dissolved phase to the vapor phase. Above the
water table, a packer is installed at the upper
VOC
CONTAMINATED
WATER
LOWER
EXTRACTION
SCREEN
Schematic Diagram of the NoVOCs™ Technology
Page 792
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
screen to prevent the passage of rising water or
bubbles. The rising water column hits the
packer, the bubbles burst and the entrained VOC
vapor is stripped off laterally through the screen
by an upper vacuum casing. The VOC-rich
vapor is brought to the surface for treatment
while the laterally deflected water circulates back
into the aquifer. Reinfiltrating water creates a
toroidal circulation pattern around the well,
enabling the groundwater to undergo multiple
treatment cycles before flowing downgradient.
The VOC-rich vapor is treated using
commercially available techniques chosen
according to the vapor stream characteristics.
NoVOCs™ can also be used to remove readily
reduced metals from groundwater and stabilize
them in the vadose zone. Solubilized metals in
their oxidized states enter the lower screen by the
same route as dissolved VOCs in the
groundwater. The nonvolatile metals remain in
solution as the VOCs are stripped at the upper
screen and the water circulates out of the well.
The groundwater and soluble metals then pass
through an infiltration and treatment gallery
surrounding the upper well screen. This
treatment gallery is impregnated with a reducing
agent which reduces the soluble metals to an
insoluble valence state. The insoluble metals
accumulate in the infiltration gallery high above
the water table and can be either capped or
excavated at the conclusion of remedial action.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process treats groundwater contaminated by
volatile petroleum hydrocarbons including
benzene, ethylbenzene, and toluene, as well as
chlorinated solvents such as tetrachloroethene
and trichloroethene. Highly soluble organics like
alcohols and ketones are not easily air-stripped
from water but are readily biodegraded hi the
oxygen-rich environment produced by
NoVOCs™.
STATUS:
The NoVOCs™ technology was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program hi 1995. The
demonstration is scheduled to occur at Naval Air
Station North Island hi San Diego, California.
The demonstration is on hold awaiting a
Research Conservation and Recovery Act permit.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
James Beninati
EG&G Environmental, Inc.
Foster Plaza 6, Suite 400
681 Andersen Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15220
412-920-5401
Fax: 412-920-5402
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 193
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
ELECTRpKINETICS, INC.
(Electrokinetic Soil Processing)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Electrokinetic, Inc.'s, soil processes extract or
remediate heavy metals and organic contaminants
in. soils. The process can be applied in situ or ex
situ with suitable chemical agents to optimize the
remediation. For example, conditioning fluids
such as suitable acids may be used for electrode
(cathode) depolarization to enhance the process.
The figure below illustrates the field-processing
scheme and the flow of ions to respective
boreholes (or trenches). Electrodes are placed on
each side of the contaminated soil mass, and a
direct current is applied. Conditioning pore fluids
may be added or circulated at the electrodes to
control process electrochemistry.
Contaminants are electroplated on the electrodes or
separated in a posttreatment unit.
An acid front migrates towards the negative
electrode (cathode), and contaminants are extracted
through electroosmosis (EO) and electromigration
(EM). The concurrent mobility of the ions and
pore fluid decontaminates the soil mass. EO and
EM supplement or replace conventional pump-and-
treat technologies.
Bench-scale results show that the process works in
both unsaturated and saturated soils. Pore fluid
flow moves from the positive electrodes (anodes)
to the cathodes under the effect of the EO and EM
forces. Electrode selection is important, since many
metal or carbon anodes rapidly dissolve after contact
with strong oxidants.
., % ."• "A f ff
Extraction/
• Exchange
= yt ' ' '
i Processing
*
Process Control System
f •. :
.• :
-, ^r
f
Extraction/
Exchange
:.'.:.:; :.::.:.::..:.:::::::::n:..
Processing
A=~-^ 7
m
- Cathode
BASE FRONT
and/or CATHODIC
PROCESS FLUID
ACID FRONT
and/or ANODIC
PROCESS FLUID
Processed
Media
Electrokinetic Remediation Process
Page 194
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Electrokinetic soil processing extracts heavy
metals, radionuclides, and other inorganic
contaminants below their solubility limits.
During bench-scale testing, the technology has
removed arsenic, benzene, cadmium, chromium,
copper, ethylbenzene, lead, nickel, phenol,
trichloroethylene, toluene, xylene, and zinc from
soils. Bench-scale studies under the SITE
Program demonstrated the feasibility of removing
uranium and thorium from kaolinite.
Limited pilot-scale field tests resulted in lead and
copper removal from clays and saturated and
unsaturated sandy clay deposits. Treatment
efficiency depended on the specific chemicals,
their concentrations, and the buffer ing capacity
of the soil. The technique proved 85 to 95
percent efficient when removing phenol at
concentrations of 500 parts per million (ppm). In
addition, removal efficiencies for lead,
chromium, cadmium, and uranium at levels up to
2,000 micrograms per gram ranged between 75
and 95 percent.
STATUS:
Based on results from the Emerging Technology
Program, the electrokinetic technology was
invited in 1994 to participate hi the SITE
Demonstration Program. For further information
on the pilot-scale system, refer to the Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/504), which
is available from EPA.
The SITE demonstration began in July 1995 at an
inactive firing range at the Fort.Polk Army
Ammunition Reservation in Louisiana. The soil
at the site is contaminated with lead, copper, and
zinc, which have accumulated over several
decades. Concentrations of lead in the sandy
clay soil range from 1,000 to 5,000 ppm and are
less than 100 ppm at a 3-foot depth. A 20-foot
by 60-foot area will be remediated to a depth of
3 feet. Remediation of the site is expected to be
completed within 9 to 12 months of processing.
This demonstration represents the first
comprehensive study in the United States of an in
situ electrokinetic separation technology applied
to heavy metals in soils.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Elif Acar
Electrokinetics, Inc.
11552 Cedar Park Ave.
Baton Rouge, LA 70809
504-753-8004
Fax: 504-753-0028
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 195
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA JION PROGRAM
GEOTECH DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
(Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification of Chromium-Contaminated Soils)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Geotech Development Corporation (Geotech) claims
that the Cold-Top ex situ vitrification technology
coverts quantities of contaminated soil from a large
number of particles into an essentially monolithic,
vitrified mass. According to Geotech, vitrification
will transform the physical state of contaminated
soil from assorted crystalline matrices to a glassy,
amorphous solid state comprised of interlaced
polymeric chains. These chains typically consist of
alternating oxygen and silicon atoms. It is
expected that chromium (both trivalent and
hexavalent) can readily substitute for silicon in the
chains. According to Geotech, such chromium
should be immobile to leaching by aqueous
solvents and, therefore, biologically unavailable
and nontoxic.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology has been successfully used to
process municipal solid waste incinerator ash, fly
ash or bottom ash, asbestos-containing materials,
and various slag materials. The developer claims
that the technology can also be used to incorporate
heavy metals, such as cadmium or chromium,
rendering them unleachable by the toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP).
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Program in December 1994. The SITE
demonstration will occur during the second phase
of a two-phase New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection-funded research project
that is being coordinated by the New Jersey
Institute of Technology, Hazardous Substance
Management Research Center.
A bench-scale study in 1994 established the
performance of the process based on leachability of
chromium and the concentration of free hexavalent
chromium in the glass product. The study included
the collection and subsequent analysis of soils from
nine chromium-contaminated sites in northern New
Jersey. The soils were analyzed for total
chromium and total hexavalent chromium; the soils
also underwent TCLP analyses for chromium.
The concentrations of hexavalent chromium were
as high as 4,800 milligrams per kilogram in
PJ CoyBn
2. Fo&oaaUa Conveyor
DOLbloWafl
.
s. Mtcnac scccrctcr IMP.)
.
7. FUscn Rmoco (IMP.)
& Cydona Separator
OL krongiot Wet Scrubber
11. Final Filter (HEPA filter)
12. Ccntrd Room
13. Service
14. SCR
15. findied R-o&ict Rotravd
16. h-Une Heeler
Schematic Diagram of the Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification of Chromium-Contaminated Soils
Page 196
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
untreated soil. The results of the evaluation
indicated that concentrations of chromium in the
leachate from TCLP analyses were generally less
than 1 milligram per liter (mg/L), and that the
concentrations of chromium in all samples were
below the regulatory threshold concentration of 5
mg/L.
During the SITE demonstration, 3-ton samples
from the Colony Diner site and the Liberty State
Park site in Jersey City, New Jersey will be
vitrified. Cold-Top ex situ vitrification will
attempt to render hexavalent chromium
unleachable, and destroy other trace organics
found in soil from the New Jersey sites. In
addition, the vitrified product will be tested for
potential reuse in road construction. The SITE
demonstration is expected to occur in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7692
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Thomas Tate
Geotech Development Corporation
1150 First Avenue, Suite 630
King of Prussia, PA 19406
610-337-8515
Fax: 610-768-5244
William Librizzi
Hazardous Substance Management
Research Center
New Jersey Institute of Technology
138 Warren Street
Newark, NJ 07102
201-596-5846
Fax: 201-802-1946
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 197
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
LASAGNA™ PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
(Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Lasagna™ process, so named because of its
treatment layers, combines electroosmosis with
treatment layers which are installed directly into
the contaminated soil to form an integrated, hi
situ remedial process. The layers may be
configured vertically (Figure 1) or horizontally
(Figure 2). The process is designed to treat soil
and groundwater contaminants completely in situ,
without the use of injection or extraction wells.
The outer layers consist of either positively or
negatively charged electrodes. An electric field
is created by the electrodes, and the electric field
created by the electrodes moves contaminants in
soil pore fluids into or through the treatment
layers. In the vertical configuration, steel rods,
may be used as electrodes. In the horizontal
configuration, the electrodes and treatment zones
are installed by hydraulic fracturing. Granular
graphite is used for the electrodes and the
treatment zones are granular iron (for zero-valent,
metal-enhanced, reductive dechlorination) or
granular activated carbon (for biodegradation by
methanotrophic microorganisms).
APPLIED ELECTRICAL POTENTIAL
Not*: Etoctroosmotlc flow Is reversed upon switching electrical polarity.
Vertical Configuration
of the Lasagna™ Process
The Lasagna™ process can remove contaminants
from soil in three ways:
• Creating treatment zones in close
proximity to one another throughout the
contaminated soil region, and converting
them into sorption/degradation zones by
introducing sorbents, catalytic agents,
microbes, oxidants, or buffers
• Using electrokinetics to transport
contaminants from the soil into the
treatment zones for degradation
• Reversing the direction of transport, if
necessary, switching electrical polarity
The orientation of the electrodes and treatment
zones depends on the characteristics of the site
and the contaminants. In general, the vertical
configuration is probably applicable to more
shallow contamination, within 50 feet of the
ground surface. The horizontal configuration,
using hydraulic fracturing or related methods, is
uniquely capable of treating much deeper
contamination.
Borehole
Granular
Electrode
Note: Electroosmotlc flow is reversed upon switching electrical polarity.
Horizontal Configuration
of the Lasagna™ Process
Page 198
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Conceptually, the Lasagna™ process is designed to
treat organic and inorganic contaminants and
mixed wastes in groundwater and soil. To date,
the process has been tested primarily on organic
contaminants in low permeability soils.
STATUS:
The Lasagna™ process (vertical configuration) was
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program in
1995. The horizontal configuration is not being
evaluated by the SITE Demonstration Program
because the work is being conducted by EPA
employees in conjunction with the University of
Cincinnati. EPA is conducting work on the
horizontal configuration under a cooperative
research and development agreement with a private
research consortium consisting of Monsanto,
DuPont, and General Electric. This collaborative
effort between the federal government and industry
is a result of an action team of the Remediation
Technologies Development Forum (RTDF). The
RTDF identifies ways that the federal government
can work with private industry to solve complex
contamination problems at hazardous waste sites.
Under the SITE Program, with significant funding
from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the
Lasagna™ process was tested for 120 days in May
1995 on soil contaminated with trichloroethene
(TCE) at DOE's Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant
(PGDP) in Kentucky. One of the key objectives of
this test was to successfully demonstrate the
coupling of elecroosmotic flushing of TCE from
the clay soil while removing the TCE from the
pore water by in situ adsorption. Steel panels were
used as electrodes and granular activated carbon
served 'as treatment layers in a vertical
configuration.
Sampling and analysis of the carbon at the end of
the test revealed a substantial amount of TCE. Soil
samples collected before and after the test indicated
a 98 percent removal of TCE from tight clay soil,
with some samples showing greater than 99 percent
removal. TCE soil levels were reduced from the 100
parts per million (ppm) range to an average
concentration of 1 ppm.
A second test of the Lasagna™ process in a vertical
configuration is underway on larger volumes of
soil at DOE's PGDP under the Rapid
Commercialization Initiative (RCI). RCI was
created by the Department of Commerce,
Department of Defense, Department of Energy,
and EPA to assist in the integration of innovative
technologies into the marketplace.
EPA and the University of Cincinnati have
installed horizontal configuration cells at
Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base (ANGB)
near Columbus, OH. Support facilities are being
installed at Offutt Air Force Base (AFB) near
Omaha, ME. Horizontal configuration cells will be
installed at Offutt AFB in spring 1997 with funding
support form the U.S. Air Force. TCE is the
target contaminant at both Rickenbacker ANGB
and Offutt AFB.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Turner or Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7775 or 513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Michael Roulier
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7796
Fax: 513-569-7620
SaHo
Monsanto Company
800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, MO 63167
314-694-5179
Fax: 314-694-8080
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 199
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
LOCKHEED MARTIN MISSILES AND SPACE CO.
and GEOKINETICS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(Electrokinetic Remediation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Electrokinetic Remediation (ER) process
removes metals and organic contaminants from
soil, mud, sludge, and marine dredgings. ER
uses electrochemical and electroldnetic processes
to desorb and remove metals and polar organics.
The technology may be applied hi situ or hi the
batch mode.
The figure below is a flow diagram of the batch
reactor. Waste material is placed into the batch
reactor, between Ebonex® ceramic electrodes that
are divided into a cathode array and an anode
array. A direct current is then applied, causing
ions and water to move toward the electrodes.
Metal ions, ammonium ions, and positively
charged organic compounds move toward the
cathode. Anions such as chloride, cyanide,
fluoride, nitrate, and negatively charged organic
compounds move toward the anode. Two
primary mechanisms transport contaminants
through the soil: electromigration and
electroosmosis. In electromigration, charged
particles are transported through the substrate.
In contrast, electroosmosis is the movement of a
liquid containing ions relative to a stationary
charged surface. Of the two, electromigration is
much faster and it is the principle mechanism for
the ER process.
The electrodes are positioned inside permeable
casings that are inserted into the waste material.
After the annulus of each casing is filled with
water, the current is turned on. The water passes
from the anode casing into the waste and toward
the cathode. This procedure (1) supports
electroldnetic movement of the contaminants
through the soil; (2) helps maintain soil moisture,
thereby sustaining the electric field; and
(3) enables various chemicals that enhance
contaminant removal to be added as required.
As the water accumulates hi the annulus of the
cathode casing, it is pumped out for processing.
Processing involves removal of contaminants by
electrochemical means, producing a concentrated
contaminant brine that can be either further
Recovered
Contaminants
Permeable
Electrode
Casing
Flow Diagram of the Electrokinetic Remediation Process
Page 200
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
processed or disposed of as hazardous waste.
The water is then returned to the annulus of the
anode casing.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
ER is designed to remove heavy metals, anions,
and polar organics from soil, mud, sludge, and
dredgings. Treatable concentrations range from
a few parts per million (ppm) to tens of thousands
ppm. The batch technology is most appropriate
for sites with contaminated estuarine and river
muds and dredgings, sewage processing sludges,
and fines remaining after soil washing. The process
can be used with virtually any substrate. ER's
effectiveness is sharply reduced for wastes with a
moisture content of less than 10 percent.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1994. A
demonstration of the process will be conducted at
the Alameda Naval Air Station in California.
The ER process has been used successfully at
several European sites (see table below) on soils
contaminated with metals.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Steven Schwartzkopf
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Co.
Research and Development Divisions
3251 Hanover Street, ORG 93-50/B204
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1191
415-424-3176
Fax: 415-354-5795
Site
Description
Former paint factory (limited
duration field trial)
Galvanizing plant (limited
duration field trial)
Former timer impregnation
plant
Temporary landfill
Soil deposit on military airbase
Site Dimensions
(in meters [m])
70 m x 3 m
15 m x 6 m
25 m x 15 m
70 m x 40 m
90 m x 20 m
Contaminants
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Arsenic
Cadmium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Initial
Concentration
> 5,000 ppm
500-1,000 ppm
2,400 ppm average
115 ppm average
250 ppm average
2,600 ppm
770 ppm
730 ppm
660 ppm
7,300 ppm
860 ppm
Final
Concentration
1,000 ppm
150-300 ppm
1,680 ppm average
10 ppm average
< 20 ppm
150 ppm
10-20 ppm
10-20 ppm
10-20 ppm
10-20 ppm
10-20 ppm
Performance Summary of In Situ Electrokinetic Remediation Process
Applied at Five Field Sites in Europe
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 201
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
MATRIX PHOTOCATALYTIC INC.
(Photocatalytic Air Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Matrix Photocatalytic Lie. is developing a titanium
dioxide (TiO^ photocatalytic air treatment
technology that destroys volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and semivolatile organic
compounds in air streams. During treatment,
contaminated air at ambient temperatures flows
through a fixed TiO2 catalyst bed activated by
ultraviolet (UV) light. Typically, organic
contaminants are destroyed in fractions of a
second.
Technology advantages include the following:
• Robust equipment
• No residual toxins
• No ignition source
• Unattended operation
• Low direct treatment cost
The technology has been tested on benzene,
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene;
trichloroethene; tetrachloroethane; isopropyl
alcohol; acetone; chloroform; methanol; and
methyl ethyl ketone. A field-scale system is
shown hi the photograph on the next page.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The TiO2 photocatalytic ah- treatment technology
can effectively treat dry or moist air. The
technology has been demonstrated to purify
contaminant steam directly, thus eliminating the
need to condense. Systems of 100 cubic feet per
minute have been successfully tested on vapor
extraction operations, air stripper emissions,
steam from desorption processes, and VOC
emissions from manufacturing facilities. Other
potential applications include odor removal, stack
gas treatment, soil venting, and manufacturing
Full-Scale Photocatalytic Air Treatment System
Page 202
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
ultra-pure air for residential, automotive,
instrument, and medical needs. Systems of up to
about 1,000 cubic feet per minute can be cost-
competitive with thermal destruction systems.
STATUS:
The TiO2 photocatalytic air treatment technology
was accepted into SITE Emerging Technology
Program (ETP) in October 1992; the evaluation
was completed in 1993. Based on results from
the ETP, this technology was invited to
participate in the SITE Demonstration Program.
For further information about the evaluation
under the ETP, refer to the journal article
(EPA/600/A-93/282), which is available from
EPA. A suitable demonstration site is being
sought.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Eilers
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7809
Fax: 513-569-7111
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Bob Henderson
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc.
22 Pegler Street
London, Ontario, Canada N5Z 2B5
519-660-8669
Fax: 519-660-8525
Field-Scale Photocatalytic Air Treatment System Treating TCE and PCE
on a Soil Vapor Extraction Site at Savannah River
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 203
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
NATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH LABORATORY
(Bioventing)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Lack of oxygen in contaminated soil often limits
aerobic microbial growth. The bioventing
biological system treats contaminated soil in situ by
injecting atmospheric air. This air provides a
continuous oxygen source, which enhances the
growth of microorganisms naturally present in the
soil. Additives such as ozone or nutrients may be
introduced to stimulate microbial growth.
Bioventing technology uses an air pump attached to
one of a series of air injection probes (see figure
below). The air pump operates at extremely low
Pressure Gauge
Air Pump
Flow
Control
Rotameter
pressures, providing inflow of oxygen without
significantly volatilizing soil contaminants. The
treatment capacity depends on the number of
injection probes, the size of the air pump, and site
characteristics such as soil porosity.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Bioventing is typically used to treat soil
contaminated by industrial processes and can treat
any contamination subject to aerobic microbial
degradation. Bioventing treats contaminants and
combinations of contaminants with varying degrees
of success.
Pressure Gauge
3-Way Ball
Bentonite Seal
Stainless Steel Air Injection Probe
1 cm ID
2cmOD
. Screened
Section
Bioventing System
r» in/I
PdCje 2O4-
The SITE P'°9'am assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
December 1996
Ongoing Project
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in July 1991. The
demonstration began in November 1992 at the
Reilly Tar site in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Soil
at this site is contaminated with polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons. The project will be
completed in November 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Paul McCauley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7444
Fax: 513-569-7105
I
I
I
I
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 205
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
PHYTOIONETICS, INC.
(Phytoremediation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Phytoremediation is the treatment of
contaminated soils, sediments, and groundwater
with higher plants. Several biological
mechanisms are involved in phytoremediation.
The plant's ability to enhance bacterial and
fungal degradative processes is important in the
treatment of soils. Plant-root exudates, which
contain nutrients, metabolites, and enzymes,
contribute to the stimulation of microbial activity.
In the zone of soil closely associated with the
plant root (rhizosphere), expanded populations of
metabolically active microbes can biodegrade
organic soil contaminants.
The application of phytoremediation involves
characterizing the site and determining the proper
planting strategy to maximize the interception
and degradation of organic contaminants. Site
monitoring ensures that the planting strategy is
proceeding as planned. The following text
discusses (1) using grasses to remediate surface
soils contaminated with organic chemical wastes,
and (2) planting dense rows of poplar trees to
treat organic contaminants in the saturated
groundwater zone.
Soil Remediation - Phytoremediation is best
suited for surface soils contaminated with
intermediate levels of organic contaminants.
Preliminary soil phytotoxicity tests are conducted
at a range of contaminant concentrations to select
plants which are tolerant. The contaminants
should be relatively nonleachable, and must be
within the reach of plant roots. Greenhouse-scale
treatability studies are often used to select
appropriate plant species.
Grasses are frequently used because of their
dense fibrous root systems. The selected species
are planted, soil nutrients are added, and the
Phytoremediation of Surface Soils
Phytoremediation of the Saturated Zone
Page 206
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Ongoing Project
plots are intensively cultivated. Plant shoots are
cut during the growing season to maintain
vegetative, as opposed to reproductive, growth.
Based on the types and concentrations of
contaminants, several growing seasons may be
required to meet the site's remedial goals.
Groundwater Remediation - The use of poplar
trees for the treatment of groundwater relies in
part on the tree's high rate of water use to create
a hydraulic barrier. This technology requires the
establishment of deep roots that use water from
the saturated zone. Phytokinetics uses deep-rooted,
water-loving trees such as poplars to intercept
groundwater plumes and reduce contaminant
levels. Poplars are often used because they are
phreatophytic; that is, they have the ability to use
water directly from the saturated zone.
A dense double or triple row of rapidly growing
poplars is planted downgradient from the plume,
perpendicular to the direction of groundwater.
flow. Special cultivation practices are use to
induce deep root systems. The trees can create
a zone of depression hi the groundwater during
the summer months because of their high rate of
water use. Groundwater contaminants may tend
to be stopped by the zone of depression,
becoming adsorbed to soil particles in the aerobic
rhizosphere of the trees. Reduced contaminant
levels in the downgradient groundwater plume
would result from the degradative processes
described above.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Phytoremediation is used for soils, sediments,
and groundwater containing intermediate levels
of organic contaminants.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi 1995. ' The
demonstration will occur at the former Chevron
Terminal #129-0350 site in Ogden, Utah. This
demonstration will assess the ability of higher
plants to reduce the concentration of petroleum
hydrocarbons in near-surface soils, and to modify
the groundwater gradient and reduce petroleum
hydrocarbons in the saturated zone. Alfalfa and
fescue plantings will be evaluated for soil
remediation, while poplar and juniper trees will
be investigated for their ability to treat the
saturated groundwater zone.
The primary objectives of the demonstration are
to determine whether (1) total petroleum
hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil hi plots
planted with alfalfa and fescue will be reduced by
30 percent annually, and (2) an average annual 3-
inch change in the groundwater elevation can be
attributed to the trees. The demonstration is
scheduled for the 1997 and 1998 growing
seasons,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ari Ferro
Phytokinetics, Inc.
1770 North Research Park Way
Suite 110
North Logan, UT 84341-1941
801-750-0985
801-755-0891
Fax: 801-750-6296
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 207
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
PHYTOTECH
(Phytoremediation Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Phytotech is an environmental biotechnology
company that uses specially selected and
engineered plants to treat soil and water
contaminated with toxic metals such as lead and
cadmium, as well as radionuclides. The treatment
of soils or sediments with this technology is
referred to as phytoextraction (see figure below).
Phytoexttaction offers an efficient, cost-effective,
and environmentally friendly way to clean up
heavy metal contamination. Plants are grown in
situ on contaminated soil and harvested after toxic
metals accumulate in the plant tissues. The degree
of accumulation varies with several factors, but
be as high as 2 percent of the plants'
can
Extraction Flow
Pb
aboveground dry weight, leaving clean soil in place
that meets or exceeds regulatory cleanup levels.
After accumulation in the plant tissues, the
contaminant metal must be disposed of, but the
amount of disposable biomass is a small fraction of
the amount of soil treated. For example,
excavating and landfilling a 10-acre site
contaminated with 400 parts per million (ppm) lead
to a depth of 1 foot requires handling roughly
20,000 tons of lead-contaminated soil.
Phytoextraction of a typical 10-acre site to remove
400 ppm of lead from the top 1 foot would require
disposal of around 500 tons of biomass - about
1/400 of the soil cleaned. In the example cited, six
to eight crops would typically be needed, with
three or four crops per growing season.
Phytoextraction
Page 208
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
Compared to traditional remedial technologies,
phytoextraction offers the following benefits:
• Lower cost
• Applicability to a broad range of metals
• Potential for recycling the metal-rich
biomass
• Minimal environmental disturbance
• Minimization of secondary air- and
water-borne wastes
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Phytotech's phytoextraction technology can be used
to clean soil or sediments contaminated with lead,
cadmium, chromium, cesium/strontium and
uranium. Phytoremediation of other metals such
as arsenic, zinc, copper, and thorium is in the
research stage.
STATUS:
Phytotech was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1996. Under the SITE
Program, Phytotech is demonstrating its
phytoremediation technology at a former metal-
plating facility in Findlay, Ohio where soil is
contaminated with heavy metals. The site has been
prepared and characterized; the contaminant metals
are chromium, cadmium, nickel, zinc and lead.
Two crops were planted and harvested in late
summer 1996. Phytotech has also conducted
several successful field trials of its phytoextraction
technology at other contaminated sites in the U.S.
and abroad.
Phytotech has conducted several field
demonstrations of its rhizofiltration technology for
the removal of (1) cesium/strontium at Chernobyl,
and (2) uranium from contaminated groundwater at
a DOE site in Ashtabula, Ohio. At Chernobyl,
sunflowers were shown to extract 95 percent of the
radionuclides from a small pond within 10 days.
At the Ashtabula site, Phytotech ran a 9-month
pilot demonstration during which incoming water
containing as much as 450 parts per billion (ppb)
uranium was treated to 5 ppb or less of uranium.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Michael Blaylock or John Ehrler
Phytotech
One Deer Park Drive, Suite I
Monmouth Junction, NJ 08852
908-438-0900
Fax: 908-438-1209
E-Mail: soikx@aol.com or johnehrler@aol.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 2O9
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
PINTAIL SYSTEMS, INC.
(Spent Ore Bioremediation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology uses microbial detoxification of
cyanide in heap leach processes to reduce
cyanide levels in spent ore and process solutions.
The biotreatment populations of natural soil
bacteria are grown to elevated concentrations,
which are applied to spent ore by drip or spray
irrigation. Process solutions are treated with
bacteria concentrates in continuous or batch
applications. This method may also enhance
metal remineralization, reducing acid rock
drainage and enhancing precious metal recovery
to offset treatment costs.
Biotreatment of cyanide in spent ore and ore
processing solutions begins by identifying
bacteria that will grow in the waste source and
that use the cyanide for normal cell building
reactions. Native isolates are ideally adapted to
the spent ore environment, the available nutrient
pool, and potential toxic components of the heap
environment. The cyanide-detoxifying bacteria
are typically a small fraction of the overall
population of cyanide-tolerant species.
For this reason, native bacteria isolates are
extracted from the ore and tested for cyanide
detoxification potential as individual species.
Any natural detoxification potentials
demonstrated in flask cyanide decomposition tests
are preserved and submitted for bioaugmentation.
Bioaugmentation of the cyanide detoxification
population eliminates nonworking species of
bacteria and enhances the natural detoxification
potential by growth in waste infusions and
chemically defined media. Pintail Systems
Incorporated (PSI) maintains a bacterial library
of some 2,500 strains of microorganisms and a
database of their characteristics.
The working population of treatment bacteria is
grown in spent ore infusion broths and process
solutions to adapt to field operating conditions.
The cyanide in the spent ore serves as the
primary carbon or nitrogen source for bacteria
nutrition. Other required trace nutrients are
provided in the chemically defined broths. The
bacterial consortium is then tested on spent ore in
a 6-inch-by-10-foot column in the field or in the
laboratory. The column simulates leach pile
TCN, WAD CN,
metals
Cyanide-leached spent ore
Pregnant pond
Carbon circuit
(metal stripping)
Staged bacteria
culture
Au,Ag
Spent Ore Bioremediation Process
Page 210
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
conditions, so that detoxification rates, process
completion, and effluent quality can be verified.
Following column tests, a field test may be
conducted to verify column results.
The spent ore is remediated by first setting up a
stage culturing system to establish working
populations of cyanide-degrading bacteria at the
mine site. Bacterial solutions are then applied
directly to the heap using the same system
originally designed to deliver cyanide solutions to
the heap leach pads (see figure on previous
page). Cyanide concentrations and leachable
metals are then measured in heap leach solutions.
This method of cyanide degradation in spent ore
leach pads degrades cyanide more quickly than
methods which treat only rinse solutions from the
pad. In addition to cyanide degradation,
biological treatment of heap leach pads has also
shown significant biomineralization and reduction
of leachable metals in heap leachate solutions.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The spent ore bioremediation process can be
applied to treat cyanide contamination, spent ore
heaps, waste rock dumps, mine tailings, and
process water from gold and silver mining
operations.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in May 1994. A site
located in Battle Mountain, Nevada has been
selected for the demonstration. Preliminary
treatability tests have been completed. In
addition, PSI has completed two full-scale
cyanide detoxification projects.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Leslie Thompson
Pintail Systems, Inc.
11801 East 33rd Avenue, Suite C
Aurora, CO 80010
303-367-8443
Fax: 303-364-2120
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 277
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
PRAXIS ENVTOOINQMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(In Situ Thermal Extraction Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The in situ thermal extraction process heats soil
with steam injection, enhancing pump-and-treat
and soil vapor extraction processes used to treat
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC). This
process is an effective and relatively inexpensive
technique to raise a target soil volume to a nearly
uniform temperature.
As illustrated in the figure below, steam is
introduced to the soil through injection wells
screened in contaminated intervals. The steam
flow sweeps contaminants to extraction wells.
Groundwater and liquid contaminants are pumped
from the extraction wells; steam, air, and
vaporized contaminants are extracted under
vacuum. After the soil is heated by steam
injection, the injection wells can introduce
additional agents to facilitate the cleanup.
Recovered vapors pass through a condenser.
The resulting condensate is combined with
pumped liquids for processing hi separation
equipment. Separated nonaqueous phase liquids
(NAPL) can be recycled or disposed of, and the
water is treated prior to discharge. The
noncondensible gases are directed to a vapor
treatment system consisting of (1) catalytic
oxidation equipment, (2) activated carbon filters,
or (3) other applicable vapor technologies. The
in situ thermal extraction process uses
conventional injection, extraction and monitoring
wells, off-the-shelf piping, steam generators,
condensers, heat exchangers, separation
equipment, vacuum pumps, and vapor emission
control equipment.
VACUUM PUMP
-AIR
WATER
s^
I AIR/WATER 1
ISEPARATORji
\»__
I
FUEL
STEAM TO
INJECTION
WELLS
WATER
-NAPL
i- STEAM TO
INJECTION
WELLS
CLAY
CLAY
In Situ Thermal Extraction Process
Page 212
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The in situ thermal extraction process removes
VOCs and SVOCs from contaminated soils and
groundwater. The process primarily treats
chlorinated solvents such as trichloroethene
(TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), and dichloro-
benzene; hydrocarbons such as gasoline, diesel,
and jet fuel; and mixtures of these compounds.
The process can be applied to rapid cleanup of
source areas such as dense NAPL pools below
the water table surface, light NAPL pools
floating on the water table surface, and NAPL
contamination remaining after conventional
pumping techniques. Subsurface conditions are
amenable to biodegradation of residual
contaminants, if necessary, after application of
the thermal process. A cap is required for
implementation of the process near the surface.
For dense NAPL compounds in high
concentrations, a barrier must be present or
created to prevent downward percolation of the
NAPLs. The process is applicable in less
permeable soils with the use of novel delivery
systems such as horizontal wells or fracturing.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi August 1993. The
demonstration is scheduled to occur at Hill Air
Force Base (AFB) in Ogden, Utah. The Ogden
Air Logistics Center Environmental Management
Office and Armstrong Laboratory at Tyndall
AFB, Florida are also participating hi the
demonstration.
From 1967 to 1979, unknown quantities of
chlorinated solvents including TCE and PCE
were disposed of in two unlined trenches at Hill
AFB. These dense NAPL compounds migrated
through the soil and shallow groundwater,
pooling on top of a natural clay layer about
50 feet below the surface. The demonstration
will be performed hi this area, after most NAPLs
have been recovered by conventional pumping.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercui.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Lloyd Stewart
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc.
1440 Rollins Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
415-548-9288
Fax: 415-548-9287
Captain Jeff Stinson
U.S. Air Force
Armstrong Laboratory
Environmental Risk Management, AL/EQM-OL
139 Barnes Drive, Suite 2
Tyndall AFB, FL 32403-5319
904-283-6254
Fax: 904-283-6064
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 213
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
PROCESS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The proprietary, nonthermal technology
developed by Process Technologies, Inc. (PTI),
is a method of photochemically oxidizing gaseous
organic compounds within a reaction chamber.
PTI's Photolytic Destruction Technology (PDT)
uses low-pressure ultraviolet (UV) lamps, with
UV emissions primarily at wavelengths in the
185 to 254 nanometer range, located within the
reaction chamber. Photons emitted from these
lamps break apart the chemical bonds making up
the volatile organic compound (VOC) molecule.
The process is capable of destroying mixtures of
chlorinated and nonchlorinated VOCs.
PTI uses a proprietary reagent that forms a liner
within the process chamber. The reagent reacts
chemically with the gaseous degradation products
formed during the photolytic destruction of
halocarbon molecules to form solid, stable
reaction products.
Reagent lifetime depends on flow rate, influent
concentrations, and specific chemical
composition of destruction targets. PTI has
performed tests on spent reagent to determine
Cleaned Air
@ 1,ooo cfm
Adsorber
Column
whether the material would be classified as a
hazardous waste under the federal hazardous
waste law and EPA regulations. Those tests
indicated that the spent reagent is likely nontoxic.
The spent reagent is also not reactive, corrosive,
or flammable, and thus PTI is confident that it is
not a hazardous waste under federal law. PTI
accordingly believes that the spent reagent
material can be disposed of as ordinary solid
waste or used as a feedstock for cement
manufacturing.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology was developed to destroy a
number of families of compounds, including
chlorinated solvents, chlorofluocarbons (CFCs),
hydrochlorofluocarbons (HCFCs), and halons.
Example sources of process off-gas include steam
vapor extraction, tank vents, air strippers, steam
strippers, and building vent systems.
The PDT system is designed and fabricated hi 3-
to 12-cubic-feet-per-minute (cfoi) modules. The
size of the module applied is dependent on the
gas flow rate and VOC concentrations in the gas
stream. The process is capable of destroying as
VOC Off-Gas_
© 1,000 cfm
, ... Process
Air-Water B|ower
Separator
Concentrated VOC Vapor
Stream @ 6 cfm
F^
i — i
i i
i i
L_J
t?
Desorber
Column
< UV Reactor
°lb[Pllo[Rlon°
oU^lbU§lbU°llo
Treated Air & 1
HCI @ 6 cfm L
C
-f) ]
6 cfm Acid
Gas Scrubber
Cleaned
T
Desorption air
@ 6 cfm
Simplified Process Flow Diagram
of Photolytic Destruction
Page 214
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
high as 50,000 parts per million by volume
(ppmv) VOC streams. FIT implements a fluid bed
concentrator to allow for the treatment of high
flow gas streams, or those with rates greater than
1,000 cfm. Significant cost savings can be
realized if the gas flow can be reduced, and
concentration increased prior to destruction.
The PTI process is simple in design and there are
no moving parts. The system is capable of
achieving greater than 90 percent on-line
availability, inclusive of scheduled maintenance
activities. The system is designed to run
continuously, 24-hours per day.
STATUS:
The PTI technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1994. The
demonstration began in September 1994 at
McClellan Air Force Base (AFB) in Sacramento,
California. The SITE demonstration was
postponed shortly thereafter. Activities under the
SITE Program will be rescheduled in 1997.
Additional tests incorporating an improved design
for treating soil vapor extraction off-gas were
successfully completed at the AFB in January
1996.
PTI completed a successful 6-month treatability
study at Hill AFB in Ogden, Utah. The purpose
of the demonstration was to determine the
effectiveness and commercial feasibility of the
PDT in treating the high concentration, low flow,
VOC-contaminated off-gases from the process
tank vents in the facility. Process performance
was compared directly to the standard treatment
technology, granular activated carbon. A
commercial system was installed in February
1996.
PTI completed a successful short-term,
treatability study at Aerojet's Site 19F in May.
Aerojet manufactures motors for liquid rockets
and other defense-related equipment. This study
was performed to evaluate the effectiveness and
cost to remove and destroy trichloroethene (TCE)
vapor from the existing extraction wells using the
PDT. The results of this test showed that the
PDT was able to destroy TCE at levels greater
than 99 percent and at a cost less than activated
carbon. PTI is now in discussions with Aerojet
to supply the necessary equipment to remediate
other known TCE plumes at the site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul de Percin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul @ epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Mike Swan
Process Technologies, Inc.
P.O. Box 476
Boise, ID 83701-0476
208-385-0900
Fax: 208-385-0994
TECHNOLOGY USER CONTACT:
Phil Mook
SM-ALC/EMR
5050 Dudley Boulevard
Suite 3
McClellan AFB, CA 95652-1389
916-643-5443
Fax: 916-643-0827
E-mail: mook.phil@smal .mcclellan.af.mil
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 215
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
RECYCLING SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(Desorption and Vapor Extraction System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The mobile desorption and vapor extraction
system (DAVES) uses a low-temperature
fluidized bed to remove organic and volatile
inorganic compounds from soils, sediments, and
sludges. This system can treat materials with
85 percent solids at a rate of 10.5 tons per hour.
Contaminated materials are fed into a co-current,
fluidized bed dryer, where they are mixed with
hot air (about 1,000 to 1,400 °F) from a
gas-fired heater. Direct contact between die
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. Vapors from
the cyclone separator are cooled in a venturi
scrubber, countercurrent 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 (see photograph below).
By-products from the DAVES include
(1) treated, dry solid representing about 96 to
98 percent of solid waste feed, (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 that are recycled through the process.
The centrifuge sludge can be bioremediated,
chemically degraded, or treated in another
manner. Recycling Sciences International, Inc.,
has patented an electrochemical oxidation process
(ECO) and is developing this process as an
Desorption and Vapor Extraction System (DAVES)
Page 216
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Ongoing Project
adjunct to the DAVES. The ECO is designed to
detoxify contaminants within the DAVES in a
closed-loop system.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes from soil, sludge, and
sediment volatile and semivolatile organics,
including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons,
pentachlorophenol, volatile inorganics (such as
tetraethyl lead), and some pesticides. In general,
the process treats waste containing less than
10 percent total organic contaminants and 30 to
95 percent solids. The presence of nonvolatile
inorganic contaminants (such as metals) in the
waste feed does not inhibit the process; however,
these contaminants are not treated.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Program in April 1995. EPA is selecting a
demonstration site for this process. Preferred
demonstration wastes include harbor or river
sediments containing at least 50 percent solids
and contaminated with PCBs and other volatile or
semivolatile organics. Soils with these
characteristics may also be acceptable. About
300 tons of waste is needed for a 2-week test.
Major test objectives are to evaluate feed
handling, decontamination of solids, and
treatment of gases generated by the process.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Eilers
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7809
Fax: 513-569-7111
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Meenan
Recycling Sciences International, Inc.
175 West Jackson Boulevard
Suite A1934
Chicago, IL 60604-2601
312-663-4242
Fax: 312-663-4269
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 217
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
RKK, LTD.
(CRYOCELL®)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
CRYOCELL® is a barrier system which provides
real-time monitoring capability, earthquake
resiliency, and diffusion-free full enclosure
contaminant isolation. The system is repairable
in situ and removable upon completion of
containment needs.
CRYOCELL® design involves installing an array
of freeze pipes, using standard well-drilling
equipment, which surround the contaminated
source or groundwater plume much like the ribs
of a canoe. Once installed, the array of freeze
pipes is connected to freeze plants by a
distributive manifold and supplied with cooled
brine at a design temperature of -10°C to -40°C
to freeze the volume of soil between the pipes,
resulting hi a 12- to 16-foot barrier.
The barrier's thickness and temperature may be
varied through design to match containment
requirements. If no subsurface confining
impervious layer is present, the array can be
installed using an angled or "V"-shaped
configuration beneath the contaminated zone,
completely enclosing the site. If additional
barrier thickness is a design requirement, a
parallel array of freeze pipes is installed in
staggered spacing outside the first array. This
configuration allows the entire inner volume of
soil between the two arrays to be frozen, thereby
increasing barrier thickness per design up to 75
feet. The depth of the containment envelop can
be in excess of 500 feet.
CRYOCELL® engineering is site-specific and
considers many cost-related factors, including
waste type, topography, soil conditions, thermal
conductivity, and groundwater movement. A
computer program incorporates all site
characteristics into a three-dimensional model
that engineers use to establish the most efficient
design and estimate the cost of CRYOCELL® for
a specific site.
A thick frozen soil barrier offers a number of
advantages for confining hazardous waste. The
barrier does not degrade or weaken over time
and is repairable in situ. If ground movement
fractures the barrier, the fissures can be filled
and resealed quickly. Maintenance costs are
extremely low, allowing continued use for
extended periods. In addition, the frozen barrier
is environmentally benign. When the site is
decontaminated, the frozen soil is allowed to melt
UANPOLD, OALLEYWAY.
AND SURFACE INSULATION
(AS REQUIRED)
REFRIGERATION
PLANTS. TYP.
REFRIGERATION
PLANTS. TYP.
MANIFOLD, OALLEYWAY,
AND SURFACE INSULATION
(AS REQUIRED)
FORMER LANDFILL OR
PROCESS TRENCH
CHYOCEtL©
FROZEN SOX. BARRER
FORMER LANDFK.LOR
PROCESSTRENCH
HAZARDOUS WASTE TANK
HAZARDOUS WASTE TANK
Schematic Diagram of CRYOCELL®
Page 218
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
and the pipes are removed. The technique is an
alternative to conventional containment systems
using steel, concrete, slurry walls, or grout
curtains. The figure on the previous page
illustrates two typical containment systems.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
RKK, Ltd. (RKK), reports that CRYOCELL® can
provide subsurface containment for a variety of
sites and waste, including underground tanks;
nuclear waste sites; plume control; burial
trenches, pits, and ponds; in situ waste treatment
areas; chemically-contaminated sites; and spent
fuel storage ponds. CRYOCELL® is designed to
contain all known biological, chemical, or
radioactive contaminants. Frozen soil barriers
are adaptable to any geometry; drilling
technology presents the only constraint.
RKK reports that the technology can isolate
sensitive areas within large active operations (for
example, sites within chemical and nuclear
facilities), smaller raw material and waste
management units (for example, tank farms,
burial trenches, and waste treatment lagoons),
and operational chemically contaminated sites,
such as chemical plants, refineries, and
substations. The technology can also contain a
site or contamination during an in situ
remediation project. It can also provide a
redundant barrier for cut-off contamination
processes, and reduces flow of groundwater into
a contaminated zone.
Contaminants are contained in situ, with frozen
native soils serving as the containment medium.
Frozen soil barriers are impervious to chemical
attack and are virtually impermeable at subzero
temperatures. In addition, frozen soil barriers
have great inertia, so they can remain frozen for
as long as two years without refrigeration.
CRYOCELL® is economically favorable for
intermediate- and long-term containment at large
sites, and maintenance costs are extremely low.
CRYOCELL® generates no waste streams or
residues.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1994. A
treatability study was completed at the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Oak Ridge
National Laboratory in 1995. Results from the
study are documented in a DOE Innovative
Technology Summary Report, titled Frozen Soil
Barrier Technology, and, Subsurface
Contaminants Focus Area Technology Summary,
(DOE/EM-0296), August 1996.
The RKK technology is being considered by
DOE for use at other hazardous waste sites.
RKK receives academic, technical, and scientific
support through a cooperative and licensing
agreement with the University of Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ronald Krieg
RKK, Ltd.
16404 Smokey Point Boulevard, Suite 303
Arlington, WA 98223
360-653-4844
Fax: 360-653-7456
E-Mail: rkk@cryocell.com
Web Site: www.cryocell.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 219
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES
(In Situ Electrokinetic Extraction System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Electrokinetic remediation has been used
successfully to treat saturated soils contaminated
with heavy metals. At some sites, however., it
may not be desirable to add the quantities of
water needed to saturate a contamination plume
in the vadose zone. Sandia National Laboratories
(SNL) has developed an electrokinetic
remediation technology that can be used in
unsaturated soils without adding significant
amounts of water.
The SNL electrokinetic extraction system, shown
in the figure below, consists of three main units:
the electrode assembly (electrode casing and
internal assemblies), the vacuum system, and the
power supply. The electrode casing consists of
a porous ceramic end that is 5 to 7 feet long and
has an outer diameter of 3.5 inches. During field
installation, the casing is attached to the required
length of 3-inch polyvinyl chloride pipe. The
electrode internal assembly consists of the drive
electrode, a water level control system, and a
pump system. The vacuum system consists of a
venturi vacuum pump and vacuum regulator that
together supply a constant vacuum for the
electrode. Up to four 10,000-watt power
supplies can operate in either constant voltage or
constant current mode.
When the drive electrode is energized,
contaminants and other ions are attracted into the
electrode casing. The water level control system
Sup
!
Po
?
i
0
*" 1 — 1
12V DC
Power
I Supply
Pumo ^^
Supply
Solution
Pressure
Regujtor Re|fef
ply Gas — •!• — • — • —
Valve
Electrode
wer Supply Pressure
Relief
Vacuum ^| Valve
Vacuum
1 Controller
Level
I Controller
JLSolenoid
™ Valve
. Iron Fillings ' I
Z~~ ^(Reactor P"
Probe F
'
Field
Electrode
Effluent8 SyStSm
Ground Surface ||
E
Porous
Ceramic "
Casing
3
Neutralizing
Solution
I
J
9
T
I
j
Drive
— Electrode
Schematic Diagram of the In Situ Electrokinetic Extraction System
Page 220
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 799G
Ongoing Project
adds water to, and extracts water from, the
electrodes. Water is supplied to the electrode
from a supply solution tank at the ground
surface. This solution is either drawn into the
electrode by the vacuum maintained in the
electrode or by a supply pump. At the same
time, water is continuously pumped out from the
electrode casing at a constant rate. Part of the
contaminated water is sent to an effluent waste
tank at the ground surface; the remainder is
returned to the electrode to maintain circulation
of the fluid surrounding the electrode. A
metering pump controlled by in-line pH meters
regulates the introduction of neutralization
chemicals to each electrode. Process control and
monitoring equipment is contained in a 10-foot-
by-40-foot instrument trailer.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
SNL has developed its electrokinetic extraction
system to treat anionic heavy metals such as
chromate in unsaturated soil. There is no lower
limit to the contaminant concentration that can be
treated; however, there may be a lower limit on
the ratio of contaminant ions to other ions in the
soil.
The technology can be expanded to treat
saturated soils. Soil that is highly conductive
because of a high salinity content is not suitable
for this technology. In addition, sites with buried
metal debris, such as pipelines, are not
appropriate.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program hi summer 1994. The
SITE demonstration began May 1996, at an
unlined chromic acid pit within a SNL landfill.
The demonstration is scheduled for completion in
January 1997.
Recent bench-scale studies at SNL have shown
the technology to be effective hi sandy soils with
a moisture content as low as 7 percent. Field
testing is underway to characterize in situ
electrokinetic extraction of chromate
contamination from unsaturated soils at the SNL
chemical waste landfill. These tests are intended
to show the technology's effectiveness in
achieving in situ water control hi unsaturated soil
and to track the movement of chromate
contamination.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther Kong Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Eric Lindgren
Sandia National Laboratories
Mail Stop 0719
P.O. Box 5800
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0719
505-844-3820
Fax: 505-844-0543
E-mail: erlindg@sandia.gov
Earl D. Mattson
Sat-UnSat Inc.
12004 Del Rey NE
Albuquerque, NM 87122
505-856-3311
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 221
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
SELENTEC ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The MAG*SEPSM process uses the principles of
chemical adsorption and magnetism to selectively
bind and remove heavy metals or radionuclides
from aqueous solutions (groundwater, wastewater,
drinking water). The contaminants are adsorbed
on specially formulated particles which have a core
made from magnetic material; these particles are
then separated (along with the adsorbed
contaminants) from the solution using a magnetic
filter or magnetic collector. The magnetic core
has no interaction with the contaminant.
The proprietary adsorbing particles are made of a
composite of organic polymers and magnetite.
The particles can be manufactured in two forms:
one with an ion exchanger and/or chelating
functional group attached to the particle surface
(amidoxime functionalized resin), or one with
inorganic adsorbers bound to the surface of the
particles (clinoptilolite). These particles have high
surface areas and rapid adsorption kinetics.
A typical MAG*SEPSM treatment system consists
of:
• a particle contact zone
• particle handling system, including
particle injection components, a magnetic
separator, and particle reclaim
components
• particle regeneration system (where
applicable)
The process stream enters a contact zone (usually
a tank - other configurations are used for particular
applications) where MAG*SEPSM particles are
injected and mixed. The contact zone provides the
necessary solution flow characteristics and contact
tune with the particles to ensure that the
contamination will be adsorbed onto the active
surface sites of the particles. The mixture then
flows through a magnetic collector, where the
contaminated particles are retained while the
treated process stream passes through.
Depending on the application, type of particle, and
contaminant concentration, the particles may be re-
injected into the flow stream, collected and
disposed of, or regenerated and reused. The
regeneration solution is processed to recover
(concentrate and remove) the contaminants and
may be recycled.
The MAG*SEPSM process is able to selectively
remove (either ex situ or hi situ) the following
contaminants from aqueous solutions: titanium,
copper, cadmium, arsenic, cobalt, molybdenum,
platinum, selenium, chromium, zinc, gold, iodine,
manganese, technetium, mercury, strontium, iron,
ruthenium, thallium, cesium, cobalt, palladium,
lead, radium, nickel, silver, bismuth, thallium,
antimony, zirconium, radium, cerium, and all
Particle
Injection
Tank
£
1
5
[
Particle
Regeneration
Process
Mixing
Zone
J
Particle
Reclaim
Tank
J
Magnetic
Collector
Treated ^
Water
Schematic Diagram of the Mag*SEPSM Treatment System
Page 222
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
actinides. The process operates at flow rates up to
2000 gallons per minute (gpm).
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The MAG*SEPSM technology reduces heavy metal
and radionuclide contamination in water and
wastewater. The technology has specific
applications in environmental remediation and
restoration, treatment of acid mine drainage,
resource recovery, and treatment of commercial
industrial wastewater. MAG*SEPSM particles can
be produced to incorporate any known ion
exchanger or sorbing material. Therefore,
MAG*SEPSM can be applied in any situation where
conventional ion exchange is used.
STATUS:
The MAG*SEPSM technology was accepted into
the SITE Program in 1996 and is also one of 10
technologies participating in the Rapid
Commercialization Initiative (RCI). RCI was
created by the Department of Commerce,
Department of Defense, Department of Energy,
and EPA to assist hi the integration of innovative
technologies into the marketplace.
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc., is
currently working under an agreement with
Argonne National Laboratory to demonstrate the
MAG*SEPSM technology at the U.S. Department
of Energy's Savannah River Site. At Savannah
River, the technology is being used to reduce the
heavy metal concentration in coal pile runoff
water. Analytical data from the demonstration has
shown that contaminant levels can be reduced to
drinking water standards.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Steve Weldon
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc.
8601 Dunwoody Place, Suite 302
Atlanta, GA 30350-2509
770-640-7059
Fax: 770-640-9305
E-Mail: selentec@gnn.com
Home Page: www.selentec.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 223
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA T1ON PROGRAM
SEVENSON ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
(MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The patented MAECTITE® chemical treatment
process for lead and other heavy metals uses
reagents and processing equipment to render
soils, waste, and other materials nonhazardous
when tested by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP). The MAECTITE® process
reduces leachable lead, hexavalent chromium,
and other heavy metals to below treatment
standards required by land-ban regulations
(September 19, 1994 40 CFR Parts 268, Final
Rule). Lead in treated material, as determined
by approved EPA methods in SW-846 (such as
the TCLP, extraction procedure toxicity test, and
the multiple extraction procedure), complies with
limits established by EPA. The photograph
below shows a 500-ton-per-day unit.
500-Ton-Per-Day MAECTITE®
Processing System
Chemical treatment by the MAECTITE® process
converts leachable lead into insoluble minerals
and mixed mineral forms within the material or
waste matrix. MAECTITE® reagents stimulate
the nucleation of crystals by chemical bonding to
yield mineral compounds in molecular forms.
These forms are resistant to leaching and physical
degradation from environmental forces. The
durability of traditional monolithic solidification-
stabilization process end-products is often
measured by geotechnical tests such as wet-dry,
freeze-thaw, permeability, and unconfined
compressive strength. The MAECTITE® process
does not use physical binders, is not pozzolanic
or siliceous, and does not rely on the formation
of metallic hydroxides using hydration
mechanisms. Therefore, these tests are not
relevant to MAECTITE® product chemical
stability, although engineered properties are
readily obtained, if required. MAECTITE® is
not pH dependent and does not use adsorption,
absorption, entrapment, lattice containment,
encapsulation, or other physical binding
principles. The technology is a true chemical
reaction process that alters the structure and
properties of the waste, yielding stable
compounds.
The MAECTITE® process uses water to assist in
dispersing reagents. However, the dehydration
characteristic of the process liberates water
present in waste prior to treatment (absorbed and
hydrated forms) to a free state where it can be
removed from the waste matrix by evaporation
and capillary drying principles. The ability of
treated material to readily lose water, the
formation of dense mineral crystals, and the
restructuring of the material as a result of
MAECTITE® treatment (where interstitial space
is minimized), all contribute to reduced waste
volume and weight.
Ex situ MAECTITE® processing equipment
generally consists of material screening and
sizing components, liquid and solid reagent
storage delivery subsystems, and a mixing unit
such as a pug mill. Equipment is mobile but can
Page 224
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
be modified for fixed system operations. In situ
MAECTITE® processing equipment is also
available; system selection is largely dictated by
contaminant plume configuration, soil
characteristics, and site space limitations.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Materials that have been rendered nonhazardous
include soils; sludges; sediments; battery
contents, including casings; and foundry sands.
Oversized material can be treated with the
process as debris, but size reduction often makes
processing more efficient. Even sludges with
free liquids (as determined by the paint filter test)
have been treated to TCLP compliance when
excess fluids are present.
The range of lead levels effectively treated has
not been fully determined; however, soils with
total lead as high as 30 percent (by weight) and
TCLP values over 15,000 milligrams per liter
(mg/L) were not problematic. Common lead
levels encountered have averaged from
200 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) to
6,500 mg/kg with TCLP averaging 20 to
400 mg/L. Material geochemistry most often
dictates final MAECTITE® treatment designs.
Furthermore, correlations between total lead and
regulated leachable lead levels are inconsistent,
with treatment efforts more strongly related to
the geochemical characteristics of the waste
material.
STATUS:
The chemical treatment technology was initially
accepted into the SITE Demonstration Program
hi March 1992. EPA is seeking a suitable
demonstration site.
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc.
(Sevenson), acquired the MAECTITE®
technology in 1993 and was issued second and
third patents in 1995 and 1996, respectively.
Combining ex situ and in situ
quantities, over 400,000 tons of material has
been successfully processed. Treatability studies
have been conducted on over 100 different
materials in over 40 states, Canada, Italy, and
Mexico. The technology has been applied at full-
scale demonstration and remedial projects in over
20 states and in all 10 EPA regions.
The MAECTITE® process has been formally
accepted into the EPA PQOPS program for the
fixation-stabilization of inorganic species.
Proprietary technology modifications have shown
promise in rendering radionuclides nonleachable
using gamma spectral counting methods on TCLP
extract. Sevenson is treating 30,000 cubic yards
of radioactive-contaminated material using their
proprietary technology modifications.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Karl Yost
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc.
9425 Calumet Avenue, Suite 101
Munster, IN 46321
219-836-0116
Fax: 219-836-2838
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 225
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
SIVE SERVICES
(Steam Injection and Vacuum Extraction)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Steam Injection and Vacuum Extraction (SIVE)
uses steam injection wells in conjunction with
dual-phase extraction wells for in situ treatment
of contaminated soil and groundwater. The
injected steam strips volatile and semivolatile
organic compounds as it flows through the
contaminated zones. The steam increases the
subsurface temperature, which increases mass
transfer and phase exchange rates, reduces liquid
viscosities, and accelerates desorption of
contaminants from the matrix. The moisture and
warmth provided by the steam also accelerates
biodegradation of residual contaminants. As a
result, contaminants are extracted or degraded at
increased rates as compared to conventional
isothermal vapor and liquid extraction systems.
SIVE-LF (Linear Flow) is an enhanced SIVE
method designed for relatively shallow depths.
With the SIVE-LF process, as illustrated in the
figure below, steam is forced to flow horizontally
and uniformly from one trench, through the
contaminant zone, and into another trench from
which the contaminants are extracted. The large
open area of the trench faces allow for high
injection and extraction rates, which promote low
treatment duration. The trenches also allow for
installation of an impermeable barrier, such as a
polyethylene liner, against one face of the open
trench before the trench is backfilled, thus
reducing the flow of injected or extracted fluid
outside the area of the targeted zones. A surface
covering for the treatment area prevents short-
circuiting of the flow of injected steam to the
atmosphere, and prevents atmospheric air from
entering the extraction trench.
Surface equipment for SIVE includes
conventional steam generation and delivery
systems, and the vacuum extraction system. The
vacuum extraction system includes a vacuum
blower, steam condenser, other cooling
components, and air emission control devices.
The condensate generated by the process requires
further treatment or off-site disposal. The
reliability of the equipment and automatic
Injection
Optional Side Wall
Cement
The SIVE-LF Process
Page 226
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
controls allow SIVE to operate without constant
direct supervision.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
SIVE may be applied to sites that have soil or
groundwater contaminated with fuels, industrial
solvents, oils, and other liquid toxics, and may be
applied at any depth. The SIVE-LF process is
designed to treat to depths of 30 feet. Because
highly volatile contaminants are readily air-
stripped without the added effects of steam, the
steam-stripping effect will be greatest on the
heavier, less volatile contaminants. SIVE also
effectively removes floating non-aqueous phase
liquids from groundwater.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in summer 1994. A
suitable site for the demonstration is being
sought.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Douglas Dieter
SIVE Services
555 Rossi Drive
Dixon, CA 95620
916-678-8358
Fax: 916-678-2202
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 227
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
SOLUCORP INDUSTRIES
(Molecular Bonding System®)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Molecular Bonding System® (MBS) is a
process developed for the stabilization of a
variety of media, such as soil, sludge, slag, and
ash, that is contaminated with heavy metals.
The process employs a proprietary mixture of
nonhazardous chemicals to convert the heavy
metal contaminants from their existing reactive
and leachable forms (usually oxides) into
insoluble, stable, nonhazardous, metallic-sulfide
compounds that will achieve toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) levels
far below regulatory limits. The MBS process
maintains the pH levels in the media within the
range where the insolubility of the heavy metal
sulfides is assured. The system also provides
buffer capacity to ensure that the pH is not
significantly altered by the addition of acids or
caustics to the media.
As depicted in the diagram below, the MBS
treatment process is completely mobile and easily
transportable (to allow for on-site treatment).
Waste material is screened and crushed as
required to reduce particle sizes to an average
1-inch diameter (particle size reduction increases
surface area, which maximizes contact with the
reagents). The waste media is then mixed with
powdered reagents in a closed-hopper pug mill
(the reagent mixture is established through
Silo
treatability studies for the site-specific
conditions). Water is then added to catalyze the
reaction and to ensure homogeneous mixing.
There is no curing time and the resulting increase
hi volume is between 2 to 3 percent. The
treated media is then conveyed to a .stockpile
where it can then be either returned to the
original site or disposed in a landfill as cover,
fill, or contour material.
MBS can also be applied with traditional in situ
mixing techniques such as tillers, eliminating the
need for excavating and preparing the soil.
The MBS process can also be used to stabilize
waste "hi line" during the manufacturing
process, preventing the waste from being
classified as hazardous. Commercial applications
on slag from a secondary smelter are underway.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The MBS process stabilizes heavy metals in soil,
sludges, baghouse dust, ash, slag, and sediment.
Heavy metals rendered inert by the process
include arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper,
lead, mercury, nickel, silver, and zinc. The
process can simultaneously stabilize multiple
heavy metal contaminants. The presence of
organics does not affect treatment by MBS.
Process Flow Diagram of the Molecular Bonding System
Page 228
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in early 1995. A
suitable demonstration site is being selected. The
MBS process has undergone extensive bench-
scale and pilot-scale testing prior to its successfill
full-scale commercialization. The same
reductions in the TCLP levels of hazardous
contaminants achieved in the laboratory were
achieved at five manufacturing sites hi five
different states.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Thomas Holdsworth
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7675
Fax: 513-569-7676
E-Mail: Holdsworth.Thomas@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Robert Kuhn
SOLUCORP Industries
250 West Nyack Road
West Nyack, NY 10994
914-623-2333
Fax: 914-623-4987
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 229
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
U.S. AIR FORCE
(Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The U. S. Air Force (USAF) has initiated a field
demonstration designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of eastern cottonwood trees hi
remediating shallow groundwater contaminated
with trichloroethene (TCE). Using vegetation to
remediate contaminated soil and groundwater is
known as phytoremediation.
Phytoremediation of groundwater involves
planting deep-rooted, water-loving vegetation to
reduce contaminant levels in the saturated zone.
The USAF's demonstration entails planting and
cultivating eastern cottonwood trees over a
dissolved TCE plume in a shallow (6 to 11 feet
below grade) alluvial aquifer.
The cottonwood trees are expected to
bioremediate the contaminated groundwater and
any contaminated soil through one or more of the
following mechanisms:
• Release of root exudates and enzymes
stimulating microbial activity in the
rhizosphere and enhancing biochemical
transformations of contaminants
• Metabolism or mineralization of
contaminants within the vegetative
tissues; the contaminated water enters the
vegetative tissues by root uptake from
the aquifer
• Transpiration of water by the leaves
In essence, the trees are expected to serve as a
natural pump-and-treat system.
TCE concentrations in the groundwater, soil
from the rhizosphere, and tree tissues will be
monitored during the demonstration. In general,
m Monitoring well
with Recorder
Schematic Diagram of the Site Layout at Naval Air Station Ft. Worth
Page 230
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
data will be gathered and interpreted to identify
the overall effect of the planted trees on the
dissolved TCE plume hi the aquifer.
Groundwater levels and TCE concentrations in
the aquifer will be measured initially to establish
baseline conditions and subsequently to map
changes in the aquifer throughout the
demonstration period. Changes in the flow field
and the position of the TCE plume will also be
modeled.
TCE concentrations will also be monitored in the
soil from the rhizosphere and in the tree tissues.
Ratios of daughter and parent compounds will be
calculated for groundwater, soil, and tissue
samples collected throughout the demonstration
period. Microbial activity in the rhizosphere will
be monitored and transpiration rates will be
measured. These data will be used to determine
the fate of the TCE at the site, including those
processes that affect its fate.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The USAF's phytoremediation technology may
be used to remediate shallow groundwater and
soil contaminated with TCE, as well as other
contaminants common to USAF installations.
Such contaminants include petroleum, munitions,
and halogenated hydrocarbons. Costs of the
technology are limited to initial site preparation,
planting, and occasional maintenance (irrigation).
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the SITE
Demonstration Program in 1996. The USAF is
currently demonstrating its phytoremediation
technology on a TCE plume near Air Force Plant
4 at the Naval Air Station Ft. Worth, formerly
Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas.
Initial site characterization and final site selection
were completed in January .1996. Site
development, which included planting trees and
installing the irrigation system, was completed hi
April 1996. The figure on the previous page
details the layout of the site. Baseline sampling
began in June 1996, and demonstration sampling
is scheduled to continue until 2000. The USAF
speculates that the trees may begin transpiring
water from the aquifer as early as the summer of
1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Gregory Harvey
U.S. Air Force
Mail Stop ASC-EMR
1801 10th Street, Building 8, Suite 200
AreaB
Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH 45433
513-255-7716, ext. 302
Fax: 513-255-4155
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 231
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
VORTEC CORPORATION
(Oxidation and Vitrification Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Vortec Corporation (Vortec) has developed an
oxidation and vitrification process for remediating
soils, sediments, sludges, and mill tailings
contaminated with organics, inorganics, and
heavy metals. The process can oxidize and
vitrify materials introduced as dry granulated
materials or slurries.
The figure below illustrates the Vortec oxidation
and vitrification process. Its basic elements
include (1) a cyclone melting system (CMS™);
(2) a material handling, storage, and feeding
subsystem; (3) a vitrified product separation and
reservoir assembly; (4) a waste heat recovery air
preheater (recuperator); (5) an air pollution
control subsystem; and (6) a vitrified product
handling subsystem.
The Vortec CMS™ is the primary thermal
processing system and consists of two major
assemblies: a counterrotating vortex (CRV) in-
flight suspension preheater and a cyclone melter.
First, slurried or dry-contaminated soil is
introduced into the CRV. The CRV (1) uses the
auxiliary fuel introduced directly into the CRV;
(2) preheats the suspended waste materials along
with any glass-forming additives mixed with oil;
and (3) oxidizes any organic constituents in the
soil. The average temperature of materials
leaving the CRV combustion chamber is between
2,200 and 2,800 °F, depending on the melting
characteristics of the processed soils.
The preheated solid materials exit the CRV and
enter the cyclone melter, where they are
dispersed to the chamber walls to form a molten
glass product. The vitrified, molten glass
product and the exhaust gases exit the cyclone
melter through a tangential exit channel and enter
a glass- and gas-separation chamber.
The exhaust gases then enter an air preheater for
waste heat recovery and are subsequently
delivered to the air pollution control subsystem
for particulate and acid gas removal. The molten
glass product exits the glass- and gas-separation
chamber through the tap and is delivered to a
water quench assembly for subsequent disposal.
MATERIAL HANDLING
STORAGE & FEEDING
SUBSYSTEM
RECYCLED
RESIDUE
VITRIFIED PRODUCT
HANDLING SUBSYSTEM
Vortec Oxidation and Vitrification Process
Page 232
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
Unique features of the Vortec oxidation and
vitrification process include the following:
• Processes solid waste contaminated
with both organic and heavy metal
contaminants
• Uses various fuels, including gas, oil,
coal, and waste
• Handles waste quantities ranging from
5 tons per day to more than 400 tons
per day
• Recycles particulate residue collected
in the air pollution control subsystem
into the CMS™. These recycled
materials are incorporated into the glass
product, resulting in zero solid waste
discharge.
• Produces a vitrified product that is
nontoxic according to EPA toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP) standards. The product also
immobilizes heavy metals and has long-
term stability.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Vortec oxidation and vitrification process
treats soils, sediments, sludges, and mill tailings
containing organic, inorganic, and heavy metal
contamination. Organic materials included with
the waste are successfully oxidized by the high
temperatures in the CRV. The inorganic
constituents hi the waste material determine the
amount and type of glass-forming additives
required to produce a vitrified product. This
process can be modified to produce a glass cullet
that consistently meets TCLP requirements.
STATUS:
The Vortec oxidation and vitrification process
was accepted into the SITE Emerging
Technology Program hi May 1991. Research
under the Emerging Technology Program was
completed in winter 1994, and Vortec was
invited to participate hi the SITE Demonstration
Program.
Construction of a 25-ton-per-day, transportable
system for treating contaminated soil at a
Department of Energy site in Paducah, Kentucky
was initiated hi October 1996. The
demonstration is scheduled to begin hi 1997.
A 50-ton-per-day system has been purchased by
Ormet Aluminum Corporation of Wheeling, West
Virginia for recycling aluminum spent pot liners,
a cyanide- and fluoride-containing waste (K088).
The recycling system became operational hi
1996.
Vortec is offering commercial systems and
licenses for the CMS™ system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
James Hnat
Vortec Corporation
3770 Ridge Pike
Collegeville, PA 19426-3158
610-489-2255
Fax: 610-489-3185
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 233
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
WESTERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
(Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The contained recovery of oily wastes (CROW®)
process recovers oily wastes from the ground by
adapting a technology used for secondary
petroleum recovery and primary production of
heavy oil and tar sand bitumen. Steam or hot
water displacement moves accumulated oily
wastes and water to production wells for
aboveground treatment.
Injection and production wells are first installed
in soil contaminated with oily wastes (see figure
below). If contamination has penetrated into or
below the aquifer, low-quality steam can be
injected below the organic liquids to dislodge and
sweep them upward into the more permeable
aquifer soil regions. Hot water is injected above
the impermeable regions to heat and mobilize the
oily waste accumulation. The mobilized wastes
are then recovered by hot water displacement.
When the organic wastes are displaced, organic
liquid saturation hi the subsurface pore space
Steam-Stripped
Water
Injection Well
increases, forming a free-fluid bank. The hot
water injection displaces the free-fluid bank to
the production well. Behind the free-fluid bank,
the contaminant saturation is reduced to an
immobile residual saturation in the subsurface
pore space. The extracted contaminant and water
are treated for reuse or discharge.
During treatment, all mobilized organic liquids
and water-soluble contaminants are contained
within the original boundaries of waste
accumulation. Hazardous materials are contained
laterally by groundwater isolation and vertically
by organic liquid flotation. Excess water is
treated in compliance with discharge regulations.
The CROW® process removes large portions of
contaminant accumulations; stops the downward
and lateral migration of organic contaminants;
immobilizes any remaining organic wastes as a
residual saturation; and reduces the volume,
mobility, and toxicity of the contaminants. The
process can be used for shallow and deep areas,
and can recover light and dense nonaqueous
Production Well
Hot Water
Flotation
Steam
Injection
CROW® Subsurface Development
Page 234
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
phase liquids. The system uses readily available
mobile equipment. Contaminant removal can be
increased by adding small quantities of selected
biodegradable chemicals in the hot water
injection.
In situ biological treatment may follow the
displacement, which continues until groundwater
contaminants are no longer detected in water
samples from the site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CROW® process can be applied to
manufactured gas plant sites, wood-treating sites,
petroleum-refining facilities, and other areas with
soils and aquifers containing light to dense
organic liquids such as coal tars,
pentachlorophenol (PCP) solutions, chlorinated
solvents, creosote, and petroleum by-products.
Depth to the contamination is not a limiting
factor.
STATUS:
The CROW® process was tested in the laboratory
and at the pilot-scale level under the SITE
Emerging Technology Program (ETP). The
process demonstrated the effectiveness of hot
water displacement and the benefits of including
chemicals with the hot water. Based on results
from the ETP, the CROW® process was invited
to participate in the SITE Demonstration
Program. The process was demonstrated at the
Pennsylvania Power and Light (PP&L) Brodhead
Creek Superfund site at Stroudsburg,
Pennsylvania.
The site contained an area with high
concentrations of by-products from past
operations. The demonstration began in July
1995; field work was completed in June 1996.
Follow-up sampling is planned for early 1997.
The Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
will be available from EPA in 1998.
Sponsors for this program, in addition to EPA
and PP&L, are the Gas Research Institute, the
Electric Power Research Institute, and the U.S.
Department of Energy. Remediation
Technologies, Inc., assisted Western Research
Institute with the demonstration.
Also, a pilot-scale demonstration was completed
at a wood treatment site in Minnesota. Over 80
percent of nonaqueous phase liquids were
removed in the pilot test, as predicted by
treatability studies, and PCP concentrations
decreased 500 percent. The full-scale
remediation for this site is underway. Early
results show an organic removal rate an order-of-
magnitude greater than conventional pump-and-
treat processes. Several other sites are being
evaluated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eugene Harris
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7862
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Lyle Johnson
Western Research Institute
365 North 9th
Laramie, WY 82070-3380
307-721-2281
Fax: 307-721-2233
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 235
-------
Technology Profile
DEMONSTRA TION PROGRAM
WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC.
(WES-Pffix® Stabilization Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
WES-PHix® is a patented stabilization process
that significantly reduces the solubility of certain
heavy metals in solid waste streams by altering
the chemical composition of the waste material.
The process does not produce a solidified mass,
unlike most other stabilization technologies.
The figure below illustrates the process. First,
waste is fed at a controlled rate into a mixing
device, such as a pug mill. The full-scale
WES-PHix® process uses a pug mill with a
capacity of 40 to 200 tons per hour. The
stabilization reagent is then added to and mixed
with the waste for about 1 minute. Once
stabilized, the waste is removed by a conveyor
from the end of the mixer. For some wastes
containing cadmium, small amounts of lime must
also be added. The WES-PHix® Process uses a
proprietary form of soluble phosphate to form
insoluble and highly stable metal phosphate
minerals. Reaction kinetics are rapid; thus, no
curing step is necessary. As a result, metal
concentrations in the treated waste are less than
Heavy
Metal-Bearing
Waste
Storage Bin
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP)
regulatory limits. In addition, the use of small
quantities of liquid phosphate reagent creates
only a minimal increase hi the weight of the
stabilized waste.
Equipment requirements include a metering
device for feeding the waste stream to the mixer,
and a storage tank for the liquid reagent. Over-
sized items such as boulders or wood debris
require crushing or removal by screens before
treatment. No posttreatment is necessary with
this process. Treated residuals can be
transported for final disposal with dump trucks or
roll-off container vehicles.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process was originally developed to treat
municipal waste combustion ash. containing heavy
metals. The commercial-scale process has
treated over 7 million tons of ash. However,
laboratory treatability data indicate that the
technology can also treat contaminated soils,
slags, sludges, foundry sands, and baghouse
Pump
Mixer
Treated Waste
Discharge
WES-PHix® Stabilization Process
Page 236
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
dusts. Recent research indicates that the process
is particularly effective at stabilizing lead,
cadmium, copper, and zinc in a variety of media,
as measured by TCLP and other laboratory
leaching tests.
STATUS:
The WES-PHix® process was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in spring 1993.
The demonstration, which was scheduled to
occur at the Jack's Creek site in Maitland,
Pennsylvania, has been postponed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ten Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Mark Lyons
Wheelabrator Technologies Inc.
4 Liberty Lane West
Hampton, NH 03842
603-929-3403
Fax: 603-929-3123
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 237
-------
-------
EMERGING
The Emerging Technology Program provides an opportunity to research and develop technologies at bench-
and pilot-scale levels. The goal is to promote and support the development of alternative technologies for
field applications at Superfund site remediations.
Technologies were solicited yearly for the Emerging Technology Program through Requests for
Preproposal. After a technical review of the preproposals, selected candidates were invited to submit a
Cooperative Agreement Application and detailed project proposal that underwent another full technical
review. The Cooperative Agreement between EPA and the technology developer required cost sharing.
Projects were considered for either a 1- or 2-year developmental effort, providing awards of up to
$150,000 per year, with a maximum of $300,000 over 2 years. Second-year funding depended on
achieving significant progress during the first year. After the second year or significant progress, emerging
technologies were considered for the SITE Demonstration Program.
To enable EPA to accept additional technologies into the Emerging Technology Program, Interagency
Agreements have been made between EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Air
Force (USAF). DOE has helped fund 21 projects, and USAF has helped fund eight projects.
Nine solicitations have been issued from November 1987 (E01) through July 1995 (E09). Fifty-five
Emerging Technology Program projects have been completed, and several more will be completed in 1997.
The following six Emerging Technology Program projects have been evaluated under the SITE
Demonstration Program.
• Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace)
• COGNIS, Inc. (TERRAMET® Soil Remediation)
• High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation)
• Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment)
• J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process)
• ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System)
Twelve more Emerging Technology Program projects are participating in the Demonstration Program.
Completed Emerging Technology Program participants are presented in alphabetical order in Table 3 and
in the technology profiles that follow; ongoing program participants are presented in alphabetical order in
Table 4 and in the profiles that follow.
Page 239
-------
I
TABLE 3
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
ABB Environmental
Services, Inc.,
Wakefield, MA (E03)'
AEA Technology PLC, National
Environmental Technology
Centre (formerly Warren
Spring Laboratory),
Oxfordshire, England (E04):
Aluminum Company of
America (formerly ALCOA
Separation Technology,
Inc.),"
Pittsburgh, PA (E03)
ART International, Inc.
(formerly Enviro-Sciences,
Inc.),
Denville, NI (EOS)
Atomic Energy of Canada,
Limited,
Chalk River, Ontario, Canada
(E01)
Babcock & WMcox Co.,'"
Lynchburg, VA (E02)
Battelle Memorial Institute,
Columbus, OH (E01)
BioTrolV
Eden Prairie, MN (E03)
Center for Hazardous Materials
Research,
Pittsburgh, PA (EOS)
Technology
Two-Zone, Plume
Interception, in Situ
Treatment Strategy
Soil Separation and
Washing Process
Bioscrubber
Low-Energy Extraction.
Process (LEEP®)
Chemical Treatment
and Ultrafiltration
Cyclone Furnace
In Situ Electroacoustic
Soil Decontamination
Methanotrophie
Bioreactor System
Acid Extraction
Treatment System
Technology
Contact
Jaret Johnson
Willard Murray
617-245-6606
Steve Barber
011-44-1235-463062
Paul Liu
412-826-3711
Werner Steiner
201-627-7601
Leo Buckley
Les Moschuk
613-584-3311
Lew Walton
804-948-4647
Satya Chauhan
614-424-4812
Dwell Dobbins
612-942-8032
Stephen Paff
412-826-5321,
ext. 233
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Not Available
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Tack Hubbard
513-569-7507
John Martin
513-569-7758
Laurel Staley
513-569-7863
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
David Smith
303-293-1475
George Moore
513-569-7991
Applicable
Media
Groundwater, Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Airstreams from
Soil, Water, and
Air Decontamina-
tion Processes
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Groundwater,
Leachate,
Wastewater
Solids, Soil,
Sludge
Soil
Water
Soil
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Inorganic Chloride
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Nonspecific, Low-Level
Ra4ionuclide$, Heavy
Metals
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Organic
Chlorinated and
Nonchlorinated
Organic Compounds
Petroleum
Hydrocarbons, PAHs
Most Volatile Organics
Tar, Creosote, PCBs,
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons, PAHs,
Pesticides
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Halogenated
hydrocarbons
Not Applicable
Solicitation number
Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
SITE Demonstration Program participant. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program Section (Completed and Ongoing Projects) for more information.
-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Center for Hazardous Materials
Research,
Pittsburgh, PA (EOS)
Center for Hazardous Materials
Research,
Pittsburgh, PA (E04)
COGNIS, Inc.,
(EOS)
COGNIS, Inc.,"'
(EOS)
Colorado Department of Public
Health (developed by
Colorado School of Mines),"'
Golden, CO (E01)
Electrokinetics, Inc.,'"
Baton Rouge, LA (E03)
High Voltage Environmental
Applications, Inc. (formerly
Electron Beam Research
Facility, Florida International
University, and University of
Miami),"*
Miami, PL (EOS)
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc.,
Princeton, NJ (EOS)
Energy and Environmental
Research Corporation,"
Irvine, CA (EOS)
Energy and Environmental
Research Corporation,
Irvine, CA (E06)
Technology
Organics Destruction
and Metals Stabilization
Smelting Lead'
Containing Waste
Biological/Chemical
Treatment
TERRAMET® Soil
Remediation
Constructed Wetlands-
Based Treatment
Electrokinetic Soil
Processing
High-Energy Electron
Irradiation
Reductive Photo-*
Dechlorination
Treatment
Hybrid Fluidized Bed
System
Reactor Filter System
Technology
Contact
Stephen Paff
412-826-5321
ext. 233
Stephen Paff
412-326-5321,
extf 233
Not Available
Not Available
James Lewis
303-692-3383
ElifAcar
504-753-8004
William Cooper
305-593-5330
Moshe Lavid
609^799-7970
Richard Koppang
714-859-8851
Neil Widmer
714-859-8851
EPA Project
Manager
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Laurel Sjaley
513-569-7863
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Michael Royer
908-321-6633
Edward Bates
513-569-7774
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Franklin Alvarez
513-569-7631
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sediment
Solids, Lead-
Containing Waste
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Acid Mine
Drainage
Soil, Sediment
Liquid, Sludge
Liquids, Solids,
Gas
Soil, Sludge
Gas Emissions
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals
Lead
Heavy Metals
Lead, Heavy Metals
Metals
Heavy Metals and Other
Inorganics, Radionuclides
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Volatile Inorganics,
Metals
Volatile Toxic Metals
Organic
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Organics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Organics
Most Organics
Volatile Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Nonspecific Organics
Condensed-Phase
Organics
Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
SITE Demonstration Program participant. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program Section (completed and ongoing projects) for more information.
-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Environmental Biotechnologies,
Inc.,
San Carlos, CA (E06)
Ferro Corporation,
Independence, OH (503)
Hazardous Substance
Management Research
Center at New Jersey
Institute of Technology, and
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey,
Newark, NJ (E04)
Institute of Gas Technology,"
Des Plaines, IL (E04)
Institute of Gas Technology,"
Des Plaines, IL (E03)
Institute of Gas Technology,
Des Plaines, IL (E03)
IT Corporation,
Knoxville.TN (E02)
IT Corporation,
Knoxviiie,TN.(E04)
IT Corporation,
Knoxville.TN (E03)
IT Corporation,
Knoxvilie.TN (E04)
Technology
Fungal Degradation
Process
Waste Vitrification
Through Electric
Melting
Pneumatic Fracturing
and Bioremediation
Process
Chemical and
Biological Treatment
Fluid Extraction-
Biological Degradation
Process
Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic
Agglomerating
Combustor
Batch Steam
Distillation and Metal
Extraction
Mixed Waste
Treatment Process
Photolytic and
Biological Soil
Detoxification
Tekno Associates
Bioslurry Reactor
Technology
Contact
Douglas Munnecke
415-596-1020
S.K. Muralidhar
216-641-8580
John Schuring
201-596-5849
David Kosson
908-445-4346
Robert Kelley
847-768-0722
Robert Paterek
847-768-0720
ArmYRehmat
847-768-0588
Michael Mensinger
847-768-0602
Stuart Shealy
423-690-3211
Ed Alperin
423-690-3211
Duane Graves
423-690-3211
Kandi Brown
423-690-32H
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Randy Parker
513-569-7271 ,
Not Available
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Annette Gatchett
513-569-7697
Ted Richardson
513-569-7949
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Douglas Grosse
513-569-7844
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Brunilda Davila
513-569-7849
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Groundwater,
Surface Water
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Solid, Liquid,
Gas, Soil, Sludge
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge
Soil
Soil, Sludge
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Inorganics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonvolatile Inorganics
Heavy Metals, Other
Inorganics
Nonspecific Inorganics,
Radionuclides
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
PAHs
Nonspecific Organics
Biodegradable
Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
PCBs, Pesticides,
Dioxins, PAHs
PAH?
Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Lewis Environmental Services,
Inc./Hickson Corporation,
Pittsburgh, PA (E06)
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc,,'"
London, Ontario, Canada (EOS)
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc.,'"
London, Ontario, Canada (EOS)
Membrane Technology and
Research, Inc.,
Menlo Park; CA (E02)
Montana College of Mineral
Science and Technology,
Butte, MT (E03)
Montana College of Mineral
Science and Technology,
Butte, MT (EOS)
New Jersey Institute of
Technology,
Newark, NJ (E03)
PSI Technologies, A Division of
Physical Sciences Inc.,
Andover, MA (E04)
Pulse Sciences, Inc.,
San Leandro, CA (E04)
Purus, Inc.,"
(E04)
RECRA Environmental, Inc.
(Formerly Electro-Pure
Systems, Inc.),
Amherst, NY (E02)
Technology
Chromated Copper
Arsenate Soil Leaching
Process
Photocatalytic Air
Treatment
Photocatalytic Water
Treatment
VaporSep® Membrane
Process
Air-Sparged
Hydrocyclone
Campbell
Centrifugal Jig
GHEA Associates
Process
Metals Immobilization
and Decontamination of
Aggregate Solids
X-Ray Treatment of
Aqueous Solutions
Photolytic Oxidation
Process
Alternating Current
Blectrocoagulation
Technology
Technology
Contact
Tom Lewis III
412-322-8100
Bob Henderson
519-660-8669
Bob Henderson
519-660-8669
Marc Jacobs
Doug Gottsehlich
415-328-2228
Theodore Jordan
406-496-4112
406-496-4193
Gordon Ziesing
406-496-4112
406-496-4193
Itzhak Gotlieb
201-226-4642
Joseph Morency
508-689-0003
Vernon Bailey
510-632-5100,
ext. 227
Not Available
Kenneth Kinecki
800-527-3272
EPA Project
Manager
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Richard Biters
513-569-7809
Richard Eilers
513-569-7809
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Euguene Harris
513-569-7862
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Brunilda Davila
513-569-7849
Mark Meckes
513-569-7348
Esperanza Piano
Renard
908-321-4355
Norrna Lewis
513-569-7665
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Air
Wastewater,
Groundwater,
Process Water
Gaseous Waste
Streams
Solids (Fine
Particles)
Soil, Solids
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Water,
Industrial Effluent
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Groundwater,
Liquid, Leachate
Soil, Groundwater
Groundwater,
Wastewater,
Leachate
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals, Other
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Inorganics
Not Applicable
Metals
Heavy Metals
Heavy Metals
Heavy Metals, Volatile
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Organic
Not Applicable
VQCs, SVOCs
Most Organics
Halogenated and
Nonhalogenated
Organics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Most Organics
Low Volatile
Organics,
Organometallics
VOCs, SVOCs
VQCs
Petroleum By-
products, Coal-Tar
Derivatives
" Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
'** SITE Demonstration Program participant. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program Section (completed and ongoing projects) for more information.
-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Remediation Technologies, Inc.,
Seattle, WA (EOS)
Resource Management Sf
Recovery, (formerly
Bio-Recovery Systems*
Inc,),"
LasCruces.NM (E01)
J.R. Simplot Company,'"
Pocatello, ID (E03)
State University of New York at
Oswego, Environmental
" Research Center,
Oswego, NY (EQ6)
Svedala Industries, Inc.,
Waukesha, WI (E03)
Trinity Environmental
Technologies, Inc,,
Mound Valley, KS (E03)
University of Dayton Research
Institute,
Dayton, OH (E05)
University of South Carolina,
Columbia, SC (E03)
University of Washington,
Seattle, WA (E02)
Technology
Biofilm Reactor for
Chlorinated Gas
Treatment
AlgaSORB® Biological
Sorptipn
The SABRE" Process
Photocatalytic
Degradation of PCB-
Contaminated
Sediments and Waters
PYROKILN
THERMAL
ENCAPSULATION
Process
PCB- and
Organochlorinfr' *
Contaminated Soil
Detoxification
Photothermal
Detoxification Unit
In Situ Mitigation of
Acid Water
Adsorptive Filtration
Technology
Contact
Hans Stroo
206-624-9349
Michael Hosea
505-382-9228
Russell Kaake
208-235-5620
Tom Yergovich
208-238-2850
Ronald Scrudato
Jeffrey Chiarenzelli
315-341-3639
Jim Kidd
414-798-6341
Glenn Heian
414-762-1190
Duane Koszalka
316-328-3222
Berry Dellinger
John Graham
513-229-2846
Frank Carucqjq
803-777-4512
Mark Benjamin
206-543-7645
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Wendy Davis-Hoover
513-569-7206
Hector Moreno
513-569-7882
Marta K. Richards
513-569-7692
Paul dePercin
513-569-7797
Chien Chen
908-906-6985
Roger WHmoth
513-569-7509
Norma Lewis
513-569-7665
Applicable
Media
Gas
Groundwater,
Leaehate,
Wastewater
Soil
Soil, Slurries,
Leachates
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Gaseous Waste
Streams
Acid Mine
Drainage
Groundwater,
Wastewater,
Leaehate
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Metals, Uranium
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals
Metals, Other
Nonspecific Inorganics
Organic
Volatile Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Not Applicable
Nitroaromatics
PCBs, Other
Chlorinated Organics,
VOCs, SVQCs
Nonspecific Organics
PCBs, PCP, Other
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Nonspecific Volatile
Organics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
I
Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
SITE Demonstration Program participant. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program Section (completed and ongoing projects) for more information.
-------
TABLE 3 (Continued)
Completed SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
UV Technologies, Inc.
(formerly Energy and
Environmental Engineering,
Inc.),"
East Cambridge, MA (E01)
Vortec Corporation,'"
Collegeville, PA (E04)
Western Product Recovery
Group, Inc.,
Houston, TX (E04)
Western Research Institute,"*
Laramie, WY (E01)
Roy F. Western, Inc.,
West Chester, PA (E06)
ZENQN Environmental Inc.
(formerly Wastewater
Technology Centre),"*
Burlington, Ontario, Canada.
(E02)
Technology
PhotoCAT" Process
Oxidation and
Vitrification process
Coordinate, Chemical
Bonding, and
Adsorption Process
Contained Recovery of
Oily Wastes
Ambersorb® 563
Adsorbent
Cross-Flow
Pervaporation System
Technology
Contact
James Porter
John Roll
617-666-5500
James Hrat
610-489-2255
Donald Kelly
713-533-9321
Ben Elkins
619-749-8856
Lyle Johnson
307-721-2281
John Thoroughgood
610-701-3728
Deborah Plantz
215-537-4061
Chris Lipski •
905-639-6320
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Teri Richardson
513-569-7949
Vince Gallardo
. 513-569-7176
Eugene Harris
5l3-569-786'2
Ronald Turner
513-569-7775
Ronald Turner
513-569-7775
Applicable -
Media
Groundwater,
Wastewater
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Soil, Groundwater
Groundwater,
Wastewater
Groundwater,
Leachate,
Wastewater
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Metals, Other
Nonspecific Inorganics
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
Various Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Nonspecific Organics
Coal Tars, Petroleum
By-products, PCP,
Chlorinated Solvents
VOCs
Solvents, Degreasers,
Gasoline, other VOCs
Invited to participate in the SITE Demonstration Program
SITE Demonstration Program participant. Refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program Section (completed and ongoing projects) for more information.
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ABB ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
(Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ Treatment Strategy)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The two-zone, plume interception, in situ
treatment strategy is designed to treat chlorinated
and nonchlorinated organic compounds in
saturated soils and groundwater using a sequence
of anaerobic and aerobic conditions (see figure
below). The in situ anaerobic and aerobic system
constitutes a treatment train that biodegrades a
wide assortment of chlorinated and
nonchlorinated compounds.
When applying this technology, anaerobic and
aerobic conditions are produced in two distinct,
hydraulically controlled, saturated soil zones.
Groundwater passes through each zone as it is
recirculated through the treatment area. The first
zone, the anaerobic zone, is designed to partially
dechlorinate highly chlorinated solvents such as
tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE),
and 1,1,1-trichloroethane with natural biological
processes. The second zone, the aerobic zone, is
designed to biologically oxidize the partially
dechlorinated products from the first zone, as
well as other compounds that were not
susceptible to the anaerobic treatment phase.
Anaerobic conditions are produced or enhanced
in the first treatment zone by introducing a
primary carbon source, such as glucose or
acetate, and mineral nutrients, such as nitrogen
and phosphorus. When proper anaerobic conditions
are attained, the target contaminants are reduced.
For example, PCE is dechlorinated to TCE, and
TCE is dechlorinated to dichloroethene (DCE)
and vinyl chloride. Under favorable conditions,
this process can completely dechlorinate the
organics to ethene and ethane.
Aerobic conditions are produced or enhanced in
the second treatment zone by introducing
oxygen, mineral nutrients such as nitrogen and
phosphorus, and possibly an additional carbon
source, such as methane (if an insufficient supply
of methane results from the upstream, anaerobic
zone). When proper aerobic conditions are
attained in this zone, partially dechlorinated
products and other target compounds from the
CONTAMINANT
SOURCE
IMPERMEABLE
LAYER
GROUNDWATER FLOW
Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ Treatment Strategy
Page 246
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
first zone are oxidized. For example, less-
chlorinated ethenes such as DCE and vinyl
chloride are cometabolized during the aerobic
microbiological degradation of methane.
The treatment strategy is designed to biologically
remediate subsoils by enhancing indigenous
microorganism activity. If indigenous bacterial
populations do not provide the adequate
anaerobic or aerobic results, specially adapted
cultures can be introduced to the aquifer. These
cultures are introduced using media-filled
trenches that can support added microbial
growth.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The two-zone, plume interception, in situ treatment
strategy is designed to treat groundwater and
saturated soils containing chlorinated and
nonchlorinated organic compounds.
STATUS:
The two-zone, plume interception, ha situ
treatment strategy was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1989.
Optimal treatment parameters for field testing
were investigated hi bench-scale soil aquifer
simulators. The objectives of bench-scale testing
were to (1) determine factors affecting the
development of each zone, (2) evaluate
indigenous bacterial communities,
(3) demonstrate treatment of chlorinated and
nonchlorinated solvent mixtures, and (4) develop
a model for the field remediation design. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/510),
which details the bench-scale testing results, is
available from EPA.
A pilot-scale field demonstration system was
installed at an industrial facility in Massachusetts.
Pilot testing began in September 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jaret Johnson or Willard Murray
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
Corporate Place 128
107 Audubon Road
Wakefield, MA 01880
617-245-6606
Fax: 617-246-5060
E-mail:
JARET.C.JOHNSON@USEVS.Mail.Abb.Com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 24-7
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
AEA TECHNOLOGY PLC, NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY CENTRE
(formerly WARREN SPRING LABORATORY)
(Soil Separation and Washing Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The National Environmental Technology Centre
of AEA Technology has developed an ex situ soil
separation and washing process that uses mineral
processing technology and hardware. The
process can be used (1) as a volume reduction
process to release clean soil fractions and
concentrate contaminants, or (2) as a
pretreatment stage in a treatment train.
Because each contaminated soil is different, AEA
Technology has developed a custom physical
treatment process for soil using a three-stage
process: laboratory-scale characterization,
separation testing and assessment, and treatment
and data analysis.
AEA Technology is experienced in conducting
pilot plant testing programs on contaminated land
and mineral ores. In addition, AEA Technology
uses computer software designed to reconcile
material flow data. The results from data
processing lead to recommendations for full-scale
continuous flow sheets with predicted flows of
solids, associated contaminant species, and water.
Also, estimates of the contaminant levels and
distributions to the various products
are
1mm
Screen Scubber
High Pressure Water
Feed Soil
I I SOmm Screening
> SOmm Debris
10-50mm
Overs izo
1-10mm
(Batched for
Jigging)
Slimes for
Flocculatlon
and Sedimentation
Magnetic*
Contaminant
Concentrate
Contaminant
Concentrate
1 Alternative option Is to use spiral separator.
2 Alternative option Is to use multi-gravity separator.
> 0.5mm
Contaminated
Product
< 0.5mm
Generalized Flowsheet for the Physical Treatment of Contaminated Soil
Page 248
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
estimated. This data is required to estimate the
cost and potential for success of the full-scale
remediation process plant. Flow sheet
configuration is flexible and customized to the
nature and contamination of each soil or waste.
A typical schematic flow sheet of the process is
shown in the diagram on the previous page. The
flow sheet involves screening the raw feed at 50
millimeters (mm) under powerful water jets to
deagglomerate the mass. Debris less than 50 mm
in size is often decontaminated. Remaining
solids and the water pass through a grinding mill
acting as a drum scrubber. The grinding mill is
more violent than the screen, further separating
the soil mass. It breaks down clay lumps and
adhering material into suspension,. except for
surface coatings of clay and oil on fine particles.
The mill discharge is screened at 1 mm and the
oversized discharge is screened from 1 to 10
mm. The mill discharge from 10 to 50 mm is
often clean debris; if it is not clean, it can be
crushed and refed into the system. Material from
1 to 10 mm is usually still contaminated and
requires further treatment.
The clay and water are removed from the
suspension containing particles greater than 1
mm. The fine product, less than 10 micron
(urn), is flocculated and thickened to reclaim the
process water for recycle. Thickened clay
product, usually containing concentrated
contaminants, passes to further treatment or
disposal. Sands from the hydrocycloning step
are further dewatered in a classifier before the
third and most intense deagglomeration
operation.
An attrition scrubber removes the remaining
surface contamination, as well as pulps and
clayballs. Having completed deagglomeration,
the soil is fractionated by particle size or
separated by specific gravity. A second stream
of particles less than 10 ywm is removed by
hydrocycloning and joins the primary product
stream. Finer sands and silt are screened at 500
,um to yield a contaminated sand for disposal or
retreatment. A 10- to 500-,um fraction can be
separated magnetically, by flotation, multigravity
separation, or a combination. These stages
produce a contaminant concentrate leaving the
remaining material relatively contaminant free.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The soil separation and washing process is
designed to remove metals, petroleum
hydrocarbons, and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons from soil. The process may be
applied to soils from gas and coke works,
petrochemical plants, coal mines, iron and steel
works, foundries, and nonferrous smelting,
refining and finishing sites. The process can also
treat sediments, dredgings, sludges, mine
tailings, and certain industrial wastes.
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1991.
For this project, soils from three sites were
characterized in the laboratory. One soil, from
a gasworks, was then selected for treatment hi a
pilot-scale unit.
Pilot trials were conducted on 30 tons of soil at a
throughput rate of 0.5 ton per hour. Several test
runs were performed to evaluate different flow
sheet configurations. Results from this test will
be available in late 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Steve Barber
AEA Technology PLC,
National Environmental Technology Centre
Culham, Abingdon
Oxfordshire OX14 3DB England
011-44-1235-463062
Fax: 011-44-1235-463010
The SITi Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 249
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AMERICA
(formerly ALCOA SEPARATION TECHNOLOGY, INC.)
(Bioscrubber)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This bioscrubber technology digests hazardous
organic emissions generated by soil, water, and
air decontamination processes. The bioscrubber
consists of a filter with an activated carbon
medium that supports microbial growth. This
unique medium, with increased microbial
population and enhanced bioactivity, converts
diluted organics into carbon dioxide, water, and
other nonhazardous compounds. The filter
removes biomass, supplies nutrients, and adds
moisture. A pilot-scale unit with a 4-cubic-foot-
per-minute capacity is being field-tested (see
figure below).
In addition to efficient degradation, the
bioscrubber provides an effective sink to mitigate
feed fluctuations. During an 11-month bench-
scale test, the bioscrubber consistently removed
contaminants such as petroleum hydrocarbons,
alcohols, ketones, and amines from the waste
feed at levels ranging from less than 5 to 40 parts
per million (ppm).
The bioscrubber provides several advantages
over conventional activated carbon adsorbers.
First, bioregeneration keeps the maximum
adsorption capacity constantly available; thus, the
mass transfer zone remains stationary and
relatively short. The carbon does not require
refrigeration, and the required bed length is
greatly reduced, reducing capital and operating
expenses. Finally, the chromatographic effect
(premature desorption) common in an adsorber is
eliminated because the maximum capacity is
available constantly. The bioscrubber's
advantages are fully exploited when the off-gas
I
I
Bioscrubber Pilot-Scale Unit
Page 250
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
contains weakly adsorbed contaminants, such as
methylene chloride, or adsorbates competing with
moisture in the stream. The bioscrubber may
replace activated carbon in some applications.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The bioscrubber technology removes organic
contaminants in air streams from soil, water, or
air decontamination processes. The technology
is especially suited to treat streams containing
aromatic solvents, such as benzene, toluene, and
xylene, as well as alcohols, ketones,
hydrocarbons, and others. The technology has
several applications to Superfund sites, including
(1) organic emission control for groundwater
decontamination using air strippers, (2) emission
control for biological treatment of ground and
surface water, and (3) emission control for soil
decontamination. These primary treatment
processes have not been designed to prevent
volatile organic compound discharges into the
atmosphere. The bioscrubber is an ideal
posttreatment for these processes because it
handles trace organic volatiles economically and
effectively.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1990.
Bench-scale bioscrubbers operated continuously
for more than 11 months to treat an air stream
with trace concentrations of toluene at about
10 to 20 ppm. The bioscrubbers accomplished a
removal efficiency of greater than 95 percent.
The filter had a biodegradation efficiency 40 to
80 times greater than existing filters. The project
was completed in June 1993. Based on results
from the Emerging Technology Program, the
bioscrubber technology was invited to participate
in the SITE Demonstration Program.
Evaluation results have been published in the
report "Bioscrubber for Removing Hazardous
Organic Emissions from Soil, Water and Air
Decontamination Processes" (EPA/540/R-93/521).
This report is available from the National
Technical Information Service. The Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/507) and the
Emerging Technology Summary
(EPA/540/SR-93/521) are available from EPA.
An article was also published in the Journal of
Air and Waste Management, Volume 44, March
1994, pp. 299-303.
The pilot-scale unit has also been tested on
discharge from an air stripping tower at a flow
rate of 2 standard cubic feet per minute. The
discharge contained from less than 10 ppm up to
200 ppm toluene. The unit demonstrated the
effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability of its
design. Additional tests are underway to confirm
results at higher flow rates and with other
contaminants.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercui.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Paul Liu
Media and Process Technology, Inc.
1155 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
412-826-3711
Fax: 412-826-3720
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 251
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ART INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(formerly ENVIRO-SCIENCES, INC.)
(Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®])
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The patented Low-Energy Extraction Process
(LEEP®) uses common organic solvents to
concentrate and extract organic pollutants from
soil, sediments, and sludges. LEEP® can treat
contaminated solids to the stringent cleanup
levels mandated by regulatory agencies. LEEP®
includes pretreatment, washing, and
concentration processes (see figure below).
During pretreatment, particles measuring up to 8
inches in diameter are removed in a gravity
settler-floater. The settler-floater includes a
metal detector and remover, a crusher, and a
metering feeder. Floating material often found at
remediation sites, such as wood chips, grass, or
root material, is also removed.
After pretreatment, the solid matrix is washed in
a unique, dual solvent process that uses both
hydrophilic and hydrophobic solvents. The
combination of these proprietary solvents
guarantees efficient contaminant removal.
The extracted pollutants are then concentrated in
a sacrificial solvent by liquid-liquid extraction or
by distillation, and are removed, from the process
for off-site disposal or recycling. The treated
solids can be returned to the site as clean fill.
LEEP® is a low-pressure process operated at
near-ambient conditions.' It is designed as a
closed-loop, self-contained, mobile unit
consisting of proven heavy-duty equipment. The
relatively inexpensive solvents used in the
process are internally recycled. The solvents are
applicable to almost every type of organic
contaminant, and their physical properties
enhance clay and silt particle settling.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
LEEP® can treat most organic contaminants in
soil, sediment, and sludge, including tar,
creosote, chlorinated hydrocarbons, polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons, pesticides, and wood-
preserving chlorophenol formulations. Bench-
and pilot-scale experiments have shown that
LEEP® Process Flow Diagram
Page 252
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
LEEP® effectively treats tar-contaminated solids
from manufactured gas plant sites, soils and
sediments contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls and refinery waste sludges, and soils
contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
LEEP® was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in July 1989. Bench-scale
studies for process development were completed
in 1994. A draft report which details the
evaluation results has been submitted to EPA.
The final report will be available in 1997.
In addition, ART International, Inc., routinely
conducts bench-scale treatability studies for
government and industrial clients, and has
obtained Toxic Substances Control Act, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, and air permits
for the technology. Other developments include
the following:
• A 200-pound-per-hour pilot-scale unit
has been constructed.
• Tests of the pilot-scale unit indicated that
LEEP® can treat soil from manufactured
gas plant sites containing up to 5 percent
tar.
• Tests to scale up the pilot-scale unit to a
commercial unit are complete.
• Commercial design criteria and a turnkey
bid package are complete.
• Commercialization activities for a full-
scale unit are underway.
• In 1994, Soil Extraction Technologies,
Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of
Public Service Electric & Gas, purchased
a LEEP® license.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 46268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Werner Sterner
ART International, Inc.
100 Ford Road
Denville, NJ 07834
201-627-7601
Fax: 201-627-6524
Tha SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 253
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA, LIMITED
(Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (AECL),
process uses chemical pretreatment and
ultrafiltration to remove trace concentrations of
dissolved metals from wastewater, contaminated
groundwater, and leachate. The process
selectively removes metal contaminants and
produces a volume-reduced water stream for
further treatment and disposal.
The installed unit's overall dimensions are 5 feet
wide by 7 feet long by 6 feet high. The skid-
mounted unit consists of (1) a bank of 5-micron
cartridge prefilters, (2) a feed conditioning
system with polyelectrolytes and chemicals for
pH adjustment, (3) two banks of hollow-fiber
ultrafilters, (4) a backflush system for cleaning
the membrane unit, and (5) associated tanks and
instrumentation.
The figure below illustrates the process.
Wastewater enters the prefilter through the feed
holding tank, where suspended particles are
removed from the feed. The filtered waste
stream is then routed to conditioning tanks where
the solution pH is adjusted. Water-soluble
Feed
Holding
Tank
Prefiltration
pH Chemical
Addition
~~* \
pH
Adjustment
Polyelectrolyte
Addition
1 .
Metal
Cornplexation
Reaction
Tank
macromolecular compounds are then added to the
wastewater to form complexes with heavy metal
ions. Next, a relatively high molecular weight
polymer, generally a commercially available
polyelectrolyte, is added to the wastewater to
form selective metal-polymer complexes at the
desired pH and temperature. The polyelectrolyte
quantities depend on the metal ion concentration.
The wastewater then passes through a cross-flow
ultrafiltration membrane system by way of a
recirculation loop. The ultrafiltration system
provides a total membrane surface area of
265 square feet and a flow rate of about 6 gallons
per minute (gpm). The membranes retain the
metal complexes (concentrate), while allowing
uncomplexed ions to pass through the membrane
with the filtered water. The filtered water
(permeate) is continuously withdrawn, while the
concentrate stream, containing most of the
contaminants, is recycled through the
recirculation loop until it meets the target
concentration. After reaching the target
concentration, the concentrate stream is
withdrawn for further treatment, such as
solidification. It can then be safely disposed of,
while the clean filtered water is discharged.
Recirculation Loop
100to150L/min
Circulation
Pump
= 20 L/min
Feed
Pump
Ultrafiltration
System
(265 sq ft Bank)
<= 20 L/min
Filter
Water
» 0.2 to 1.0 L/min
Concentrate
Single-Stage Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration Process
Page 254
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The AECL process treats groundwater, leachate,
and surface runoff contaminated with trace levels
of toxic heavy metals. The process also treats
effluents from (1) industrial processes,
(2) production and processing of base metals,
(3) smelters, (4) electrolysis operations, and
(5) battery manufacturing. Potential applications
include removal of metals such as cadmium,
lead, mercury, uranium, manganese, nickel,
chromium, and silver.
The process can treat influent with dissolved
metal concentrations from several parts per
million (ppm) up to about 100 ppm. In addition,
the process removes other inorganic and organic
materials present as suspended or colloidal solids.
The sole residue is the ultrafiltration concentrate,
which generally constitutes 5 to 20 percent of the
feed volume.
STATUS:
The AECL process was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1988. During
initial bench-scale and pilot-scale tests, the AECL
process successfully removed cadmium, lead,
and mercury. These results were used to help
designers construct the mobile unit.
The mobile unit has been tested at Chalk River
Laboratories and a uranium mine tailings site in
Ontario, Canada. The field evaluation indicated
that process water characteristics needed further
study; pretreatment schemes are being evaluated.
The mobile unit, which is capable of treating
influent flows ranging from 1,000 to
5,000 gallons per day, is available for treatability
tests and on-site applications. An Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/002) is
available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
John Martin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7758
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Leo Buckley or Les Moschuk
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited
Waste Processing Technology
Chalk River Laboratories
Chalk River, Ontario, Canada KOJ 1JO
613-584-3311
Fax: 613-584-8107
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 255
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE
(In Situ Electroacoustic Soil Decontamination)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This patented in situ electroacoustic soil
decontamination (BSD) technology removes
heavy metals from soils through direct current
electrical and acoustic fields. Direct current
facilitates liquid transport through soils. The
technology consists of electrodes, an anode and
a cathode, and an acoustic source (see figure
below).
The double-layer boundary theory is important
when an electric potential is applied to soils. For
soil particles, the double layer consists of (1) a
fixed layer of negative ions that are firmly held to
the solid phase, and (2) a diffuse layer of more
loosely held cations and anions. Applying an
electric potential to the double layer displaces the
loosely held ions to their respective electrodes.
The cations take water with diem as they move
toward the cathode.
Besides water transport through wet soils, the
direct current produces orner effects, such as ion
transfer, pH gradients development, electrolysis,
oxidation and reduction, and heat generation.
Heavy metals present in contaminated soils can
be leached or precipitated out of solution by
electrolysis, oxidation and reduction reactions, or
ionic migration. The soil contaminants may be
(1) cations, such as cadmium, chromium, and
lead; or (2) anions, such as cyanide, chromate,
and dichromate. The existence of these ions in
their respective oxidation states depends on soil
pH and concentration gradients. Direct current
is expected to increase the leaching rate and
precipitate the heavy metals out of solution by
establishing appropriate pH and osmotic gradients.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes heavy metals from
soils. When applied in conjunction with an
electric field and water flow, an acoustic field
can enhance waste dewatering or leaching. This
phenomenon is not fully understood. Another
possible application involves the unclogging of
recovery wells. Because contaminated particles
are driven to the recovery well, the pores and
interstitial spaces in the soil can close. This
technology could be used to clear these clogged
spaces.
Contaminants
Water (Optional)
Profile
In Situ Electroacoustic Soil Decontamination (BSD) Technology
Page 256
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
The technology's potential for improving
nonaqueous phase liquid contaminant recovery
and hi situ removal of heavy metals needs to be
tested at the pilot-scale level using clay soils.
STATUS:
The BSD technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1988. Results
indicate that BSD is technically feasible for
removing inorganic species such as zinc and
cadmium from clay soils; it is only marginally
effective for hydrocarbon removal. A modified
BSD process for more effective hydrocarbon
removal has been developed but not tested. The
Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/5-90/004) describing the 1-year
investigation can be purchased through the
National Technical Information Service, (PB 90-
204728/AS). The Emerging Technology
Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/004) is available from
EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Satya Chauhan
Battelle Memorial Institute
505 King Avenue
Columbus, OH 43201
614-424-4812
Fax: 614-424-3321
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 257
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
BIOTROL®
(Methanotrophic Bioreactor System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The BioTrol methanotrophic bioreactor system is
an aboveground remedial technology for water
contaminated with halogenated hydrocarbons.
Trichloroethene (TCE) and related compounds
pose a difficult challenge to biological treatment.
Unlike aromatic hydrocarbons, for example,
TCE cannot serve as a primary substrate for
bacterial growth. Degradation depends on
cometabolism (see figure below), which is
attributed to the broad substrate specificity of
certain bacterial enzyme systems. Although
many aerobic enzyme systems reportedly
cooxidize TCE and related compounds, BioTrol
claims that the methane monooxygenase (MMO)
produced by methanotrophic bacteria is the most
promising.
Methanotrophs are bacteria that can use methane
as a sole source of carbon and energy. Although
certain methanotrophs can express MMO in either
a soluble or particulate (membrane-bound) form,
BioTrol has discovered that the soluble form used
in the BioTrol process induces extremely rapid
TCE degradation rates. Two patents have been
obtained, and an additional patent on the process
is pending. Results from experiments with
Methylosinus trichosporium strain OB3b indicate
that the maximum specific TCE degradation rate
is 1.3 grams of TCE per gram of cells (dry
weight) per hour. This rate is 100 to 1,000 times
faster than reported TCE degradation rates for
nonmethanotrophs. This species of
methanotrophic bacteria reportedly removes
various chlorinated aliphatic compounds by more
than 99.9 percent.
BioTrol has also developed a colorimetric assay
that verifies the presence of MMO hi the
bioreactor culture.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The bioreactor system can treat water
contaminated with halogenated aliphatic
hydrocarbons, including TCE, dichloroethene
isomers, vinyl chloride, dichloroethane isomers,
chloroform, dichloromethane (methylene
chloride), and others. In the case of groundwater
Carton Dioxide carton Dioxide, Chloride
Water
V
Methane
Trichlorcetee
Cometabolism of TCE
Page 258
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
D&cember 1996
Completed Project
treatment, bioreactor effluent can either be
reinjected or discharged to a sanitary sewer or a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1990.
Both bench- and pilot-scale tests were conducted
using a continuous-flow, dispersed-growth
system. As shown in the figure below, the pilot-
scale reactor displayed first-order TCE
degradation kinetics. The final report on the
demonstration appears in the Journal of the Air
and Waste Management Association, Volume 45,
No. 1, January 1995. The Emerging Technology
Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/506) and the Emerging
Technology Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/505) are
available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
David Smith
U.S. EPA
Region 8
999 18th Street
Denver, CO 80202
303-293-1475
Fax: 303-294-1198
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Durell Dobbins
BioTrol®
10300 Valley View Road, Suite 107
Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3546
612-942-8032
Fax: 612-942-8526
2,000
1,500 _
& 1,000 —
O
UJ
O
500 —
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
HRT (min)
Results for Pilot-Scale, Continuous-Flow Reactor
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 259
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
CENTER FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESEARCH
(Acid Extraction Treatment System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The acid extraction treatment system (AETS)
uses hydrochloric acid to extract heavy metal
contaminants from soils. Following treatment,
the clean soil may be returned to the site or used
as fill.
A simplified block flow diagram of the AETS is
shown below. First, soils are screened to remove
coarse solids. These solids, typically greater
than 4 millimeters in size, are relatively clean
and require at most a simple rinse with water or
detergent to remove smaller attached particles.
After coarse particle removal, the remaining soil
is scrubbed in an attrition scrubber to break up
agglomerates and cleanse surfaces. Hydrochloric
acid is then introduced into the soil in the
extraction unit. The residence time in the unit
varies depending on the soil type, contaminants,
and contaminant concentrations, but generally
ranges between 10 and 40 minutes. The soil-
extractant mixture is continuously pumped out of
the mixing tank, and the soil and extractant are
separated using hydrocyclones.
When extraction is complete, the solids are
transferred to the rinse system. The soils are
rinsed with water to remove entrained acid and
metals. The extraction solution and rinse waters
are regenerated using a proprietary technology
that removes the metals and reforms the acid.
The heavy metals are concentrated in a form
potentially suitable for recovery. During the
final step, the soils are mixed with lime and
fertilizer to neutralize any residual acid. No
wastewater streams are generated by the process.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The mam application of AETS is extraction of
heavy metals from soils. The system has been
tested using a variety of soils containing one or
more of the following: arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. The
treatment capacity is expected to range up to 30
tons per hour. AETS can treat all soil fractions,
including fines.
The major residuals from AETS treatment
include the cleaned soil; which is suitable for fill
or for return to the site, and the heavy metal
concentrate. Depending on the concentration of
heavy metals, the mixtures of heavy metals found
at the site, and the presence of other compounds
(calcium, sodium) with the metals, heavy metals
may be reclaimed from the concentrate.
STATUS:
Under the Emerging Technology Program,
laboratory-scale and bench-scale tests were
conducted to develop the AETS technology. The
bench-scale. pilot system was constructed to
process between 20 and 100 kilograms of soil per
hour. Five soils were tested, including an EPA
synthetic soil matrix (SSM) and soils from four
Superfund sites, including NL Industries hi
Pedricktown, New Jersey; King of Prussia site hi
Winslow Township, New Jersey; a smelter site hi
Butte, Montana; and Palmerton Zinc site hi
CONTAMINATED
3011.
MAKE-UP
AGIO
COARSE SOIL
PARTICLES
HEAVY
.TREATED »<™-S
SOIL
Acid Extraction Treatment System (AETS) Process
Page 260
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Palmerton, Pennsylvania. These soils contained
elevated concentrations of some or all of the
following: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper,
lead, nickel, and zinc. The table below summarizes
soil treatability results based on the EPA Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
hazardous waste requirements for toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) and the
California standards for total metal
concentrations. The Emerging Technology
Report (EPA/540/R-94/513) and Emerging
Technology Summary (EPA/540/SR-94/513) are
available from EPA.
The results of the study are summarized below:
• AETS can treat a wide range of soils
containing a wide range of heavy metals
to reduce the TCLP below the RCRA
limit. AETS can also reduce the total
metals concentrations below the
California-mandated total metals
limitations.
• In most cases, AETS can treat the entire
soil, without separate stabilization and
disposal for fines or clay particles, to the
required TCLP and total metal limits.
The only exception was the SSM, which
may require separate stabilization and
disposal of 20 percent of the soil to
reduce the total TCLP lead concentrations
appropriately. However, AETS
successfully treated arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, copper, nickel, and zinc hi
the soil.
• Treatment costs under expected process
conditions range from $100 to $180 per
cubic yard of soil, depending on the site
size, soil types, and contaminant
concentrations. Operating costs ranged
from $50 to $80 per cubic yard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
George Moore
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7991
Fax: 513-569-7276
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stephen Paff
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
412-826-5321, ext. 233
Fax: 412-826-5552
Metal
As
Cd
Cr
Cu
Nl
Pb
Zn
Soil
SSM
*,T,L
*,T
*,T,L
* T T
,1,1-1
* T T
,1,1-1
*
*.T.L
Buite
*,T,L
*,T,L
*,T,L
*,T,L
King of Prussia
*,T,L
*,T,L
*,T,L
Pedticktown
*,T,L
* T T
, i. jj-i
*,T,L
Palmerton
*,T,L
*,T,L
*,T,L
*.T,L
Key: * — Metal is present in that soil Boldface and larger font indicates high initial metals
T — Successful treatment for total metals concentration (at least double the regulatory standards)
L — Reduction in leachabiliry to below standards
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 261
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
CENTER FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESEARCH
(Organics Destruction and Metals Stabilization)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology is designed to destroy hazardous
organics in soils while simultaneously stabilizing
metals and metal ions (see figure below). The
technology causes contaminated liquids, soils,
and sludges to react with elemental sulfur at
elevated temperatures. All organic compounds
react with sulfur. Hydrocarbons are converted to
an inert carbon-sulfur powdered residue and
hydrogen sulfide gas; treated chlorinated
hydrocarbons also produce hydrochloric acid gas.
These acid gases are recovered from the off-
gases. The hydrogen sulfide is oxidized in a
conventional acid gas treating unit (such as ARI
Technologies LO-CAT™), recovering the sulfur
for reuse.
In addition to destroying organic compounds, the
technology converts heavy metals to sulfides,
which are rendered less leachable. If required,
the sulfides can be further stabilized before
Treated
Gas
Makeup
Sulfur
LO-CAT-I
Recovered Sulfur
Sulfur
Vapor
Section
Reactor
Preheater
Section
Salts Water
Treated
Soil
Organics Destruction and Metals Stabilization
Page 262
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
disposal. Thus, heavy metals can be stabilized in
the same process step as the organics destruction.
The technology's main process components
consist of the following:
• A prereaction mixer where the solid and
reagent are mixed
• An indirectly heated, enclosed reactor
that includes a preheater section to drive
off water, and two integrated reactor
sections to react liquid sulfur with the
solids and further react desorbed organic
compounds with vapor-phase sulfur
• An acid gas treatment system that
removes the acid gases and recovers
sulfur by oxidizing the hydrogen sulfide
• A treated solids processing unit that
recovers excess reagent and prepares the
treated product to comply with on-site
disposal requirements
Initial pilot-scale testing of the technology has
demonstrated that organic contaminants can be
destroyed in the vapor phase with elemental
sulfur. Tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene, and
polychlorinated biphenyls were among the
organic compounds destroyed.
Batch treatability tests of contaminated soil
mixtures have demonstrated organics destruction
and immobilization of various heavy metals.
Immobilization of heavy metals is determined by
the concentration of the metals in leachate
compared to EPA toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP) regulatory limits. Following
treatment, cadmium, copper, lead, nickel, and
zinc were significantly reduced compared to
TCLP values. In treatability tests with
approximately 700 parts per million of Aroclor
1260, destruction levels of 99.0 to 99.95 percent
were achieved. Destruction of a pesticide,
malathion, was also demonstrated. The process
was also demonstrated to be effective on soil
from manufactured gas plants, containing a wide
range of polynuclear aromatics
The current tests are providing a more detailed
definition of the process limits, metal
concentrations, and soil types required for
stabilization of various heavy metals to meet the
limits specified by TCLP. In addition, several
process enhancements are being evaluated to
expand the range of applicability.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology is applicable to soils and
sediments contaminated with both organics and
heavy metals.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in January 1993.
Bench-scale testing hi batch reactors was
completed in 1993. The pilot-scale program was
directed at integrating the process concepts and
obtaining process data in a continuous unit. The
program was completed in 1995 and the
Emerging Technology Report will be available in
1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stephen Paff
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
412-826-5321, ext. 233
Fax: 412-826-5552
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 263
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
CENTER FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESE1ARCH
(Smelting Lead-Containing Waste)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Secondary lead smelting is a proven technology
that reclaims lead from lead-acid battery waste
sites. The Center for Hazardous Materials
Research (CHMR) and Exide Corporation
(Exide) have demonstrated the use of secondary
lead smelting to reclaim usable lead from various
types of waste materials from Superfund and
other lead-containing sites. Reclamation of lead
is based on existing lead smelting procedures and
basic pyrometallurgy.
The figure below is a generalized process flow
diagram. Waste material is first excavated from
Superfund sites or collected from other sources.
The waste is then preprocessed to reduce particle
size and to remove rocks, soil, and other debris.
Next, the waste is transported to the smelter.
At the smelter, waste is fed to reverberatory or
blast furnaces, depending on particle size or lead
content. The two reverberatory furnaces
normally treat lead from waste lead-acid
batteries, as well as other lead-containing
material. The furnaces are periodically tapped to
remove slag, which contains 60 to 70 percent
lead, and a soft pure lead product.
The two blast furnaces treat slag generated from
the reverberatory furnaces, as well as larger-
sized lead-containing waste. These furnaces are
tapped continuously for lead and tapped
intermittently to remove slag, which is
transported offsite for disposal. The
reverberatory and blast furnace combination at
Exide can reclaim lead from batteries and waste
with greater than 99 percent efficiency.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process has been demonstrated to reclaim
lead from a variety of solid materials, including ,
rubber battery case material, lead dross, iron shot
abrasive blasting material, and wood from
demolition of houses coated with lead paint. The
technology is applicable to solid wastes
containing more than 2 percent lead, provided
that they do not contain excessive amounts of
calcium, silica, aluminum, or other similar
constituents. Explosive and flammable liquids
cannot be processed in the furnace. As tested,
this technology is not applicable to soil
remediation.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1991.
Field work for the project was completed in
February 1993.
The process was tested at three Superfund sites.
Materials obtained from two additional sites were
PREPROCESSING
TRANSPORT OF MATERIAL
ROCKS, SOILS, DEBRIS
SB'
SLAGT
' SMELTER
LEAD TO
PLANT X.
N^ S
REVERB
FURNACE
LAGl
BLAST
FURNACE
r>R !
J I
Smelting Lead-Containing Waste Process
Page 264
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
also used for these tests. Results from the
Emerging Technology Program, presented in the
table below, show that the process is applicable
to waste materials at each site and economically
feasible for all but demolition material. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-94/510), the Emerging
Technology Summary (EPA/540/SR-95/504),
and the Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/R-95/504) are available from EPA.
An article about the technology was also
published by the Journal of Hazardous Materials
in February 1995.
Specific technical problems encountered included
(1) loss of furnace production due to material
buildup within the furnaces, (2) breakdowns in
the feed system due to mechanical overloads, and
(3) increased oxygen demands inside the
furnaces. All of these problems were solved by
adjusting material feed rates or furnace
parameters. Based on these tests, CHMR has
concluded that secondary lead smelting is an
economical method of reclaiming lead from lead-
containing waste material collected at Superfund
sites and other sources.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7863
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stephen Paff
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
412-826-5321, ext. 233
Fax: 412-826-5552
Source of Material/
Type of Material Tested
Tonolli Superfund site (PA)/
Battery cases
Hebalka Superfund site (PA)/
Battery cases
Pedricktown Superfund site (NJ)/
Battery cases; lead dross, residue, and
debris
Laurel House Women's Shelter (PA)/
Demolition material contaminated
with lead-based paint.
PennDOT/
Abrasive bridge blasting material
%Lead
3 to 7
10
45
1
3 to 5
Economical*
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Test Results
Lead can be reclaimed in secondary lead smelter;
incorporated into regular blast furnace feed stock.
Lead can be reclaimed in secondary lead smelter;
reduced in size and incorporated into regular
reverberatory furnace feed stock.
Lead can be reclaimed in secondary lead smelter;
screened and incorporated into regular
reverberatory and blast furnace feed stocks.
Lead can be reclaimed in secondary lead smelter;
however, the cost of processing the material was
estimated to be very high.
Lead can be reclaimed in secondary lead smelter;
incorporated into regular blast furnace feed stock.
* Compared to stabilization or landfilling
Results from Field Tests of the Smelting Lead-Containing Waste Technology
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 265
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
COGNIS, INC.
(Biological/Chemical Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
COGNIS, Inc.'s, biological/chemical treatment is
a two-stage process that treats soils, sediments,
and other media contaminated with both metals
and organics. Metals are first removed from the
contaminated matrix by a chemical leaching
process. The organics are then removed by
bioremediation.
Although metals removal usually occurs in the
first stage, bioremediation may be performed first
if organic contamination levels are found to
inhibit the metals extraction process.
Bioremediation is more effective if the metal
concentrations in the soil are sufficiently low so
as not to inhibit the microbial population.
However, even hi the presence of inhibitory
metal concentrations, a microbe population may
be enriched to perform the necessary
bioremediation.
The soil handling requirements for both stages
are similar, so the unit operations are fully
Laachant
Contaminated
Soil
I
Wet
Classification
with
Laachant
Clay/Humus
reversible. The final treatment products are a
recovered metal or metal salt, biodegraded
organic compounds, and clean soil.
The contaminated soil is first exposed to a
leachant solution and classified by particle size
(see figure below). Size classification allows
oversized rock, gravel, and sand to be quickly
cleaned and separated from the sediment fines
(silt, clay, and humus), which require longer
leaching times. Typically, organic pollutants are
also attached to the fines.
After dissolution of the metal compounds, metal
ions such as zinc, lead, and cadmium are
removed from the aqueous leachate by liquid ion
exchange, resin ion exchange, or reduction. At
this point, the aqueous leaching solution is freed
of metals and can be reused to leach additional
metal from the contaminated soil. If an
extraction agent is used, it is later stripped of the
bound metal under conditions in which the agent
is fully regenerated and recycled. The heavy
metals are recovered in a saleable, concentrated
Leachant Recycle
> Metal
Leachant Slurry
*
Lei
r
ich
Leachata k
1
Metal
Recovery
Bloaugment
Fertilizer
pH Adjust
Bloromodlat'on
Water
Carbon Dioxide
Metal Leaching and Bioremediation Process
Page 266
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
form as solid metal or a metal salt. The method
of metals recovery depends on the metals present
and their concentrations.
After metals extraction is complete, the "mud"
slurry settles and is neutralized. Liquids are
returned to the classifier, and the partially treated
soil is transferred to a slurry bioreactor, a
slurry-phase treatment lagoon, or a closed land
treatment cell for bioremediation. This soil and
the residual leachate solution are treated to
maximize contaminant biodegradation.
Micronutrients are added to support microbial
growth, and the most readily biodegradable
organic compounds are aerobically degraded.
Bench-scale tests indicate that this process can
remediate a variety of heavy metals and organic
pollutants. The combined process is less
expensive than separate metal removal and
organic remediation.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This remediation process is intended to treat
combined-waste soils contaminated by heavy
metals and organic pollutants. The process can
treat contaminants including lead, cadmium,
zinc, and copper, as well as petroleum
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons that are subject to aerobic micro-
bial degradation. The combined process can also
be modified to extract mercury and other metals,
and to degrade more recalcitrant halogenated
hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
This remediation process was accepted into the
SITE Emerging Technology Program in August
1992. Bench- and pilot-scale testing of the
bioremediation process is complete. A full-scale
field test of the metals extraction process was
completed under the Demonstration Program.
For further information on the full-scale process,
refer to the profile in the Demonstration Program
section (completed projects).
This remediation process is no longer available
through CONGIS, Inc. For further information
about the process, contact the EPA Project
Manager.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45208
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 267
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
M.L. ENERGIA, INC.
(Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Reductive Photo-Dechlorination (RPD)
treatment uses ultraviolet (UV) light in a reducing
atmosphere and at moderate temperatures to treat
waste streams containing chlorinated hydrocarbons
(CIHC). Because CIHCs are destroyed in a
reducing environment, the only products are
hydrocarbons and hydrogen chloride (HC1).
The RPD process is schematically depicted in the
figure below. The RPD process consists of five
main units: (1) input/mixer; (2) photo-thermal
chamber; (3) HC1 scrubber; (4) separator; and (5)
products storage and recycling. Chlorinated
wastes may be introduced into the process in one
of three ways: as vapor, liquid, or bound to an
adsorbent, such as activated carbon. Air laden
with chlorocarbon vapors is first passed through a
condenser, which removes chlorinated materials as
liquids. Chlorocarbon liquids are fed into a
vaporizer, mixed with a reducing gas, and passed
into the photo-thermal chamber. Chlorinated
contaminants adsorbed onto activated carbon are
purged with reducing gas and mildly heated to
induce vaporization. The ensuing vapors are then
fed into the photo-thermal chamber.
The photo-thermal chamber is the heart of the
RPD process because all reactions central to the
process occur in this chamber. Saturated, olefinic,
or aromatic chlorocarbons with one or more
carbon-chlorine bonds are exposed to UV light,
heat, and a reducing atmosphere, such as hydrogen
gas or methane (natural gas). According to M.L.
ENERGIA, Inc., carbon-chlorine bonds are
broken, resulting in chain-propagating hydrocarbon
reactions. Chlorine atoms are eventually stabilized
as HCL, which is easily scrubbed. Hydrocarbons
may hold their original structures, rearrange,
cleave, couple, or go through additional
hydrogenation. Hydrocarbons produced from the
Reducing Gas
Recycle
UV
Light
Chlorocarbons
Waste Stream
Photo-thermal
Chamber
Separator
Reducing Gas
Make-up
Hydrocarbons
Products
Storage and
Recycling
Reductive Photo-Dechlorination (RPD) Treatment
Page 268
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
dechlorination of wastes include ethane, acetylene,
ethylene, and methane. Valuable hydrocarbon
products can be stored, sold, or recycled as
auxiliary fuel to heat the photo-thermal chamber.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The RPD process is designed specifically to treat
volatile chlorinated wastes in the liquid, gaseous,
or adsorbed state. The RPD process was tested for
methylchloride, dichloromethane, chloroform,
carbon tetrachloride, trichloroethane (TCA),
dichloroethylene, and trichloroethene.
Field applications include treatment of organic
wastes discharged from soil venting extraction
operations, vented from industrial hoods and
stacks, and adsorbed on activated carbon. The
process can be used to (1) treat gas streams
containing chlorinated hydrocarbons, and (2)
pretreat gas streams entering catalytic oxidation
systems by reducing chlorine content and
protecting the catalyst against poisoning.
STATUS:
The RPD technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in summer 1992.
Since then, the RPD technology has successfully
completed the bench-scale developmental stage,
from which a pilot-scale prototype unit has been
construction. The Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-94/508) is available from EPA.
Experimental results on a representative
chlorocarbon contaminant (TCA) have
demonstrated greater than 99 percent conversion
and dechlorination, with high selectivity towards
two saleable hydrocarbon products, ethane and
methane. Similar favorable results have been
obtained for other saturated and unsaturated
chlorocarbons treated by the RPD process.
Preliminary cost analysis shows that the process is
extremely cost-competitive with other remedial
processes; the estimated cost is less than $1 per
pound of treated chlorocarbon. The RPD
technology is available for commercialization.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Moshe Lavid
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc.
P.O. Box 470
Princeton, NJ 08542-470
609-799-7970
Fax: 609-799-0312
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 269
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH CORPORATION
(Hybrid Fhiidized Bed System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Hybrid Fluidized Bed (HFB) system treats
contaminated solids and sludges by incinerating
organic compounds and extracting and
detoxifying volatile metals. The system consists
of three stages: a spouted bed, a fluidized
afterburner, and a high-temperature particulate
soil extraction system.
First, the spouted bed rapidly heats solids and
sludges to allow extraction of volatile organic and
inorganic compounds. The spouted bed retains
larger soil clumps until they are reduced in size
but allows fine material to quickly pass through.
This segregation process is beneficial because
organic contaminants hi fine particles vaporize
rapidly. The decontamination time for large
particles is longer due to heat and mass transfer
limitations.
The central spouting region is operated with an
inlet gas velocity of greater than 150 feet per
second. This velocity creates an abrasion and
grinding action, rapidly reducing the size of the
feed materials through attrition. The spouted bed
operates between 1,500 and 1,700 °F under
oxidizing conditions.
Organic vapors, volatile metals, and fine soil
particles are carried from the spouted bed
through an open-hole type distributor, which
forms the bottom of the second stage, the
fluidized bed afterburner. The afterburner
provides sufficient retention time and mixing to
incinerate the organic compounds that escape the
spouted bed, resulting hi a destruction and
removal efficiency of greater than 99.99 percent.
In addition, the afterburner contains bed
materials that absorb metal vapors, capture fine
particles, and promote formation of insoluble
metal silicates. The bed materials are typically
made of silica-supported bauxite, kaolinite, or
lime.
In the third stage, the high-temperature
particulate soil extraction system removes clean
processed soil from the effluent gas stream with
one or two hot cyclones. The clean soil is
extracted hot to prevent unreacted volatile metal
species from condensing in the soil. Off-gases
are then quenched and passed through a
conventional baghouse to capture the condensed
metal vapors.
Generally, material handling problems create
major operational difficulties for soil cleanup
devices. The HFB system uses a specially
designed auger feed system. Solids and sludges
are dropped through a lock hopper system into an
auger shredder, which is a rugged, low-
revolutions-per-minute, feeding-grinding device.
Standard augers are simple and reliable, but are
susceptible to clogging from feed compression in
the auger. In the HFB system, the auger
shredder is closecoupled to the spouted bed to
Page 27O
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
reduce compression and clump formation during
feeding. The close-couple arrangement locates
the tip of the auger screw several inches from the
internal surface of the spouted bed, preventing
soil plug formation.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is applicable to soils and sludges
contaminated with organic and volatile inorganic
contaminants. Nonvolatile inorganics are not
affected.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in January 1990.
Design and construction of the commercial
prototype HFB system and a limited shakedown
are complete. The Emerging Technology
Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/508) is available from
EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Richard Koppang
Energy and Environmental Research
Corporation
18 Mason Street
Irvine, CA 92718
714-859-8851
Fax: 714-859-3194
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 271
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH CORPORATION
(Reactor Filter System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Energy and Environmental Research
Corporation (EER) Reactor Filter System (RFS)
technology is designed to control gaseous and
entrained particulate matter emissions from the
primary thermal treatment of sludges, soils, and
sediments. Most Superfund sites are
contaminated with toxic organic chemicals and
metals. Currently available thermal treatment
systems for detoxifying these materials release
products of incomplete combustion (PIC) and
volatile toxic metals. Also, the large air
pollution control devices (APCD) often required
to control PICs and metals are generally not
suitable for transport to remote Superfund sites.
EER designed the RFS to avoid some of these
logistical problems. The RFS uses a fabric filter
installed immediately downstream of the thermal
treatment process to control toxic metals,
particulates, and uriburned organic species. The
I Sorbent
1 I—Injection
1 naoo'
RFS involves the following three steps:
• First, solids are thermally treated with a
primary thermal process, such as a
rotary kiln, fluidized bed, or other
system designed for thermal treatment.
• Next, a low-cost, aluminosilicate
sorbent, such as kaolinite, is injected into
the flue gases at temperatures near
1,300 °C (2,370 °F). The sorbent reacts
with volatile metal species such as lead,
cadmium, and arsenic in the gas stream
and chemically adsorbs onto the surfaces
of the sorbent particles. This adsorbtion
forms insoluble, nonleachable alumino-
silicate complexes similar to cementitious
species.
• Finally, high-temperature fabric
filtration, operating at temperatures up to
1,000 °C (1,830 °F), provides additional
residence time for the sorbent/
Reactor Filter System
Exhaust
ID Fans
Example Application of RFS Equipment
Page 272
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 799G
Completed Project
metal reaction to produce nonleachable by-
products. This step also provides additional
time for destruction of organic compounds
associated with particulate matter, reducing
ash toxicity. Because of the established link
between PIC formation and gas-particle
chemistry, this process can virtually
eliminate potential polychlorinated dioxin
formation.
The RFS may improve the performance of
existing thermal treatment systems for Superfund
wastes containing metals and organics. During
incineration, hazardous organics are often
attached to the particulate matter that escapes
burning in the primary zone. The RFS provides
sufficient residence time at sufficiently high
temperatures to destroy such organics. Also, by
increasing gas-solid contact parameters, the
system can decrease metal emissions by
preventing the release of metals as vapors or
retained on entrained particles.
The figure on the previous page shows the RFS
installed immediately downstream of the primary
thermal treatment zone at EER's Spouted Bed
Combustion Facility. Because the spouted bed
generates a highly particulate-laden gas stream,
a high-temperature cyclone is used to remove
coarse particulate matter upstream of the RFS.
Sorbent is injected into the flue gas upstream of
the high temperature fabric filter. A
conventional baghouse is available for
comparison with RFS performance during the
demonstration. However, the baghouse is not
needed in typical RFS applications since the high-
temperature filtration medium has shown similar
performance to conventional fabric filtration
media.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The RFS is designed to remove entrained
particulates, volatile toxic metals, and condensed-
phase organics present in high-temperature (800
to 1,000 °C) gas streams generated from the
thermal treatment of contaminated soils, sludges,
and sediments. Many conventional treatments
can be combined with the RFS technology.
Process residuals will consist of nonleachable
particulates that are essentially free of organic
compounds, thus reducing toxicity, handling
risks, and landfill disposal.
STATUS:
The RFS was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in 1993. EER developed
the pilot-scale process through a series of bench-
scale screening studies, which were completed in
September 1994. These screening studies guided
the sorbent selection and operating conditions for
the pilot-scale demonstration. The tests were
completed in 1996; the final report will be
available from the National Technical
Information Service.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Neil Widmer
Energy and Environmental
Research Corporation
18 Mason Street
Irvine, CA 92718
714-859-8851
Fax: 714-859-3194
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 273
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Fungal Degradation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are
widespread pollutants found at creosote wood
treatment sites and at manufacturing gas plants
(MGP). Environments contaminated with these
compounds are considered hazardous due to the
potential carcinogenic effects of specific PAHs.
Environmental BioTechnologies, Inc. (EBT),
investigated the bioremediation of contaminants
associated with former MGP sites in a program
cosponsored by the Electric Power Research
Institute and the EPA. Initially, EBT screened
over 500 fungal cultures (mostly brown and white
rot fungi) for their ability to degrade PAHs and
other organic pollutants. A group of 30 cultures
were more intensely examined and several cultures
were optimized for use in a soil composting
process.
EBT conducted bench-scale treatability studies to
assess the feasibility of PAH degradation in soil
using a fungal augmented system designed to
enhance the natural bioprocess. Results of one
study are shown in the figure below.
Concentrations of 10 PAHs were determined over
a 59-day treatment period.
Some states have a soil treatment standard of 100
parts per million for total PAHs. EBT's fungal
treatment process was able to reach this cleanup
standard within a 5- to 6-week treatment period for
one PAH-contaminated soil, as shown in the figure
on the next page.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
One intended environmental application for this
technology is the treatment of soil and sediment
contaminated with coal tar wastes from former
MGP sites. Soils at these sites are contaminated
with PAHs and are difficult to cost-effectively
remediate. EBT's fungal soil treatment process is
projected to cost $66 to $80 per ton, which is more
cost-effective than other technical approaches such
as coburning in utility burners, thermal desorption,
and incineration that are being considered by utility
companies.
STATUS:
EBT was accepted into the SITE Emerging
Technology Program in 1993 and began laboratory
studies hi 1994. The project was completed in
1996. The overall project objectives were to (1)
identify fungal and bacterial cultures that efficiently
Naprcnatae
Fluoranthene
Tlm» (Days)
Pyrene
Chiysene
Fungal Degradation of Five PAHs in Soil Over A 59-Day Period
Page 274
The SITE Program assesses but does not
, approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
degrade coal tar wastes, and (2) develop and
demonstrate a pilot-scale process that can be
commercialized for utility industry applications.
EBT initially worked with PAH-spiked water and
soils. EBT then tested, under optimized
conditions, selected soil cultures from several
MGP sites identified by New England Electric
Services, a utility company sponsor. Testing
identified several possibly superior fungal cultures
to degrade PAHs. These cultures exhibited
degradative preferences for either lower molecular
weight or higher molecular weight PAHs,
suggesting a consortia as a possible best approach.
These cultures were then examined in nutrient-
supplemented systems to determine optimal PAH
degradation rates.
A bench-scale composter system was used to
determine optimal moisture content, soil
amendment requirements, and inoculation
procedures for accelerating degradation of PAHs.
During the second year, small (less than 1 cubic
yard) plots of MGP-site soil were used to test the
optimized process in laboratory studies before a
field demonstration is conducted. Results from the
evaluation will be published by EPA in 1997.
Based on its performance during the Emerging
Technology Program evaluation, the microbial
composting process has been invited to participate
in the SITE Demonstration Program.
EBT has also conducted a bench-scale treatability
study for a company in France to determine the
feasibility of fungal PAH degradation in MGP soil.
Results demonstrated an increased rate of
biodegradation in the fungal-augmented system for
all of the measured individual PAH compounds in
the 80-day treatment period, compared with the
natural, unamended system.
EBT is also currently conducting a 10-ton soil
PAH field project to demonstrate that the fungal
degradation process can be scaled up and used in
commercial applications.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Douglas Munnecke
Environmental BioTechnologies, Inc.
969C Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
415-596-1020
Fax: 415-596-1016
E-mail: ebt@ix.netcom.com
600
300
200
100
-Fungal System —Q— Control —,
0 10 20 ,_ ,30 40 50
Time (days)
Degradation of Total PAHs In Soil
60
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 275
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
FERRO CORPORATION
(Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Vitrification technology converts contaminated
soils, sediments, and sludges into oxide glasses,
chemically rendering them nontoxic and suitable
for landfilling as nonhazardous materials.
Successful vitrification of soils, sediments, and
sludges requires (1) development of glass
compositions tailored to a specific waste, and
(2) glass melting technology that can convert the
waste and additives into a stable glass without
producing toxic emissions.
In an electric melter, glass — an ionic conductor
of relatively high electrical resistivity — stays
molten with joule heating. Such melters process
waste under a relatively thick blanket of feed
material, which forms a counterflow scrubber
that limits volatile emissions (see figure below).
GLASS-MAKING
MATERIALS
Commercial electric melters have significantly
reduced the loss of inorganic volatile constituents
such as boric anhydride (B2O3) or lead oxide
(PbO). Because of its low emission rate and
small volume of exhaust gases, electric melting is
a promising technology for incorporating waste
into a stable glass matrix.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Vitrification stabilizes inorganic components
found in hazardous waste. In addition, the high
temperature involved in glass production (about
1,500 °C) decomposes organics such as
anthracene, bis(2-ethylhexyl phthalate), and
pentachlorophenol in the waste. The
decomposition products can easily be .removed
from the low volume of melter off-gas.
Electrode
MOLTEN GLASS
>1500°C)
Y777777A
Steel
FRIT, MARBLES, etc.
STABLE
GLASS
IIBL>
DISPOSAL
Electric Furnace Vitrification
Page 276
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
Under the Emerging Technology Program,
synthetic soil matrix IV (SSM-IV) has been
developed and subjected to toxicity characteristic
leaching procedure (TCLP) testing.
Ten independent replicates of the preferred
composition produced the following results:
Metal
As
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Ni
Zn
TCLP analyte concentration,
parts per million
Remediation
Limit
5
1
5
5
5
5
5
Mean of Glass
Replicates
<0.100
<0.010
0.019
0.355
0.130
<0.010
0.293
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
S.K. Muralidhar
Ferro Corporation
Corporate Research
7500 East Pleasant Valley Road
Independence, OH 44131
216-641-8580
Fax: 216-524-0518
SSM-IV and additives (sand, soda ash, and other
minerals) required to convert SSM-IV to the
preferred glass composition have been processed
hi a laboratory-scale electric melter. Three
separate campaigns have produced glass at
17 pounds per hour at a fill of 67 percent
SSM-IV and 33 percent glass-making additives.
The TCLP mean analyte concentrations were less
than 10 percent of the remediation limit at a
statistical confidence of 95 percent. Ferro
Corporation's experience indicates that this
melting rate would produce an equivalent rate of
1 ton per hour hi an electric melter used to treat
wastes at a Superfund site. The Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/503) is
available from EPA.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 277
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH CENTER AT NEW JERSEY
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY and
RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY
(Pneumatic Fracturing and Bioremediation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Hazardous Substance Management Research
Center (HSMRC) has developed a technology for
the in situ remediation of organic contaminants.
The process enhances in situ bioremediation
through pneumatic fracturing to establish an
extended biodegradation zone supporting aerobic,
denitrifying, and methanogenic populations. The
technique is designed to provide faster transport
of nutrients and electron acceptors (for example,
oxygen and nitrate) to the microorganisms,
particularly in geologic formations with moderate
to low permeability.
An overview of the process is shown in the figure
below. First, the formation is pneumatically
fractured by applying high pressure air in 2-foot-
long, discrete intervals through a proprietary
device known as an HQ Injector. After the
formation has been fractured with air, nutrients
or other chemicals are introduced into the
fracture network to stimulate biological activity.
The carrier gas and the particular amendments
(atomized liquid or dry media) injected into the
formation can be adjusted according to the target
contaminant and the desired degradation
environment (aerobic, denitrifying, and
anaerobic). The high air-to-liquid ratio atomizes
the liquid supplements during injection,
increasing their ability to penetrate the fractured
formation. In the final step of the process, the
site is operated as an in situ bioremediation cell
to degrade the contaminants. A continuous, low-
level air flow is maintained through the fracture
network by a vacuum pump to provide oxygen to
the microbial populations. Periodically,
additional injections are made to replenish
nutrients and electron acceptors.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The integrated process can be applied to a wide
variety of geologic formations. In geologic
formations with low to moderate permeabilities,
such as those containing clay, silt, or tight
bedrock, the process creates artificial fractures
which increase formation permeability. In
Overview of the Integrated Pneumatic Fracturing and Bioremediation Process
Page 278
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
formations with higher permeabilities, the
process is still useful for rapid aeration and
delivery of amendments to the microorganisms.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1991 and
was evaluated at a gasoline refinery located in the
Delaware Valley. The soil at the site was
contaminated with benzene, toluene, and xylene
(BTX) at concentrations up to 1,500 milligrams
per kilogram, along with other hydrocarbons.
The evaluation was completed in May 1994.
Contact the EPA Project Manager for a copy of the
results from the evaluation. A journal article has
been submitted to the Journal of Air and Waste
Management.
Throughout the 50-week pilot-scale evaluation,
off-gases were monitored for BTX, carbon
dioxide, and methane, which served as indicators
of biological activity. Process effectiveness was
evaluated through comparative analysis of soil
samples collected at the beginning and the end of
the evaluation.
Vapor extraction tests revealed postfracture air
flows to be 24 to 105 times higher than
prefracture air flows. Measurements of ground
surface heave and observations of fractures
venting to the ground surface indicated that the
fractures had effective radii of up to 20 feet from
the injection point.
Soil gas data collected at the monitoring wells
show that the indigenous microbial populations
responded favorably to the injection of the soil
amendments. Soil gas data consistently showed
elevated levels of carbon dioxide immediately
following each injection, indicating increased
rates of BTX mineralization. Correspondingly,
BTX concentration levels in the wells gradually
declined over time after depletion of oxygen and
nitrate, at which time methanogenic processes
began to dominate until the next subsurface
amendment injection.
Comparative analysis of soil samples extracted
from the site before and after the evaluation
period showed that a substantial amount of BTX
was degraded as a result of the integrated
process. Total soil-phase BTX was reduced from
28 kilograms to 6 kilograms over the 50-week
pilot test, corresponding to a 79 percent
reduction in total BTX mass. An assessment of
pathways of BTX loss from the formation showed
a large proportion of the mass reduction (85
percent) was attributable to bioremediation.
Process development for this evaluation was
supported in part by the U.S. Department of
Defense, Advanced Research Projects Agency,
and the Office of Naval Research.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
John Schuring
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering
New Jersey Institute of Technology
University Heights
Newark, NJ 07102
201-596-5849
Fax: 201-802-1946
David Kosson
Department of Chemical and Biochemical
Engineering
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey •
P.O. Box 909
Piscataway, NJ 08855
908-445-4346
Fax: 908-445-2637
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 279
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
INSTITUTE OF GAS TECHNOLOGY
(Chemical and Biological Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Institute of Gas Technology (IGT) chemical
and biological treatment (CBT) process
remediates sludges, soils, groundwater, and
surface water contaminated with organic
pollutants, such as polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH) and polychlorinated
biphenyls (see photograph below). The treatment
system combines two remedial techniques:
(1) chemical oxidation as pretreatment, and
(2) biological treatment using aerobic and
anaerobic biosystems hi sequence or alone,
depending on the waste. The CBT process uses
mild chemical treatment to produce intermediates
that are biologically degraded, reducing the cost
and risk associated with a more severe treatment
process such as incineration.
During the pretreatment stage, the contaminated
material is treated with a chemical reagent that
degrades the organics to carbon dioxide, water,
and partially oxidized intermediates. In the
second stage of the CBT process, biological
systems degrade the hazardous residual materials
and the partially oxidized intermediates from the
first stage. Chemically treated wastes are
subjected to cycles of aerobic and anaerobic
degradation if aerobic or anaerobic treatment
alone is not sufficient. Several cycles of
chemical and biological treatment are also used
for extremely recalcitrant contaminants.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CBT process can be applied to soils,
sludges, groundwater, and surface water
containing (1) high waste concentrations that
would typically inhibit bioremediation, or (2) low
waste concentrations for which bioremediation
alone is too slow. The process is not adversely
affected by radionuclides or heavy metals.
Depending on the types of heavy metals present,
these metals will bioaccumulate in the biomass,
Chemical and Biological Treatment Process
Page 280
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
complex with organic or inorganic material in the
soil slurries, or solubilize in the recycled water.
The CBT process can be applied to a wide range
of organic pollutants, including alkenes,
chlorinated alkenes, aromatics, substituted
aromatics, and complex aromatics.
STATUS:
IGT evaluated the CBT process for 2 years under
the SITE Emerging Technology Program. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-94/540), which details results
from the evaluation, is available from EPA.
Based on results from the Emerging Technology
Program, this technology was invited to
participate hi the SITE Demonstration Program.
Under the SITE Demonstration Program, IGT
plans to conduct a full-scale demonstration of the
CBT process on sediments containing PAHs.
Different operating scenarios will be used to
demonstrate how effectively the CBT process
treats sediments in a bioslurry reactor. Several
sites are being considered for the demonstration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Robert Kelley
Institute of Gas Technology
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018-1804
847-768-0722
Fax: 847-768-0546
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 281
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
INSTITUTE OF GAS TECHNOLOGY
(Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The three-step fluid extraction-biological
degradation (FEBD) process removes organic
contaminants from soil (see figure below). The
process combines three distinct technologies:
(1) fluid extraction, which removes the organics
from contaminated solids; (2) separation, which
transfers the pollutants from the extract to a
biologically compatible solvent or activated
carbon carrier; and (3) biological degradation,
which destroys the pollutants and leaves
innocuous end-products.
In the fluid extraction step, excavated soils are
placed in a pressure vessel and extracted with a
recirculated stream of supercritical or near-
supercritical carbon dioxide. An extraction
cosolvent may be added to enhance the removal
of additional contaminants.
During separation, organic contaminants are
transferred to a biologically compatible
separation solvent such as water or a water-
contaminated
Soil
methanol mixture. The separation solvent is then
sent to the final stage of the process, where
bacteria degrade the waste to carbon dioxide and
water. Clean extraction solvent is then recycled
for use in the extraction stage.
Organic contaminants are biodegraded in
aboveground aerobic bioreactors, using mixtures
of bacterial cultures capable of degrading the
contaminants. Selection of cultures is based on
site contaminant characteristics. For example, if
a site is mainly contaminated with polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), cultures able to
metabolize or cometabolize these hydrocarbons
are used. The bioreactors can be configured to
enhance the rate and extent of biodegradation.
Research continues on using bound activated
carbon in a carrier system during the separation
step. Bound activated carbon should allow high-
pressure conditions to be maintained in the fluid
extraction step, enhancing extraction efficiency
and decreasing extraction time. Bound activated
carbon should also limit the loss of carbon
Extraction Solvent
with Contaminants
Stags 1
EXTRACTION
Decontaminated
Soil
1
Separation
Solvent
Stage 2
SEPARATION
Extraction
Solvent
Recycled
or Cleaned
Extraction
Solvent
Compressor
Separation Solvents
with Contaminants
Stage 3
BIOLOGICAL
DEGRADATION
Make-up
Extraction
Solvent
Water, Carbon
Dioxide, and
Biomass
Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process
Page 282
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
dioxide, thereby decreasing costs. The activated
carbon containing the bound EAHs could then be.
treated in the biodegradation step by converting
the carrier system to a biofilm reactor. These
activated carbon carrier systems could then be
recycled into the high-pressure system of the
extraction and separation steps.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes organic compounds
from contaminated solids. It is more effective on
some classes of organics, such as hydrocarbons
(for example, gasoline and fuel oils) than on
others, such as halogenated solvents and
polychlorinated biphenyls. The process has also
been effective in treating nonhalogenated
aliphatic hydrocarbons and PAHs.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in June 1990.
The Institute of Gas Technology has evaluated all
three stages of the technology with soils from a
Superfund site and from three town gas sites.
These soils exhibited a variety of physical and
chemical characteristics. Approximately 85 to 99
percent of detectable PAHs, including two- to
six-ring compounds, were removed from the
soils.
The measurable PAHs were biologically
converted in both batch-fed and continuously fed,
constantly stirred tank reactors. The conversion
rate and removal efficiency were high in all
systems. The PAHs were biologically removed
or transformed at short hydraulic retention times.
All PAHs, including four- to six-ring
compounds, were susceptible to biological
removal.
Results from this project were published hi the
Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-94/501), which is available from
EPA. An article was submitted to the Journal of
Air and Waste Management.
Potential users of this technology have expressed
interest in continuing research. This technology
has been invited to participate in the SITE
Demonstration Program. The technology would
be able to remediate town gas sites, wood
treatment sites, and other contaminated soils and
sediments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Annette Gatchett
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7697
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Robert Paterek
Institute of Gas Technology
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018-1804
847-768-0720
Fax: 847-768-0546
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 283
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
INSTITUTE OF GAS TECHNOLOGY
(Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Institute of Gas Technology (IGT) has
developed a two-stage, fluidized-bed/cyclonic
agglomerating combustor (AGGCOM) based on
a combination of IGT technologies. In the
combined system, solid, liquid, and gaseous
organic wastes can be efficiently destroyed.
Solid, nonvolatile, inorganic contaminants are
combined within a glassy matrix consisting of
discrete pebble-sized agglomerates that are suitable
for disposal in a landfill.
The first stage of the combustor is an
agglomerating fluidized-bed reactor, which can
operate under substoichiometric conditions or
with excess air. This system can operate from
low temperature (desorption) to high temperature
(agglomeration). This system can also gasify
materials with high calorific values (for example,
municipal solid wastes). With a unique fuel and
air distribution, most of the fluidized bed is
maintained at 1,500° to 2,000°F, while the
central hot zone temperature can be varied
between 2,000° and 3,000°F.
When contaminated soils and sludges are fed into
the fluidized bed, the combustible fraction of the
waste is rapidly gasified and combusted. The
solid fraction, containing inorganic and metallic
contaminants, undergoes a chemical
transformation in the hot zone and is
agglomerated into glassy pellets. These pellets
are essentially nonleachable under the conditions
AGGCOM Pilot Plant
Page 284
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
of the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP). The product gas from the fluidized bed
may contain unburned hydrocarbons, furans,
dioxins, and carbon monoxide, as well as carbon
dioxide and water, the products of complete
combustion.
The product gas from the fluidized bed is fed into
the second stage of the combustor, where it is
further combusted at a temperature of 1,800° to
2,400°F. The second stage is a high-intensity
cyclonic combustor and separator that provides
sufficient residence time (0.25 second) to oxidize
carbon monoxide and organic compounds to
carbon dioxide and water vapor. This stage has
a combined destruction and removal efficiency of
greater than 99.99 percent. Volatilized metals
are collected downstream in the flue gas scrubber
condensate.
The two-stage AGGCOM process is based on
IGT's experience with other fluidized-bed and
cyclonic combustion systems. The patented
sloping-grid design and ash discharge port in this
process were initially developed for IGT's
U-GAS coal gasification process. The cyclonic
combustor and separator is a modification of
IGT's low-emissions combustor.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The two-stage AGGCOM process can destroy
organic contaminants in gaseous, liquid, and
solid wastes, including soils and sludges.
Gaseous wastes can be fired directly into the
cyclonic combustor. Liquid, sludge, and solid
wastes can be co-fired directly into the fluidized
bed. Solid particles must be less than about 6
millimeters to support fluidized bed operation;
therefore, certain wastes may require grinding or
pulverization prior to remediation.
Because the solid components in the waste are
heated above fusion temperature during the
agglomeration process, metals and other
inorganic materials are encapsulated and
immobilized within the glassy matrix.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1990.
Tests conducted in the batch, 6-inch-diameter
fluidized bed have demonstrated that
agglomerates can be formed from the soil. The
agglomerates, produced at several different
operating conditions from soil spiked with lead
and chromium compounds, passed the TCLP test
for leachability.
A pilot-scale combustor with a capacity of 6 tons
per day has been constructed (see photograph on
previous page), and testing has produced samples
of agglomerated soil. Future testing will focus
on sustained and continuous operation of the
pilot-scale plant using different types of soil, as
well as other feedstocks. Tests with organic and
inorganic hazardous waste surrogates admixed
with the feed soil will also be conducted. A final
report on the project has been submitted to EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Teri Richardson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7949
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Amir Rehmat or Michael Mensinger
Institute of Gas Technology
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018-1804
847-768-0588 or 847-768-0602
Fax: 847-768-0516
E-mail: arehmat@igt.org or mensuig@igt.org
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 285
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
IT CORPORATION
(Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The batch steam distillation and metal extraction
treatment process is a two-stage system that treats
soils contaminated with organics and inorganics.
This system uses conventional, readily available
process equipment and does not produce
hazardous combustion products. Hazardous
materials are separated from soils as
concentrates, which can then be disposed of or
recycled. The treated soil can be returned to the
site.
During treatment, waste soil is slurried in water
and heated to 100° C. This heat vaporizes
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and produces
an amount of steam equal to 5 to 10 percent of
the slurry volume. Resulting vapors are
condensed and decanted to separate organic
contaminants from the aqueous phase.
Condensed water from this step can be recycled
through the system after soluble organics are
removed. The soil is then transferred as a slurry
to the metal extraction step.
In the metal extraction step, the soil slurry is
washed with hydrochloric acid. Subsequent
countercurrent batch washing with water removes
residual acid from the soil. The solids are then
separated from the final wash solution by
gravimetric sedimentation. Most heavy metals
are converted to chloride salts in this step. The
acid extract stream is then routed to a batch
steam distillation system, where excess
hydrochloric acid is recovered (see figure
below). Bottoms from the still, which contain
heavy metals, are precipitated as hydroxide salts
and drawn off as a sludge for off-site disposal or
recovery.
As a batch process, this treatment technology is
targeted at sites with less than 5,000 tons of soil
Racyclo water from
extraction step
Soil slurry to
metal extraction
or dewatering vessel
Batch distillation vessel
Batch Steam Distillation Step
Page 286
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7396
Completed Project
requiring treatment. Processing time depends on
equipment size and batch cycle times; about one
batch of soil can be treated every 4 hours.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process may be applied to soils and sludges
contaminated with organics, inorganics, and
heavy metals.
STATUS:
The batch steam distillation and metal extraction
process was accepted into the SITE Emerging
Technology Program in January 1988. The
evaluation was completed hi 1992. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-95/509), which details results from
the test, is available from EPA.
Under the program, three pilot-scale tests have
been completed on three soils, for a total of nine
tests. The removal rates for benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylene were greater than
99 percent. The removal rates for chlorinated
solvents ranged from 97 percent to 99 percent.
One acid extraction and two water washes
resulted in a 95 percent removal rate for heavy
metals. Toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure tests on the treated soils showed that
soils from eight of the nine tests met leachate
criteria. Data were also collected on the
recovery rate for excess acid and the removal
rate for precipitation of heavy metals into a
concentrate.
Estimated treatment costs per ton, including
capital recovery, for the two treatment steps are
as follows:
Batch Steam Distillation
500-ton site
2,500-ton site
$299-393/ton
$266-350/ton
Metals Extraction
(including acid recovery)
500-ton site
2,500-ton site
$447-619/ton
$396-545/ton
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martha Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stuart Shealy
IT Corporation
312 Directors Drive
Knoxville, TN 37923-4709
423-690-3211
Fax: 423-694-9573
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 287
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
IT CORPORATION
(Mixed Waste Treatment Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
IT Corporation's mixed waste treatment process
integrates thermal desorption, gravity separation,
water treatment, and chelant extraction
technologies to treat soils contaminated with
hazardous and radioactive constituents. The
process separates these contaminants into distinct
organic and inorganic phases that can then be
further minimized, recycled, or destroyed at
commercial disposal facilities. The
decontaminated soil can be returned to the site.
Each technology has been individually
demonstrated on selected contaminated materials.
The process flow diagram below shows how the
technologies have been integrated to treat mixed
waste streams.
During the initial treatment step, feed soil is
prepared using standard techniques, such as
screening, crushing, and grinding to remove
oversized material and provide a consistent feed
material.
Organic Phase
Thermal treatment removes volatile and semi-
volatile organics from the soil. Soil is indirectly
heated in a rotating chamber, volatilizing the
organic contaminants and any moisture in the
soil. The soil passes through the chamber and is
collected as a dry solid. The volatilized organics
and water are condensed into separate liquid
phases. The organic phase is decanted and
removed for disposal. The contaminated aqueous
phase is passed through activated carbon, which
removes soluble organics before combining with
the thermally treated soil.
Inorganic contaminants are removed by three
physical and chemical separation techniques:
(1) gravity separation of high density particles;
(2) chemical precipitation of soluble metals; and
(3) chelant extraction of chemically bound
metals.
Gravity separation is used to separate higher
density particles from common soil.
Radionuclide contaminants are typically found in
Water and
Conditioning
Agents
Heavy
Radionuclide
Particles
Radionuclldes
on Resin
Mixed Waste Treatment Process
Page 288
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
this fraction. The gravity separation device
(shaker table, jig, cone, or spiral) depends on
contaminant distribution and the physical
properties of the thermally treated soil.
"Many radionuclides and other heavy metals are
dissolved or suspended in the aqueous separation
media. These contaminants are separated from
the soils and are precipitated. A potassium
ferrate formulation precipitates radionuclides.
The resulting microcrystalline precipitant is
removed, allowing the aqueous stream to be
recycled.
Some insoluble radionuclides remain with the soil
following the gravity separation process. These
radionuclides are removed by chelant extraction.
The chelant solution then passes through an ion-
exchange resin to remove the radionuclides and
is recycled to the chelant extraction step.
The contaminants are collected as concentrates
from all waste process streams for recovery or
off-site disposal at commercial hazardous waste
or radiological waste facilities. The
decontaminated soil can be returned to the site as
clean fill.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process treats soils contaminated with
organic, inorganic, and radioactive material.
STATUS:
The mixed waste treatment process was selected
for the SITE Emerging Technology Program in
October 1991. Bench- and pilot-scale testing was
completed in late 1995; a report detailing
evaluation results will be available from EPA in
1997. Individual components of the treatment
process have been demonstrated on various
wastes from the U.S. Department of Energy,
(DOE), the U.S. Department of Defense, and
commercial sites. Thermal separation has
removed and recovered polychlorinated
biphenyls from soils contaminated with uranium
and technetium. These soils were obtained from
two separate DOE gaseous diffusion plants.
Gravity separation of radionuclides has been
demonstrated at pilot scale on Johnston Atoll in
the Pacific. Gravity separation successfully
removed plutonium from native coral soils.
Water treatment using the potassium ferrate
formulations has been demonstrated at several
DOE facilities in laboratory and full-scale tests.
This treatment approach reduced cadmium,
copper, lead, nickel, plutonium, silver, uranium,
and zinc to dischargeable levels.
Chelant extraction has successfully treated
surface contamination in the nuclear industry for
more than 20 years. Similar results are expected
for subsurface contamination.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Douglas Grosse
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7844
Fax: 513-569-7585
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ed Alperin
IT Corporation
312 Directors Drive
Knoxville, TN 37923-4709
423-690-3211
Fax: 423-694-9573
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 289
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
IT CORPORATION
(Photolytic and Biological Soil Detoxification)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology is a two-stage, in situ photolytic
and biological detoxification process for shallow
soil contamination. The first step in the process
degrades the organic contaminants with
ultraviolet (UV) radiation. The photolytic
degradation rate is several times faster with
artificial UV light than with natural sunlight.
The degradation process is enhanced by adding
detergent-like chemicals (surfactants) to mobilize
the contaminants. Photolysis of the contaminants
converts them to more easily degraded
compounds. Periodic sampling and analysis
determines when photolysis is complete.
Biodegradation, the second step, further destroys
organic contaminants and detoxifies the soil.
When sunlight is used to treat shallow soil
contamination, the soil is first tilled with a power
tiller and sprayed with surfactant. The soil is
tilled frequently to expose new surfaces and
sprayed often. Water may also be added to
maintain soil moisture.
When UV lights are used, parabolic reflectors
suspended over the soil increase the amount of
UV irradiation (see figure below). After
photolysis is complete, biodegradation is
enhanced by adding microorganisms and
nutrients and further tilling the soil.
When these techniques are applied to soils with
deep contamination, soil needs to be excavated
and treated hi a specially constructed shallow
treatment basin that meets Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act requirements. When soil
contamination is shallow, photolysis and housing
prevent contaminants from migrating to
groundwater.
The only treatment residuals are soil
contaminated with surfactants and the end
metabolites of the biodegradation processes. The
Photolytic Degradation Process Using UV Lights
Page 290
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
end metabolites depend on the original
contaminants. The surfactants are common
materials used in agricultural formulations.
Therefore, the soils can be left on site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This photolytic and biological soil detoxification
process destroys organics, particularly dioxins
such as tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), other
polychlorinated aromatics, and polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1989; the
evaluation was completed hi 1992. The
Emerging Technology Report (PB95-159992) is
available for purchase from the National
Technical Information Services. The Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/502) and
Emerging Technology Summary
(EPA/540/SR-94/531) are available from EPA.
Bench-scale tests conducted on dioxin-
contaminated soil showed that the effectiveness of
surface irradiation to degrade TCDDs or PCBs is
strongly influenced by soil type. Early tests on
sandy soils showed greater than 90 percent
removals for both TCDDs and PCBs. Using a
450-watt mercury lamp, the irradiation time was
more than 20 hours for greater than 90 percent
destruction of TCDD and more than 4 hours for
greater than 90 percent destruction of PCBs.
However, a high humic content decreased the
effectiveness of the UV photolysis. Soil
contaminated with PCBs in the bench-scale tests
had a high clay content. The highest removal
rate for these soils was 30 percent, measured
over a 16-hour irradiation time.
The bench-scale tests used a medium-pressure
mercury UV lamp; sunlight was ineffective. No
significant improvement in PCB destruction was
achieved using a pulsed UV lamp.
The process was also tested with Fenton's
reagent chemistry as an alternate method of
degrading PCBs to more easily biodegraded
compounds. PCB destruction ranged from
nondetectable to 35 percent. Data indicates that
no significant change in PCB chlorine level
distribution occurred during treatment.
Other studies examined PCB biodegradability in
(1) soil treated with a surfactant and UV
radiation, (2) untreated soil, and (3) soil known
to have PCB-degrading organisms. Study results
were as follows:
• PCB removal in the UV-treated soil,
untreated soil, and soil with known
biological activity was higher when
augmented with an isolated PCB
degrader (microorganism).
• In the untreated soil, biphenyl was more
efficient at inducing PCB degradation
than 4-bromobiphenyl.
• For the treated soil, surfactant treatment
may have inhibited microbial activity due
to high total organic carbon and low pH.
Isolation and enrichment techniques have made it
possible to isolate microorganisms capable of
biodegrading PCBs hi contaminated soil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Duane Graves
IT Corporation
312 Directors Drive
Knoxville, TN 37923-4709
423-690-3211
Fax: 423-694-3626
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 291
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
IT CORPORATION
(Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
IT Corporation (IT) has used the Bioslurry
Reactor (developed by Tekno Associates, Salt
Lake City, Utah) to treat polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH) in soil. Traditional
biological treatments, such as landfarming and in
situ bioremediation, may not reduce PAHs in soil
to target levels in a timely manner. Slurry
reactors are more efficient for bioremediation
and more economical than thermal desorption
and incineration.
During the project, IT operated one 10-liter and
two 60-liter bioslurry reactors (see figure below)
in semicontinuous, plug-flow mode. The first
60-liter reactor received fresh feed daily and
supplements of salicylate and succinate.
alicylate induces the naphthalene degradation
operon on PAH plasmids in the microorganisms.
This system has been shown to degrade
phenanthrene and anthracene. The naphthalene
pathway may also play a role in carcinogenic
PAH (CPAH) metabolism. Succinate is a by-
product of naphthalene metabolism and serves as
a general carbon source.
The first 60-liter reactor removed easily
degradable carbon and increased biological
activity against more recalcitrant PAHs (three-
ring compounds and higher).
Effluent from the first reactor overflowed to the
second 60-liter reactor hi series, where Fenton's
reagent (hydrogen peroxide and iron salts) was
added to accelerate oxidation for four- to six-ring
MANUAL
PH
ADJUSTMENT
ATMOSPHERE
LEOEHD;
V SAMPLE PORT
, , ^,m, ^.-.,. (r,j PRESSURE REGULATOR
^] PRESSURE INDICATOR (Jil) TIMER
H-1
F6ED
MIXER
B-1 R-1
AIR AIR
BLOWER ROTAMETER
F!LTER
U-2ABC
BIOREACTOR
MIXER
T-7
BIOREACTOR2
(SOIL)
z-1
CARBON
ADSORPTION
BIOREACTOR 1 BIOREACTOR 3 SLURRY
(SOIL) (SOIL) PUMP
P-a
EFFLUENT
PUMP
T-2
CLARIFIER
(20L)
Z-2
AIR
SAMPLING
DEVICE
T-B
EFFLUENT
CONTAINER
(20L)
Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor System
Page 292
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
PAHs. Fenton's reagent produces a free radical
that can oxidize multi-ring aromatic
hydrocarbons.
The T-8 reactor (third in a series) was used as a
polishing reactor to remove any partially
oxidized contaminants remaining after the
Fenton's reagent treatment. Slurry was removed
from this reactor and clarified using gravity
settling techniques.
Operation of the reactors as described increased
the rate and extent of PAH biodegradation,
making bioslurry treatment of impacted soils and
sludges a more effective and economical
remediation option.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is applicable to PAH-
contaminated soils and sludges that can be readily
excavated for slurry reactor treatment. Soils
from coal gasification sites, wood-treating
facilities, petrochemical facilities, and coke plants
are typically contaminated with PAHs.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program hi 1993. Under
this program, IT conducted a pilot-scale
investigation of the three slurry reactors
operating hi series. A suitable soil for the pilot-
scale test was obtained from a wood-treating
facility in the southeastern U.S. About 4,000
pounds of PAH-impacted soil was screened and
treated during summer 1994. CPAH and PAH
removals were demonstrated at 84 and 95
percent, respectively. A final report will be
available from EPA in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Brunilda Davila
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7849
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Kandi Brown
IT Corporation
312 Directors Drive
Knoxville, TN 37923
423-690-3211
Fax: 423-690-3626
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 293
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
LEWIS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC./
fflCKSON CORPORATION
(Chromated Copper Arsenate Soil Leaching Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc. (Lewis), has
developed a soil leaching process to remediate
soils contaminated with inorganics and heavy
metals including chromium, copper, cadmium,
mercury, arsenic, and lead.
The soil leaching process consists of leaching
contaminated soil in a countercurrent stirred
reactor system (see figure below). A screw
feeder delivers the soil into the reactor, where it
is leached with sulfuric acid for 30 to 60 minutes.
The sulfuric acid solubilizes the inorganics and
heavy metals into the leaching solution. Any
organic contaminants are separated and decanted
from the leaching solution, using strong acid
leachate, space separation, and skimming. The
processed soil is then washed with water and air-
dried.
The wash water is then treated with Lewis'
ENVIRO-CLEAN PROCESS, which consists of
a granulated activated carbon system followed by
an electrolytic recovery system. The
ENVIRO-CLEAN PROCESS recovers the heavy
metals from the leaching solution and wash water
and produces an effluent that meets EPA
discharge limits for heavy metals. The treated
wash water can then be reused in the soil
washing step. The leaching solution can be
returned directly to the stirred reactor system,
depending on its metals concentration.
Contaminated soil must be properly sized and
screened to facilitate leaching in the stirred
reactor system. Large pieces of debris such as
rocks, wood, and bricks must be removed before
treatment. Standard screening and classification
equipment, such as that used in municipal waste
treatment plants, is suitable for this purpose.
Soil Contaminated
with Heavy Metals
Leaching
Solution
Metal Loaded Leaching Solution
Reprocessed
Activated
Carbon
Reprocessed Activated
Carbon
Solution
Chromated Copper Arsenate Soil Leaching Process
Page 294
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December fff&ff
Completed Project
The soil leaching process does not generate
appreciable quantities of treatment by-products or
waste streams containing heavy metals. The
treated soil meets toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP) criteria and can be either
returned to the site or disposed of at a
nonhazardous landfill. The granular activated
carbon requires disposal after about 20 to 30
treatment cycles and should also meet TCLP
criteria. Heavy metals recovered by the
ENVTRO-CLEAN process can be reused by
industry.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The soil leaching process can treat wastes
generated by the wood preserving and metal
plating industries, battery waste sites, and urban
lead sites.
STATUS:
The soil leaching process was accepted into the
Emerging Technology Program in 1993.
Laboratory-scale tests have shown that the
process successfully treats soil contaminated with
chromated copper arsenate (CCA). The
evaluation of the technology under the SITE
Program was completed in September 1996.
Results from the evaluation will be available in
1997.
In 1992, Lewis treated a 5-gallon sample of
CCA-contaminated soil from Hickson
Corporation (Hickson), a major CCA chemical
manufacturer. The treated soil met TCLP
criteria, with chromium and arsenic, the two
main leaching solution constituents, averaging
0.8 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) and 0.9
mg/kg, respectively.
Analysis also revealed 3,330 milligrams per liter
(mg/L) of chromium, 13,300 mg/L of copper,
and 22,990 mg/L of iron in the leaching solution.
In addition, analysis indicated 41.4 mg/L of
chromium, 94.8 mg/L of copper, and 3.0 mg/L
of arsenic present in the wash water. After
treatment, the wash water contained metals levels
below 0.01 mg/L for copper and chromium and
0.3 mg/L for arsenic.
Lewis plans further laboratory-scale testing at its
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania facility, followed by
bench- or pilot-scale testing at Hickson's facility
in Conley, Georgia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Tom Lewis m
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc.
R.J. Casey Industrial Park
Preble and Columbus Streets
Pittsburgh, PA 15233
412-322-8100
Fax: 412-322-8109
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 295
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH, INC.
(VaporSep® Membrane Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Membrane Technology and Research, Inc.,
VaporSep® system, shown in the figure below,
uses synthetic polymer membranes to remove
organic vapors from contaminated air streams.
The process generates a clean air stream and a
liquid organic stream.
Air laden with organic vapor contacts one side of
a membrane that is 10 to 100 times more
permeable to the organic compound than to air.
The membrane separates the air into two streams:
a permeate stream containing most of the organic
vapor, and a clean residual air stream. The
organic vapor is condensed and removed as a
liquid; the purified air stream may be vented or
recycled.
The VaporSep® system maintains a lower vapor
pressure on the permeate side of the membrane to
drive the permeation process. This pressure
difference can be created by either compressing
the feed stream or using a vacuum pump on the
permeate stream.
The VaporSep® systems built to date range in
capacity from 1 to 700 standard cubic feet per
minute. The systems are significantly smaller
than carbon adsorption systems of similar
capacity and can be configured for a wide range
of feed flow rates and compositions. The process
has been tested on air streams contaminated with
a wide range of organic compounds at
concentrations of 100 to over 100,000 parts per
million. •
The VaporSep® system removes between 90 and
99 percent of the organic vapor, depending on
the class of organic compound and the system
design. The system produces only a purified air
stream and a small volume of organic condensate.
VaporSep® Membrane Organic Vapor Recovery System
Page 296
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
The concentration of organics in the purified air
stream is generally low enough for discharge to
the atmosphere.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
VaporSep® systems can treat most air streams
containing flammable or nonflammable
halogenated and nonhalogenated organic
compounds, including chlorinated hydrocarbons,
chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), and fuel
hydrocarbons. Typical applications include the
folio whig:
• Reduction of process vent emissions,
such as those regulated by EPA source
performance standards for the synthetic
organic chemical manufacturing industry
• Treatment of air stripper exhaust before
discharge to the atmosphere
• Recovery of CFCs and
hydrochlorofluorocarbons
• Recovery of valuable organic feedstocks
for recycling to the process
• Recovery of gasoline vapors
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1989; the
project was completed in 1991. The process,
demonstrated at both the bench and pilot scales,
achieved removal efficiencies of over 99.5
percent for selected organic compounds. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-94/503) is available from EPA.
Almost 40 VaporSep® systems have been
supplied to customers in the United States and
overseas for applications such as the following:
• CFC and halocarbon recovery from
process vents and transfer operations
• CFC recovery from refrigeration systems
• Vinyl chloride monomer recovery from
polyvinyl chloride manufacturing
operations
• CFC-12/ethylene oxide recovery from
sterilizer emissions
• Recovery of monomers, other
hydrocarbons, and nitrogen in polyolefin
degassing processes
A VaporSep® system successfully treated an air
stream from a soil vacuum extraction operation at
a U.S. Department of Energy site.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Marc Jacobs
Doug Gottschlich
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc.
1360 Willow Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025-1516
415-328-2228
Fax: 415-328-6580
E-mail: mjacobs@mtrinc.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 297
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
MONTANA COLLEGE OF MINERAL
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(Air-Sparged Hydrocyclone)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The air-sparged hydrocyclone (ASH) was
developed at the University of Utah during the
early 1980s to achieve fast flotation of fine
particles in a centrifugal field. The ASH consists
of two concentric right-vertical tubes with a
conventional cyclone header at the top and a froth
pedestal at the bottom (see figure below). The
inner tube is a porous tube through which air is
sparged. The outer tube serves as an air jacket to
evenly distribute air through the porous inner
tube.
Slurry is fed tangentially through the
conventional cyclone header to develop a swirl
flow of a certain thickness hi the radial direction
(the swirl-layer thickness). The swirl is
discharged through an annular opening between
the porous tube wall and the froth pedestal. Air
is sparged through the porous inner tube wall and
is sheared into small bubbles. These bubbles are
Overflow
then radially transported, together with attached
hydrophobic particles, into a froth phase that
forms on the cyclone axis. The froth phase is
stabilized and constrained by the froth pedestal at
the underflow, moved toward title vortex finder of
the cyclone header, and discharged as an
overflow product. Water-wetted hydrophilic
particles generally remain in the slurry phase and
are discharged as an underflow product through
the annulus created by the froth pedestal.
During the past decade, large mechanical
flotation cells, such as aeration-stirred tank
reactors, have been designed, installed, and
operated for mineral processing. In addition,
considerable effort has been made to develop
column flotation technology in the United States
and elsewhere; a number have been installed in
industries. Nevertheless, for both mechanical
and column cells, the specific flotation capacity
is generally limited to 1 to 2 tons per day (tpd)
per cubic foot of cell volume. In contrast, the
Vortex Finder
Cylinder
Jacket
Air
Nipple
Underflow
Air-Sparged Hydrocyclone
Page 298
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
ASH has a specific flotation capacity of at least
100 tpd per cubic foot of cell volume.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Standard flotation techniques used in industrial
mineral processing are effective ways of
concentrating materials. However, metal value
recovery is never complete. The valuable
material escaping the milling process is
frequently concentrated in the very fine particle
fraction.
The ASH can remove fine mineral particles that
are amenable to the froth flotation process.
These particles are generally sulfide minerals,
such as galena (lead sulfide), sphalerite (zinc
sulfide) and chalcopyrite (copper-iron-sulfide).
Finely divided mining wastes containing these
minerals oxidize and release the metallic
elements as dissolved sulfates into the
groundwater. Particularly applicable are tailings
from older operations conducted before the
development of froth flotation. Earlier
operations recovered minerals by gravity
concentration, which did not effectively capture
fine particles and left tailings with relatively large
concentrations of the environmentally hazardous
fine sulfide minerals.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in June 1990.
The most recent pilot plant trials on tailings
generated by gravity concentration have
confirmed both the technology's ability to
recover sulfide minerals and the high throughput
capacity claimed by proponents of the ASH.
However, results on the economics of ash
processing were inconclusive. Studies under the
SITE Program were completed in August 1994,
and a journal article is pending. The pilot plant
was dismantled after 4 years of operation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eugene Harris
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7862
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Theodore Jordan
Montana College of Mineral Science
and Technology
West Park Street
Butte, MT 57901
406-496-4112
406-496-4193
Fax: 406-496-4133
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 299
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
MONTANA COLLEGE OF MINERAL
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(Campbell Centrifugal Jig)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Campbell Centrifugal Jig (CCJ) is a
mechanical device that uses centrifugal force to
separate fine heavy mineral and metal particles
from waste materials. The CCJ combines jigging
and centrifuging to separate these particles from
a fluid slurry. TransMar, Inc., owns the patents
and rights to the CCJ technology.
Standard jigs separate solids of different specific
gravities by differential settling in a pulsating bed
and gravitational field. Jigs operating in this
mode can recover solids larger than about 150
mesh (105 microns). Centrifuges are effective in
separating solids from liquids but are not
effective hi separating solids from solids.
Slurry Inlet
Pulse Water Inlet
Cone Shroud
The CCJ, shown hi the figure below, combines
the continuous flow and pulsating bed of the
standard jig with the high acceleration forces of
a centrifuge to segregate and concentrate heavy
particles from the waste. The CCJ can recover
particles ranging in size from 1 to about
500 microns, depending on whether the particles
are sufficiently disaggregated from the host
material. The disaggregated particle should have
a specific gravity at least 50 percent greater than
the waste material. The CCJ does not need
chemicals to separate the solids.
Appropriately sized, slurried material is fed into
the CCJ through a hollow shaft inlet at the top of
the machine. The slurried material discharges
from the shaft onto a diffuser plate, which has
Bull Wheel
Hutch Area
Pulse Water Outlet
—Tails Outlet
• Cone Outlet
Campbell Centrifugal Jig (CCJ)
Page 300
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
vanes that distribute the material radially to the
jig bed. The jig bed's surface is composed of
stainless-steel shot ragging that is slightly coarser
than the screen aperture. The jig bed is pulsated
by pressurized water admitted through a screen
by four rotating pulse blocks. The pulsing water
intermittently fluidizes the bed, causing heavier
particles to move through the ragging and screen
to the concentrate port, while lighter particles
continue across the face of the jig bed to the
tailings port.
The effectiveness of separation depends on how
well the original solids are disaggregated from
the waste material and the specific gravity of
each solid. The slurried feed material may
require grinding to ensure disaggregation of the
heavy metals. Operating parameters include
pulse pressure, rotation speed or g-load, screen
aperture, ragging type and size, weir height, and
feed percent solids.
The CCJ produces heavy mineral or metal
concentrates which, depending on the waste
material, may be further processed for extraction
or sale. A clean tailings stream may be returned
to the environment.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CCJ can separate and concentrate a wide
variety of materials, ranging from base metals to
fine coal ash and fine (1-micron) gold particles.
Applications include (1) remediation of heavy
metal-contaminated soils, tailings, or harbor
areas containing spilled concentrates; (2) removal
of pyritic sulfur and ash from fine coal; and (3)
treatment of some sandblasting grit.
STATUS:
The CCJ was accepted into the SITE Emerging
Technology Program in May 1992. The CCJ
was evaluated at the Montana College of Mineral
Science and Technology Research Center
(Montana Tech). Montana Tech equipped a pilot
plant to evaluate the Series 12 CCJ, which has a
capacity of 1 to 3 tons per hour. Tests were
completed in August 1994 on base-metal mine
tailings from various locations in western
Montana. A report on these tests is pending.
In addition, under the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) Integrated Demonstration
Program, the CCJ was tested on clean Nevada
test site soil spiked with bismuth as a surrogate
for plutonium oxide. These tests occurred at the
University of Nevada, Reno, during August and
September 1994. In the future, the CCJ will be
tested for its ability to remove radioactive
contamination from soils from several DOE sites.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jack Hubbard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Gordon Ziesing
Montana College of Mineral Science
and Technology
West Park Street
Butte, MT 59701
406-496-4112
406-496-4193
Fax: 406-496-4133
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 301
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(GHEA Associates Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The GHEA Associates process applies surfactants
and additives to soil washing and wastewater
treatment to make organic and metal
contaminants soluble. In soil washing, soil is
first excavated, washed, and rinsed to produce
clean soil. Wash and rinse liquids are then
combined and treated to separate surfactants and
contaminants from the water. Next,
contaminants are separated from the surfactants
by desorption and isolated as a concentrate.
Desorption regenerates the surfactants for
repeated use in the process.
The liquid treatment consists of a sequence of
steps involving phase separation, ultrafiltration,
and air flotation (see figure below). The treated
water meets all National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System groundwater discharge
criteria, allowing it to be (1) discharged without
further treatment, and (2) reused in the process
itself or reused as a source of high quality water
for other users.
In wastewater treatment applications, surfactants
added to the wastewater adsorb contaminants.
The mixture is then treated in the same manner
as described above for (1) water purification,
(2) separation of the contaminants, and
(3) recovery of the surfactants. The treatment
process yields clean soil, clean water, and a
highly concentrated fraction of contaminants. No
other residues, effluents, or emissions are
produced. The figure below illustrates the
GHEA process.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can be applied to soil, sludges,
sediments, slurries, groundwater, surface water,
end-of-pipe industrial effluents, and hi situ soil
flushing. Contaminants that can be treated
include both organics and heavy metals,
Contaminated
Soil
Surfactant
Extraction
t
Liquid
Rinse
Clean
Soil ""
Recycle
Recycla
; i
Clean
Water
Contaminant
GHEA Process for Soil Washing
Page 302
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
nonvolatile and volatile organic compounds, and
highly toxic refractory compounds.
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in June 1990.
Treatability tests were conducted on various
matrices, including soils with high clay contents,
industrial oily sludges, industrial wastewater
effluents, and contaminated groundwater (see
table below). In situ soil flushing tests have
shown a 20-fold enhancement of contaminant
removal rates. Tests using a 25-gallon pilot-scale
plant have also been conducted. The Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/509), which
details evaluation results, is available from EPA.
Costs for treatment range from $50 to $80 per
ton.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Brunilda Davila
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7849
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Itzhak Gotlieb
GHEA Associates
5 Balsam Court
Newark, NJ 07068
201-226-4642
Fax: 201-703-6805
SUMMARY OF TREATABILITY TEST RESULTS
MATRIX
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): Trichloroethene;
1 ,2-Dichloroethene; Benzene; Toluene
Soil, parts per million (ppm)
Water, parts per billion (ppb)
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH):
Soil, ppm
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB):
Soil, ppm
Water, ppb
Trinitrotoluene in Water, ppm
Coal Tar Contaminated Soil (ppm):
Benzo[a]pyrene
Benzotklfluoranthene
Chrysene
Benzanthracene
Pyrene
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Fluorene
Dibenzofuran
1 -Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Heavy Metals In Soil:
Chromium, ppm
Iron (III) in Water, ppm:
UNTREATED
SAMPLE
20.13
109.0
13,600
380.00
6,000.0
180.0
28.8
24.1
48.6
37.6
124.2
83.6
207.8
92.7
58.3
88.3
147.3
21,000
30.8
TREATEB SAMPLE
0.05
2.5
80
0.57
<0.1
<.08
<0.1
4.4
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
1.3
<0.1
640
0.3
PERCENT
REMOVAL
99.7%
97.8%
99.4%
99.8%
>99.9%
>99.5%
>99.7%
81.2%
>99.8%
>99.7%
>99.9%
>99.8%
>99.9%
>99.9%
>99.8%
98.5%
>99.9%
96.8%
99.0%
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 303
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
PSI TECHNOLOGIES,
A DIVISION OF PHYSICAL SCIENCES INC.
(Metals Immobilization and Decontamination of Aggregate Solids)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
PSI Technologies has developed a technology for
metals immobilization and decontamination of
aggregate solids (MelDAS) (see figure below).
The technology involves a modified incineration
process in which high temperatures destroy
organic contaminants in soil and concentrate
metals into fly ash. The bulk of the soil ends up
as bottom ash and is rendered nonleachable. The
fly ash is then treated with a sorbent to
immobilize the metals, as determined by the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. The
MelDAS process requires a sorbent fraction of
less than 5 percent by soil weight.
Standard air pollution control devices clean the
effluent gas stream. Hydrogen chloride and
sulfur dioxide, which may be formed from the
oxidation of chlorinated organics and sulfur
compounds in the waste, are cleaned .by alkaline
scrubbers. Fly ash is captured by a particulate
removal device, such as an electrostatic
precipitator or baghouse. The only solid residues
exiting the process are treated soils, which no
longer contain organics and will not leach toxic
metals.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The MelDAS process treats organics and heavy
metals in soils, sediments and sludges. The
process has been effective in treating arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, nickel, and zinc.
The MelDAS process is applicable to wastes
contaminated with a combination of volatile
metals and complex organic mixtures of low
volatility. Possible MelDAS process applications
include battery waste sites and urban sites
(1) PARTICULATE REMOVAL
(2) ACID-GAS SCRUBBER
BURNER
TREATED
SOIUFLY ASH
DISCHARGE
MelDAS Process
Page 304
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
containing lead paint or leaded gasoline, or.
chemical or pesticide manufacturing facilities
contaminated with organometallics.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1991.
Bench-scale testing under the SITE Program was
completed in July 1992. The testing showed that
organic, lead, and arsenic wastes could be
successfully treated with less sorbent (1 to 10
percent of the soil by weight) than previously
anticipated. Pilot-scale testing occurred in
October 1992 and was completed in May 1993.
The Emerging Technology Report has been
submitted to EPA for review.
Initial testing, conducted under the EPA Small
Business Innovative Research program, has
demonstrated the feasibility of treating wastes
containing arsenic, cadmium, lead, and zinc.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Mark Meckes
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7348
Fax: 513-569-7328
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Joseph Morency
PSI Technologies, A Division of
Physical Sciences Inc.
20 New England Business Center
Andover, MA 01810
508-689-0003
Fax: 508-689-3232
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 305
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
PULSE SCIENCES, INC.
(X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
X-ray treatment of organically contaminated
aqueous solutions is based on the in-depth
deposition of ionizing radiation. X-rays collide
with matter, generating a shower of lower energy
secondary electrons within the contaminated
waste material. The secondary electrons ionize
and excite the atomic electrons, break up the
complex contaminant molecules, and form highly
reactive radicals. These radicals react with the
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC) to form
nontoxic by-products such as water, carbon
dioxide, and oxygen.
An efficient, high-power, high-energy, linear
induction accelerator (LIA) plus X-ray converter
generates the X-rays used in the treatment
process. The LIA energy, which must be small
enough to avoid nuclear activation and as large as
possible to increase the bremsstrahlung
conversion efficiency, will most likely be in the
range of 8 to 10 million electron volts (MeV). A
repetitive pulse of electrons 50 to
100 nanoseconds long is directed onto a cooled
converter of a high atomic number metal to
efficiently generate X-rays. The X-rays then
penetrate the container and treat the waste.
materials contained within.
Based on coupled electron/photon Monte Carlo
transport code calculations, the effective
penetration depth of X-rays produced by
converting 10-MeV electrons is 32 centimeters in
water after passing through the side of a standard
55-gallon drum. Large contaminant volumes can
be easily treated without absorbing a significant
fraction of the ionizing radiation in the container
walls. Either flowing waste or contaminated
waste in stationary or rotating containers can be
treated. No additives are required for the
process, and in situ treatment is feasible. The
cost of high throughput X-ray processing is
estimated to be competitive with alternative
processes which decompose the contaminants.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
X-ray processing can treat a large number of
organic contaminants in aqueous solutions
(groundwater, liquids, leachates, or wastewater)
without expensive waste extraction or
preparation. The technology has successfully
treated 17 organic contaminants, listed in the
table on the next page. No hazardous by-products
are predicted to form or have been observed in
the experiments.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in May 1991 and
was completed in April 1994. A 1.2-MeV, 800-
ampere, 55-nanosecond LIA gave a dose rate of
5 to 10 rads per second. Twelve different VOCs
and SVOCs found in Superfund sites were
irradiated in 21 aqueous matrices prepared with
a neat solution of the contaminant in
reagent grade water. The amount of X-ray
dose (1 rad = 10"5 Joules per gram) required to
decompose a particular contaminant was a
function of its chemical bond structure and its
reaction rate with the hydroxyl radical. When
carbonate and bicarbonate ions (hydroxyl radical
scavengers) were present in contaminated well
water samples, approximately five times the
X-ray dose was required to decompose
contaminants that react strongly with the
hydroxyl radical. The remediation rate of carbon
tetrachloride, which does not react with hydroxyl
radicals, was not affected.
An X-ray dose of 150 kilorads (krad) reduced the
moderate contamination levels in a well water
sample from a Superfund site at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) to less
than those set by the California Primary Drinking
Water Standards. For a more highly
contaminated LLNL well water sample,
experimental data suggested a 500-krad dose was
needed to reduce the contamination levels to
drinking water standards.
Page 306
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
In principle, the rate coefficients determined
from the data can be used to estimate the dose
level required to destroy mixtures of multiple
VOC contaminants and OH- radical scavengers.
However, these estimates should be applied
judiciously. Only the experimentally determined
destruction curves, based on the remediation of
test samples of the actual mixture, can be used
with confidence at the present. The table below
summarizes the X-ray treatment results from the
SITE evaluation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Esperanza Piano Renard
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Avenue, MS-104
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-321-4355; Fax: 908-321-6640
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Vernon Bailey
Pulse Sciences, Inc.
600 McCormick Street
San Leandro, CA 94577
510-632-5100, ext. 227; Fax: 510-632-5300
^
CONTAMINANT
TCE
PCE
Chloroform
Methylene Chloride
Trans-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
Cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride (CCy
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Benzene/CCl4
Ethylbenzene/CCl,
Ortho-xylene/CCl4
TCE
PCE
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
TCE
PCE
Chloroform
CC14
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
Freon
••
MATJOX
Deionized Water
Contaminated
Well Water
LLNL Well Water
Sample #1
LLNL Well Water
Sample #2
INITIAL
CONCENTRATION,
)*
9,780
10,500
2,000
270
260
13
590
180
240
150
890
240
262/400
1,000/430
221/430
3,400
500
< 10
25
13
14
5,000
490
250
14
38
11
71
HNAL
CONCENTRATION
(M*>
<0.1
< 0.1
4.4
3.1
0.78
< 0.5
54
14
< 0.5
<0.5
3.6
1.2
< 0.5/196
< 0.5/70.9
< 0.5/85
< 0.5
< 0.5
1
< 1
2.0
< 0.5
< 1.0
1.6
81
4
17
6.8
32
-
CHOWS"
b)
5
5
5 .
10
6
200
0.5
1
150
680
1,750
1/0,5
680/0.5
1,750/0.5
5
5
5
6
200
6
5
5
0.5
5
5
—
X-RAY DOSE
{toad)
50.3
69.8
178
145.9
10.6
10.6
207.1
224
8.8
4.83
20.4
5.6
39.9/93.8
33.2/185
20.5/171
99.0
99.0
145.4
49.9
145.4
49.9
291
291
291
291
291
291
291
parts per billion
California Primary Drinking Water Standards
Summary of X-ray Treatment Results
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 307
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
RECRA ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
(formerly ELECTRO-PURE SYSTEMS, INC.)
(Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The alternating current electrocoagulation (ACE)
technology offers an alternative to the use of
metal salts or polymers and polyelectrolyte
addition for breaking stable emulsions and
suspensions. The technology removes metals,
colloidal solids and particles, and soluble
inorganic pollutants from aqueous media by
introducing highly charged polymeric aluminum
hydroxide species. These species neutralize the
electrostatic charges on suspended solids and oil
droplets to facilitate agglomeration or coagulation
and resultant separation from the aqueous phase.
The treatment prompts the precipitation of certain
metals and salts.
The figure below depicts the basic ACE process.
Electrocoagulation occurs in either batch mode,
allowing recirculation, or continuous (one-pass)
mode in an ACE fluidized bed separator.
Electrocoagulation is conducted by passing the
aqueous medium through the treatment cells in
upflow mode. The electrocoagulation cell(s)
consist of nonconductive piping equipped with
rectilinearly shaped, nonconsumable metal
electrodes between which is maintained a
turbulent, fluidized bed of aluminum alloy
pellets.
Application of the alternating current electrical
charge to the electrodes prompts the dissolution
of the fluidized bed and the formation of the
polymeric hydroxide species. Charge
neutralization is initiated within the
electrocoagulation cell(s) and continues following
effluent discharge. Application of the electrical
field prompts electrolysis of the water medium
and generates minute quantities of hydrogen gas.
The coagulated solids will often become
entrained in the gas, causing their flotation.
Attrition scrubbing of the fluidized bed pellets
within the cell inhibits the buildup of scale or
coating on the aluminum pellets and the face of
the electrodes. Coagulation and flocculation
occur simultaneously within the ACE cells as the
effluent is exposed to the electric field and the
aluminum dissolves from the fluidized bed.
The working volume of the fluidized bed cell,
excluding external plumbing, is 5 liters. The
ACE systems have few moving parts and can
easily be integrated into a process treatment train
for effluent, pretreatment, or polishing treatment.
The ACE technology has been designed into
water treatment systems which include membrane
separation, reverse osmosis, electrofiltration,
sludge dewatering, and thermo-oxidation
technologies.
System operating conditions depend on the
chemistry of the aqueous medium, particularly
the conductivity and chloride concentration.
Treatment generally requires application of low
voltage (< 135 VAC) and operating currents of
Solid
- Airfor
Turbulence
Alternating Current Electrocoagulation (ACE)
Page 308
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
less than 20 amperes. The flow rate of the
aqueous medium through the treatment cell(s)
depends on the solution chemistry, the nature of
the entrained suspension or emulsion, and the
treatment objectives.
Product separation occurs in conventional gravity
separation devices or filtering systems. Each
phase is removed for reuse, recycling, additional
treatment, or disposal.
Current systems are designed to treat waste
streams of between 10 and 100 gallons per
minute (gpm). RECRA Environmental, Inc.,
maintains a bench-scale unit (1 to 3 gpm) at its
Amherst Laboratory for use in conducting
treatability testing.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ACE technology treats aqueous-based
suspensions and emulsions such as contaminated
groundwater, surface water runoff, landfill and
industrial leachate, wash and rinse waters, and
various solutions and effluents. The suspensions
can include solids such as inorganic and organic
pigments, clays, metallic powders, metal ores,
and colloidal materials. Treatable emulsions
include a variety of solid and liquid
contaminants, including petroleum-based by-
products.
The ACE technology has demonstrated
reductions of clay, latex, and various hydroxide
loadings by over 90 percent. Chemical oxygen
demand and total organic carbon content of
spiked slurries have been reduced by over 80
percent. The technology has removed heavy
metals at between 55 and 99 percent efficiency.
Fluoride and phosphate have been removed at
greater than 95 percent efficiency. The system
has been used to recover fine-grained products
which would otherwise have been discharged.
STATUS:
The ACE technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1988.
The laboratory-scale testing was completed in
June 1992. The Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-92/011) and Emerging Technology
Summary (EPA/540/S-93/504) are available from
EPA. The research results are described in the
Journal of Air and Waste Management, Volume
43, May 1993, pp. 784-789, "Alternating
Current Electrocoagulation for Superfund Site
Remediation."
Experiments on metals and complex synthetic
slurries have defined major operating parameters
for broad classes of waste streams. The
technology has been modified to minimize
electrical power consumption and maximize
effluent throughput rates.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Kenneth Kinecki
RECRA Environmental, Inc.
10 Hazelwood Drive, Suite 110
Amherst, NY 14228-2298
800-527-3272
Fax: 716-691-2617
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 3O9
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Remediation Technologies, Inc., biological
treatment technology uses aerobic cometabolic
organisms in fixed-film biological reactors to
treat gases contaminated with volatile chlorinated
hydrocarbons. Contaminated gases enter the
bottom of the 6-foot-tall reactor column and flow
up through a medium that has a high surface area
and favorable porosity for gas distribution. Both
methanotrophic and phenol-degrading organisms
have been evaluated within the reactor. The
figure below illustrates a methanotrophic reactor.
In methanotrophic columns, methane and
nutrients are added to grow the organisms
capable of degrading volatile chlorinated
hydrocarbons.
The organisms degrade these compounds into
acids and chlorides that can be subsequently
degraded to carbon dioxide and chloride.
Because of intermediate toxicity and competitive
inhibition, methane-volatile organic compound
(VOC) feeding strategies are critical to obtain
optimum VOC degradation over the long term.
Methanotrophic bacteria from various soils were
tested to determine potential VOC compound
degradation. The optimal culture from this
testing was isolated and transferred to a bench-
scale biofilm reactor, where substrate
degradation rates per unit of biofilm surface area
were determined. Four pilot-scale biofilm
reactors were then established, with feeding
strategies and retention times based on earlier
testing.
Gas
Effluent i Nutrients
Column Ht = S'
Dia = 5"
Toxic
Methane Material
Humidified
Air
A
A
-f
A
Sample
Taps
3' media
4" gravel
Drain
Methanotrophic Biofilm Reactor
Page 310
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December
Completed Project
The following issues are investigated in the
methanotrophic biofilm reactors:
• Comparison of different media types
• Trichloroethene (TCE) removal across
the columns
• TCE degradation rates
In addition to studies of the methanotrophic
biofilm reactors, a column was seeded with a
filamentous phenol-degrading consortia that
grows well on phenol in a nitrogen-limited
solution. Phenol also induces enzymes capable
of rapid cometabolic degradation of TCE.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can treat gaseous streams of
volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons. These waste
streams may result from air stripping of
contaminated groundwater or industrial process
streams, or from vacuum extraction during in situ
site remediation.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in summer 1992;
the evaluation was completed in 1995. The
Emerging Technology Report, which details
results from the evaluation, is being prepared.
TCE degradation rates hi the pilot-scale biofilm
reactor were well below those previously
measured in laboratory testing or those reported
in the literature for pure cultures. The phenol-
fed column was started on a celite medium. TCE
removal was superior to that in the
methanotrophic columns, even with sub-optimal
biomass development.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Hans Stroo
Remediation Technologies, Inc.
1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207
Seattle, WA 98134
206-624-9349
Fax:206-624-2839 .
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 311
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT & RECOVERY
(formerly BIO-RECOVERY SYSTEMS, INC.)
(AlgaSORB® Biological Sorption)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The AlgaSORB® sorption process uses algae to
remove heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions.
The process takes advantage of the natural
affinity for heavy metal ions exhibited by algal
cell structures.
The photograph below shows a portable effluent
treatment equipment (PETE) unit, consisting of
two columns operating either in series or in
parallel. Each column contains 0.25 cubic foot
of AlgaSORB®, the treatment medium. The
PETE unit shown below can treat waste at a flow
rate of approximately 1 gallon per minute (gpm).
Larger systems have been designed and
manufactured to treat waste at flow rates greater
than 100 gpm.
The AlgaSORB® medium consists of dead algal
cells immobilized in a silica gel polymer. This
immobilization serves two purposes: (1) it
protects the algal cells from decomposition by
other microorganisms, and (2) it produces a hard
material that can be packed into columns that,
when pressurized, still exhibit good flow
characteristics.
The AlgaSORB® medium functions as a
biological ion-exchange resin to bind both
metallic cations (positively charged ions, such as
mercury [Hg+2]) and metallic oxoanions
(negatively charged, large, complex, oxygen-
containing ions, such as selenate [SeO4"2]).
Anions such as chlorides or sulfates are only
weakly bound or not bound at all. In contrast to
current ion-exchange technology, divalent cations
z,.-atJ~-» "~-^
Portable Effluent Treatment Equipment (PETE) Unit
Page 312
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
typical of hard water, such as calcium (Ca+2) and
magnesium (Mg+2), or monovalent cations, such
as sodium (Na+) and potassium (K + ) do not
significantly interfere with the binding of toxic
heavy metal ions to the algae-silica matrix.
Like ion-exchange resins, AlgaSORB® can be
regenerated. After the AlgaSORB® medium is
saturated, the metals are removed from the algae
with acids, bases, or other suitable reagents.
This regeneration process generates a small
volume of solution containing highly
concentrated metals. This solution must undergo
treatment prior to disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can remove heavy metal ions
from groundwater or surface leachates that are
"hard" or that contain high levels of dissolved
solids. The process can also treat rinse waters
from electroplating, metal finishing, and printed
circuit board manufacturing operations. Metals
removed by the technology include aluminum,
cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, gold, iron,
lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, nickel,
platinum, selenium, silver, uranium, vanadium,
and zinc.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in 1988; the evaluation was
completed in 1990. Under the Emerging
Technology Program, the AlgaSORB® sorption
process was tested on mercury-contaminated
groundwater at a hazardous waste site in
Oakland, California. Testing was designed to
determine optimum flow rates, binding
capacities, and the efficiency of stripping agents.
The Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/5-90/005a&b), Emerging Technology
Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/005), and Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/003) are
available from EPA. An article was also
published hi the Journal of Air and Waste
Management, Volume 41, No. 10, October 1991.
Based on results from the Emerging Technology
Program, Resource Management & Recovery
was invited to participate in the SITE
Demonstration Program.
The process is being commercialized for
groundwater treatment and industrial point source
treatment.
FOR FURTHER B^FORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Michael Hosea
Resource Management & Recovery
4980 Baylor Canyon Road
Las Cruces, NM 88011
505-382-9228
Fax: 505-382-9228
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 313
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT OSWEGO,
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Environmental Research Center at the State
University of New York at Oswego (SUNY) has
developed an electrochemical peroxidation
process widely applicable for the treatment of
liquid wastes and slurries with low solids content.
The process treats mixed waste by using (1)
oxidative free radicals to attack organic
contaminants, and (2) adsorptive removal of
metals from liquid waste streams. Initial testing
indicates destructive efficiencies greater than 99
percent for a variety of compounds including
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), volatile organic
compounds, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene,
xylene, organic dyes, and microbes.
The process involves combining Fenton's reagent
with a small electrical current. In a batch
treatment process, steel electrodes are submersed
into the waste to be treated; solid particles are
suspended by mechanical mixing or stirring. A
low direct current is applied to the electrodes,
and hydrogen peroxide and a reduced form of
iron are added. The iron and hydrogen peroxide
instantaneously react to form free radicals, which
oxidize organic contaminants. Free radicals are
also produced by the reaction of the peroxide
with solvated electrons. The process can be
significantly enhanced by pH adjustment,
periodic current reversal, and use of proprietary
enhancements.
Metals readily adsorb to the iron hydroxide by-
product, and the metals can then be separated by
precipitation or flocculation. The volume of by-
products may be reduced and the metals may be
immobilized by heating and phase conversion to
hematite. In specific applications, select metals
may be plated onto electrodes and recovered.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This process is capable of treating liquids and
slurries containing a variety of contaminants,
including oxidizable organic compounds and
Contaminated Liquids,
Solids, Slurries (1)
DC Current (2a)
Mixing
Containment
Vessel (2)
Acid (3)
Co-solvent (4)
Zero Valent Iron (5)
Ferrous Iron (6)
Hydrogen Peroxide (7)
Liquid/Solid
Separation (8)
Iron
Hydroxide (9)
Metal
Hydroxides (11)
Solids (10)
Water (12)
Discharge
Pilot-Scale Electrochemical Peroxidation System
Page 314
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
metals. The process may be applied to industrial
process wastes (textiles, pulp and paper, food
industry), landfill leachates, gasoline- or solvent-
contaminated groundwater, pesticide rinsates, or
other liquid wastes.
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in November
1993 to evaluate photochemical methods of
destroying PCBs in water and sediment. The
evaluation was complete in 1995. An Emerging
Technology Report will be available in late 1996.
During research related to the initial SITE
evaluation, which focused on photocatalytic
processes, a new technology (electrochemical
peroxidation) was discovered. Electrochemical
peroxidation has distinct advantages over
photochemical processes, and its development
was pursued. A pilot-scale continuous flow
treatment system has been constructed with a
local remediation firm and will be tested at a
gasoline-contaminated groundwater site in spring
1997. If initial tests are encouraging, in situ
application of the process will be conducted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Hector Moreno
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7882
Fax: 513-569-7879
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Ronald Scrudato
Jeffrey Chiarenzelli
Environmental Research Center
319 Piez Hall
State University of New York at Oswego
Oswego, NY 13126
315-341-3639
Fax: 315-341-5346
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 315
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
SVEDALA INDUSTRIES, INC.
TFTRRMAL ENCAPSULATION Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PYROKILN THERMAL
ENCAPSULATION process is designed to
improve conventional rotary kiln incineration of
hazardous waste. The process introduces
inorganic additives (fluxing agents) with the
waste to promote incipient slagging or thermal
encapsulating reactions near the kiln discharge.
The thermal encapsulation is augmented using
other additives hi either the kiln or in the air
pollution control (APC) baghouse to stabilize the
metals in the fly ash. The process is designed to
(1) immobilize the metals remaining in the kiln
ash, (2) produce an easily handled nodular form
of ash, and (3) stabilize metals hi the fly ash,
while avoiding the problems normally
experienced with higher temperature "slagging
kihi" operations.
The basis of this process is thermal
encapsulation. Thermal encapsulation traps
metals hi a controlled melting process operating
hi the temperature range between slagging and
nonslagging modes, producing ash nodules that
are 0.25- to 0.75-inch hi diameter.
The figure below illustrates the process. Wastes
containing organic and metallic contaminants are
incinerated hi a rotary kiln. Metals (in
particular, those with high melting points) are
trapped hi the bottom ash from the kiln through
the use of fluxing agents that promote
agglomeration with controlled nodulizing.
The PYROKILN THERMAL
ENCAPSULATION process may reduce
leaching of metals to levels below EPA toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) limits
for metals. Metals with low melting and
vaporization temperatures, such as arsenic, lead,
and zinc, are expected to partially volatilize,
partitioning between the bottom ash and the fly
ash. Metals concentrated hi the fly ash may be
stabilized, if necessary, by adding reagents to the
kiln and to the APC system to reduce leaching to
Contaminated
Bulk Materials
Reagent
Addition
and
Food-Stock
Preprocessing
Fuel
Rotary Kiln
Decontaminated
Materials
PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process
Page 316
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
below TCLP limits. This process may also
reduce the total dust load to the APC system and
the amount of particulate emissions from the
stack.
The use of fluxing reagents is a key element in
this technology. The fluxing agents are
introduced into the kiln in the proper amount and
type to lower the ash's softening temperature.
Proper kiln design is required to allow the kiln
outlet to function as an ash agglomerator. Good
temperature control is required to keep the
agglomerates at the correct particle size, yielding
the desired 0.25- to 0.75-inch nodules. By
producing nodules, rather than a molten slag, the
process is expected to prevent operating
problems such as ash quenching, overheating,
and premature refractory failure. The process
should also simplify cooling, handling, and
conveying of the ash.
The controlled nodulizing process should
immobilize metals with high boiling points.
Lead, zinc, and other metals with lower
volatilization temperatures tend to exit the kiln as
fine fumes. Reagents can be injected into the
kiln, the APC devices, or a final solids mixer to
aid in the collection of these metals from the gas
stream.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology is intended for soils and sludges
contaminated with organics and metals. As with
other rotary kiln systems, the process is expected
to destroy a broad range of organic species,
including halogenated and nonhalogenated
organics and petroleum products. Svedala
Industries, Inc., claims that metals that may be
encapsulated or stabilized include antimony,
arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,
copper, lead, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium,
and zinc.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in March 1990.
A final report has been prepared, and a technical
paper summarizing the project was presented in
1994 at the Air and Waste Management
Association 87th Annual Meeting and Exhibition
in Cincinnati, Ohio. The final report was
published in the July 1995 issue of the Journal of
the Air and Waste Management Association.
A synthetic soil matrix was created for the batch
rotary kiln tests. Feed preparation was a key
element in nodule production. These tests
yielded nodules with appropriate crush strength.
Test results showed a decrease in TCLP metal
leachate levels with increasing crush strength.
An analytical method involving microwave-aided
digestion was used to evaluate samples produced
in a second batch kirn test program. This method
provided excellent, consistent results, indicating
teachability below TCLP limits.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Marta K. Richards
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7692
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
JimKidd
Svedala Industries, Inc.
20965 Crossroads Circle
Waukesha, WI 53186
414-798-6341
Fax: 414-798-6211
Glenn Heian
Svedala Industries, Inc.
Process Research and Test Center
9180 Fifth Avenue
Oak Creek, WI 53154
414-762-1190
Fax: 414-764-3443
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 317
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
THERMATRIX, INC.
(formerly PURUS, INC.)
(Photolytic Oxidation Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The photolytic oxidation process indirectly
destroys volatile organic compounds (VOC) in
soil and groundwater. The process uses a xenon
pulsed-plasma flash-lamp that emits short
wavelength ultraviolet (UV) light at very high
intensities. The process strips the contaminants
into the vapor phase, and the UV treatment
converts the VOCs into less hazardous
compounds.
Photolysis occurs when contaminants absorb
sufficient UV light energy, transforming
electrons to higher energy states and breaking
molecular bonds (see figure below). Hydroxyl
radicals, however, are not formed. The process
requires the UV light source to emit wavelengths
in the regions absorbed by the contaminant. An
innovative feature of this technology is its ability
to shift the UV spectral output to optimize the
photolysis.
The process uses vacuum extraction or air
stripping to volatilize VOCs from soils or
groundwater, respectively. VOCs then enter the
photolysis reactor, where a xenon flashlamp
generates UV light. The plasma is produced by
pulse discharge of electrical energy across two
electrodes in the lamp. Ninety-nine percent
destruction occurs within seconds, allowing
continuous operation. Because organics are
destroyed in the vapor phase, the process uses
Cl
\
Cl/
Cl
\
H
TCE
less energy than a system treating dissolved
organics.
WASTE APPLICABILIirY:
The photolytic oxidation process is designed to
destroy VOCs, including dichloroethene (DCE),
tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE),
and vinyl chloride volatilized from soil or
groundwater. Destruction of other VOCs, such
as benzene, carbon tetrachloride, and
1,1,1-trichloroethane, is under investigation.
STATUS:
The photolytic oxidation process was accepted
into the SITE Emerging Technology Program in
March 1991. Field testing of a full-scale
prototype began in October 1991. The test was
conducted at the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory Superfund site in California. The site
contains soil zones highly contaminated with
TCE.
During the field test, a vacuum extraction system
delivered contaminated air to the unit at air flows
up to 500 cubic feet per minute (cfm). Initial
TCE concentrations in the air were
approximately 250 parts per million by volume.
The contaminant removal goal for the treatment
was 99 percent. Vapor-phase carbon filters were
placed downstream of the unit to satisfy
California Air Quality emission control
UV
C02+ HCI
UV Photolysis of TCE
Page 318
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
requirements during the field test. Test results
are discussed below. The Final Report
(EPA/540/R-93/516), the Summary Report
(EPA/540/SR-93/516), and the Technology
Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/501) have been
published.
The low-wavelength UV emissions allowed direct
photolysis of many VOCs, particularly
chlorinated compounds and freons, that would
not have been possible with commercial mercury
vapor lamps. TCE, PCE, and DCE were quickly
destroyed. To be rapidly photolyzed, some
VOCs require photosensitization or an even
lower-wavelength light source.
TCE results are shown in the table below. TCE
removal yielded undesirable intermediates.
Greater than 85 percent of the TCE chain photo-
oxidation product is dichloroacetyl chloride
(DCAC). Further oxidation of DC AC is about
100 times slower than TCE photolysis and forms
dichlorocarbonyl (DCC) at about 20 percent
yield. At this treatment level, the DCC
concentration may be excessive, requiring
additional treatment.
Further studies should focus on (1) the
effectiveness of dry or wet scrubbers for
removing acidic photo-oxidation products, (2)
development of thermal or other methods for
posttreatment of products such as DCAC, and (3)
the use of shorter-wavelength UV lamps or
catalysts to treat a broader range of VOCs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7665
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Steve McAdams
Thermatrix, Inc.
101 Metro Drive, Suite 248
San Jose, CA95110
408-453-0490
Fax: 408-453-0492
TCE PHOTOLYSIS FIELD TEST RESULTS
Freq.
(Hz)
30
30
30
30
15
15
5
5
1
1
Notes:
No. of
Chambers
4
4
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
Hz = Hertz
cfm = cubic
Flow
(cfm)
103
97
95
106
97
103
95
103
106
103
feet per minute
Res.
Time
(sec)
9.6
10.1
10.4
4.6
10.1
4.8
10.4
4.8
9.3
4.8
TCE
Input
(ppmv)
78.4
108.5
98.3
91.7
106.8
101.3
104.9
101.4
101.7
98.5
dl =
nd =
TCE TCE
Output Destruction
(ppmv) (%)
dl
dl
dl
0.07
dl
dl
dl
dl
0.85
13.23
detection limit
not detected
:>99.99
2:99.99
;>99.99
99.92
k99.99
a99.99
;>99.99
a99.9
99.16
86.57
DCC
Yield
(ppmv)
nd
21.3
25.6
15.9
22.8
12.6
8.7
9.4
12.5
6.8
DCAC
Yield
(ppmv)
20.2
26.5
34
49.2
nd
65.3
75.7
76.3
83.2
84.9
Chlorine
Balance
(Mole%)
78.8
106.2
114.5
91.1
nd
86.2
90.0
88.8
90.3
93.3
sec = seconds
ppmv = parts per million volume
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 319
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
TRINITY ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated Soil Detoxification)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology uses an aprotic solvent, other
reagents, and heat to dehalogenate
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in solids to inert
biphenyl and chloride salts (see figure below).
First, solid material is sized to allow better
contact between the reagents and PCBs. In a
continuous flow reactor, the soils are heated to
drive off excess water. Reagents are then added
to destroy the PCBs.
The reagent, consisting of a solvent and an
inorganic alkali material, completely strips
chlorine from the PCB molecule. Excess alkali
can be easily neutralized and is reusable in the
process. Treated soil can be returned to the
excavation once analytical results show that PCBs
have been destroyed.
Gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy analyses
of processed PCB materials show that the process
produces no toxic or hazardous products.
A chlorine balance confirms that PCBs are
completely dehalogenated. To further confirm
chemical dehalogenation, inorganic and total
organic chloride analyses are also used. The
average total chloride recovery for treated soils
is greater than 90 percent.
The commercial process is expected to be less
costly than incineration but more expensive than
land disposal. Since no stack emissions are
produced, permitting the process for a
remediation would be easier than incineration.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process can treat many different solid and
sludge-type materials contaminated with PCB
Aroclor mixtures, specific PCB congeners,
pentachlorophenol, and individual chlorinated
dioxin isomers. However, other chlorinated
hydrocarbons such as pesticides, herbicides, and
polychlorinated dibenzofurans could also be
treated by this technology.
PCB
Contaminated
Soil
Son Particle
Sizing
J.
Particla
Screening
i
°age
k
320
Alkali
Reagant
Aprotic
1 1
Soil Heated
to Remove
Moisture
1
PCBs
Removed
From Water
|
PCB Solids
into Process
Heat
Maintained
to Promote
Reaction
V
PCB Soil Detoxifical
Solvent Purified
to Remove
Any Soil Fines
T
Solvent
Recovered from
Non-PCB Soil
Excess Alkali Non-PCB Soil
in Non-PCB Soil Returned to
_4 is Neutralized _> Excavation
Water
Acidified
T
Acid
tion Process
Acidified Water
> Added to Soil
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1990.
The current system was developed by researchers
in early 1991, after the original aqueous, caustic-
based system proved ineffective at destroying
PCBs.
The SITE project was completed in 1992.
Trinity is investigating further improvements to
the technology. Due to cost limitations, no
commercialization of the investigated process is
expected. A final report will not be published.
In bench-scale studies, synthetically contaminated
materials have been processed to eliminate
uncertainties in initial PCB concentration. This
chemical process has reduced PCB
concentrations from 2,000 parts per million
(ppm) to less than 2 ppm in about 30 minutes
using moderate power input. Further laboratory
experiments are underway to determine the
reaction mechanism and to enhance PCB
destruction. Through additional experimentation,
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc.,
expects to reduce processing time through better
temperature control, more efficient mixing, and
possibly more aggressive reagents.
A modular pilot-scale processor has been planned
that uses several heating zones to preheat and dry
the contaminated soil, followed by PCB
destruction. The pilot process would be capable
of processing 1 ton per hour initially. Additional
modules could be added to increase process
capacity, as needed. Contaminated soils from
actual sites will be used to test the pilot-scale
processor instead of the synthetically
contaminated soils used in bench-scale testing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Paul dePercin
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7797
Fax: 513-569-7105
E-Mail: dePercin.Paul@epamail.epa.gov
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Duane Koszalka
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc.
62 East First Street
Mound Valley, KS 67354
316-328-3222
Fax: 316-328-2033
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 321
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON RESEARCH INSTITUTE
(Photothermal Detoxification Unit)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Photolytic reactions (reactions induced by
exposure to ultraviolet [UV] light) can destroy
certain hazardous organic wastes at relatively low
temperatures. However, most photochemical
processes offer relatively limited throughput rates
and cannot completely mineralize the targeted
wastes. For aqueous waste streams, these
problems have been partially addressed by using
indirect photochemical reactions involving a
highly reactive photolytic initiator such as
hydrogen peroxide or heterogeneous catalysts.
Recently, the University of Dayton Research
Institute (UDRI) developed a photolytic
detoxification process to treat the gas waste
streams. This process is clean and efficient and
offers the speed and general applicability of a
combustion process.
The photothermal detoxification unit (PDU) uses
photothermal reactions conducted at temperatures
higher than those used in conventional
photochemical processes (200 to 500 °C versus
Thermally Insulated
Reactor Vessel
Mounting
Flange
\
Gas Inlet
Sampling Ports (4)
20 °C), but lower than combustion temperatures
(typically greater than 1,000 °C). At these
elevated temperatures, photothermal reactions are
energetic enough to destroy many wastes quickly
and efficiently without producing complex and
potentially hazardous by-products.
The PDU is a relatively simple device,
consisting of an insulated reactor vessel
illuminated with high-intensity UV lamps. As
shown in the figure below, the lamps are
mounted externally for easy maintenance and
inspection. Site remediation technologies that
generate high-temperature gas streams, such as
thermal desorption or in situ steam stripping,
can incorporate the PDU with only slight
equipment modifications. The PDU can be
equipped with a pre-heater for use with soil
vapor extraction (SVE). Furthermore, the PDU
can be equipped with conventional air pollution
control devices for removal of acids and sus-
pended particulates from the treated process
stream. The PDU shown in the figure below is
also equipped with built-in sampling ports for
External UV Lamp
Assemblies (3)
Exhaust
Sampling Ports (4)
Support/Transportation
Pallet
Photothermal Detoxification Unit (PDU)
Page 322
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
monitoring and quality assurance and quality
control.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
According to UDRI, the PDU has proven
extremely effective at destroying the vapors of
polychlorinated biphenyls, polychlorinated
dibenzodioxins, polychlorinated dibenzofurans,
aromatic and aliphatic ketones, and aromatic and
aliphalic chlorinated solvents, as well as
brominated and nitrous wastes found in soil,
sludges, and aqueous streams. The PDU can be
incorporated with most existing and proposed
remediation processes for clean, efficient, on-site
destruction of the off-gases. More specifically,
high-temperature processes can directly
incorporate the PDU; SVE can use the PDU
fitted with a preheater; and groundwater
remediation processes can use the PDU in
conjunction with air stripping.
STATUS:
The technology was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in August 1992, and
development work began hi December 1992.
The evaluation was completed in 1994. The
Emerging Technology Report (EPA/540/R-95/526),
the Emerging Technology Bulletin
(EPA/540/F-95/505) and the Emerging
Technology Summary (EPA/540/SR-95/526)
are available from EPA. An article was also
published hi the Journal of Air and Waste
Management, Volume 15, No. 2, 1995.
Emerging Technology Program data indicate that
the technology performs as expected for
chlorinated aromatic wastes, such as
dichlorobenzene and tetrachlorodibenzodioxin,
and better than expected for relatively light
chlorinated solvents, such as trichloroethene
(TCE) and tetrachloroethene. Further tests with
selected mixtures, including benzene, toluene,
ethyl-benzene, xylene, TCE, dichlorobenzene,
and water vapor, show that the process is
effective at treating wastes typically found at
many remediation sites. Adequate scaling and
performance data are now available to proceed
with the design and development of prototype
full-scale units for field testing and evaluation.
Through prior programs with the U.S.
Department of Energy, technology effectiveness
has been thoroughly investigated using relatively
long wavelength UV light (concentrated sunlight
with wavelengths greater than 300 nanometers).
Limited data have also been generated at shorter
wavelengths (higher energy) using available
industrial UV illumination systems.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Chien Chen
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
2890 Woodbridge Avenue, MS-104
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-906-6985
Fax: 908-321-6640
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Barry Dellinger or John Graham
Environmental Sciences and
Engineering Group
University of Dayton Research Institute
300 College Park
Dayton, OH 45469-0132
513-229-2846
Fax: 513-229-2503
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 323
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
(In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The in situ acid water mitigation process
addresses the acid drainage problem associated
with exposed sulfide-bearing minerals from
sources including mine waste rock and
abandoned metallic mines. Acid drainage forms
under natural conditions when iron disulfides are
exposed to the atmosphere and water,
spontaneously oxidizing them to produce a
complex of highly soluble iron sulfates and salts.
These salts hydrolyze to produce an acid-, iron-,
and sulfate-enriched drainage that adversely affects
the environment.
The in situ mitigation strategy modifies the
hydrology and geochemical conditions of the site
through land surface reconstruction and selective
placement of limestone.
Limestone is used as the alkaline source material
because it has long-term availability, is generally
inexpensive, and is safe to handle. For the
chemical balances to be effective, the site must
receive enough rainfall to produce seeps or
drainages that continually contact the limestone.
Rainfall, therefore, helps to remediate the site,
rather than increasing the acid drainage.
During mine construction, lysimeters and
limestone chimneys are installed to collect
surface runoff and funnel it into the waste rock
dump. Acidic material is capped with
impermeable material to divert water from the
Overview of Site Lysimeters
Page 324
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
acid cores. This design causes the net acid load
to be lower than the alkaline load, resulting in
benign, nonacid drainage.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology mitigates acid drainage from
abandoned waste dumps and mines. It can be
applied to any site in a humid area where
limestone is available.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in March 1990.
Studies under the Emerging Technology Program
are complete. A peer-reviewed journal article
has been prepared and submitted.
For the SITE evaluation, six large-scale
lysimeters (12 feet wide, 8 feet high, and 16 feet
deep) were constructed and lined with 20-mil
polyvinyl chloride plastic (see photograph on
previous page). The lysimeters drained through
an outlet pipe into 55-gallon collection barrels.
Piezometers in the lysimeter floor monitored the
hydrology and chemistry of the completed
lysimeter. During June 1991, 50 tons of
acid-producing mine waste rock was packed into
each lysimeter.
The effluent from each lysimeter was monitored
for 1 year to establish a quality baseline. In the
second phase of the study, selected lysimeters
were topically treated, maintaining two
lysimeters as controls to compare the efficacy of
the acid abatement strategy. In addition, a rain
gauge was installed at the site for mass balance
measurements. An ancillary study correlating
laboratory and field results is complete.
In the last phase of the 3-year study, little if any
leachate was collected due to drought conditions
in the southeast U.S. With the return of normal
rainfall, sufficient leachate was collected to
compare the treated lysimeters against the
controls to evaluate the treatment's effectiveness.
The treated lysimeters, in general, showed a
20 to 25 percent reduction in acid formation.
The acidities measured about 10,000 milligrams
per liter (mg/L) for the untreated lysimeters,
while acidities from the treated lysimeters
measured about 7,000 mg/L. This study was
conducted on a very high acid-producing waste
rock, representing a near worst-case situation.
The process should be more successful on milder
acid sources.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Roger Wilmoth
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7509
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Frank Caruccio
Department of Geological Sciences
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208
803-777-4512
Fax: 803-777-6610
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 325
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
(Adsorptive Filtration)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Adsorptive filtration removes inorganic
contaminants (metals) from aqueous waste
streams. An adsorbent ferrihydrite is applied to
the surface of an inert substrate such as sand,
which is then placed in one of three vertical
columns (see figure below). The contaminated
waste stream is adjusted to a pH of 9 to 10 and
passed through the column. The iron-coated sand
grains in the column act simultaneously as a filter
and adsorbent. When the column's filtration
capacity is reached (indicated by particulate
breakthrough or column blockage), the column is
backwashed. When the adsorptive capacity of
the column is reached (indicated by break-
through of soluble metals), the metals are
removed and concentrated for subsequent
recovery with a pH-induced desorption process.
Sand can be coated by ferrihydrite formed when
either iron nitrate or iron chloride salts react with
sodium hydroxide. The resulting ferrihydrite-
coated sand is insoluble at a pH greater than 1;
thus, acidic solutions can be used in the
regeneration step to ensure complete metal
recovery. The system does not appear to lose
treatment efficiency after numerous regeneration
cycles. Anionic metals such as arsenate,
chromate, and selenite can be removed from the
solution by treating it at a pH near 4 and regen-
erating it at a high pH. The system has an empty
bed retention time of 2 to 5 minutes.
This technology offers several advantages over
conventional treatment technologies. These
advantages are its ability to (1) remove both
dissolved and suspended metals from the waste
stream, (2) remove a variety of metal complexes,
(3) work in the presence of high concentrations
of background ions, and (4) remove anionic
metals.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This adsorptive filtration process removes
inorganic contaminants, consisting mainly of
metals, from aqueous waste streams. It can be
applied to aqueous waste streams with a wide
Effluent to Discharge
or Recycle
VALVE
p) PUMP
^_ To Metal Recovery
Adsorptive Filtration Treatment System
Page 326
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
range of contaminant concentrations and pH
values.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in January 1988;
the evaluation was completed in 1992. The
Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/R-93/515), Emerging Technology
Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/515), and Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/008) are
available from EPA.
During the SITE evaluation, synthetic solutions
containing cadmium, copper, or lead at
concentrations of 0.5 part per million (ppm) were
treated in packed columns using 2-minute
retention times. After approximately 5,000 bed
volumes were treated, effluent concentrations
were about 0.025 ppm for each metal, or a 95
percent removal efficiency. The tests were
stopped, although the metals were still being
removed. In other experiments, the media were
used to adsorb copper from wastewater
containing about 7,000 milligrams per liter
(mg/L) copper.
The first batch of regenerant solutions contained
cadmium and lead at concentrations of about
500 ppm. With initial concentrations of 0.5 ppm,
this represents a concentration factor of about
1,000 to 1. Data for the copper removal test
have not been analyzed. At a flow rate yielding
a 2-minute retention time, the test would have
taken about 7 days of continuous flow operation
to treat 5,000 bed volumes. Regeneration took
about 2 hours.
The system has also been tested for treatment of
rinse waters from a copper-etching process at a
printed circuit board shop. The coated sand was
effective in removing mixtures of soluble,
complexed, and particulate copper, as well as
zinc and lead, from these waters. When two
columns were used in series, the treatment
system was able to handle fluctuations hi influent
copper concentration from less than 10 mg/L up
to several hundred mg/L. .
Groundwater from Western Processing, a
Superfund site near Seattle, Washington, was
treated to remove both soluble and particulate
zinc.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7665
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Mark Benjamin
University of Washington
Department of Civil Engineering
P.O. Box 352700
Seattle, WA 98195-2700
206-543-7645
Fax: 206-685-9185
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 327
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UV TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(formerly ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, INC.)
(PhotoCAT™ Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PhotoCAT™ process photochemically
oxidizes organic compounds in wastewater using
hydrogen peroxide, a chemical oxidant,
ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and a photocatalyst.
The photochemical reaction has the potential to
reduce high concentrations (200,000 or more
parts per million [ppm]) of organics in water to
nondetectable levels. The energy from UV
radiation is predominantly absorbed by the
organic compound and the oxidant, making both
species reactive. The process can be used as a
final treatment step to reduce organic
contamination in industrial wastewater and
groundwater to acceptable discharge limits.
The existing bench-scale system treats solutions
containing up to several thousand ppm of total
organic carbon at a rate of 3 gallons per minute.
The bench-scale system consists of a
photochemical reactor, where oxidation occurs,
and associated tanks, pumps, and controls. The
UV lamps are high-intensity lamps that penetrate
the wastewater more effectively. The portable,
skid-mounted system's design depends on the
chemical composition of the wastewater or
groundwater being treated.
Typically, the contaminated wastewater is
pumped through a filter unit to remove suspended
particles. Next, the filtrate is mixed with
stoichiometric quantities of hydrogen peroxide.
Finally, this mixture is fed to the photochemical
reactor and irradiated. The overall reaction is as
follows:
[2a + 0.5(b - 1)]H2O2 _-
aCO2 + [2a + (b - 1)]H2O
HX
where CaH,,X represents a halogenated
contaminant in the aqueous phase. Reaction
products are carbon dioxide, water, and the
appropriate halogen acid. Reaction kinetics
depend on (1) contaminant concentration,
(2) peroxide concentration, (3) irradiation dose,
and (4) radiation spectral frequency.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The PhotoCAT™ process treats industrial
wastewater and groundwater containing organics
at concentrations up to several thousand ppm.
Destruction efficiencies greater than two orders
of magnitude have been obtained for
chlorobenzene, chlorophenol, and phenol, with
low to moderate dose rates and initial
concentrations of 200 ppm. Destruction
efficiencies of three orders of magnitude have
been demonstrated on simulated industrial waste
streams representative of textile dyeing
operations, with higher dose rates and an initial
concentration of 200 ppm.
STATUS:
Studies of the PhotoCAT™ process under the
SITE Emerging Technology Program are
complete, and the technology has been invited to
participate in the SITE Demonstration Program.
The Emerging Technology Report
(EPA/540/SR-92/080), Emerging Technology
Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/004), and Emerging
Technology Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/080) are
available from EPA.
Work involving the on-line production of
oxidants and the effectiveness of the
photocatalytic substrate is underway under
funding from EPA Small Business Industry
Research Phase II and Phase I awards.
Page 328
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Representative results from recent trials using the
PhotoCAT™ process are summarized in the table
below. Results are shown as the electric energy
dose per gram-mole of initial contaminant to
cause one decade of contaminant destruction.
Dose (kW-hr/
Contaminant* gmole/decade)"
Chlorobenzene 7
Trichloroethene 5
Trichloroethane [500] 1
Tetrachloroethene 6
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 33
1,1,1-Trichloroethene [1,000] 7
Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, & xylene 5
Reactive Black Dye 5 26
Direct Yellow Dye 106 103
Direct Red Dye 83 31
Reactive Blue Dye 19 50
1-Chloronaphthalene [15] 27
Ethylene, diamine, & triacetic acid 17
Methanol 3
Textile waste (sulfiir & indigo dyes) [740] 11
Textile waste (fiber reactive dyes) [270] 7
Chemical waste (formaldehyde & thiourea) [8,200] 1
All are 100 parts per million,
except as noted
kilowatt-hour per gram-mole per decade
The technology has been improved since the EPA
reports were published. These improvements
include (1) using the UV lamp as the energy
source; (2) improving the photochemical reactor
design; (3) improving the lamp design, including
lamp intensity and spectral characteristics; and
(4) fixing the catalyst.
A cost-competitive PhotoCAT™ system can be
designed and built to treat industrial wastewater
with contaminant levels of 10 to 10,000 ppm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
James Porter or John Roll
UV Technologies, Inc.
P.O. Box 410185 or 410186
East Cambridge, MA 02141-0002
617-666-5500
Fax: 617-666-5802
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 329
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
WESTERN PRODUCT RECOVERY GROUP, INC.
(Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and Adsorption Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The coordinate, chemical bonding, and
adsorption (CCBA) process converts heavy
metals hi soils, sediments, and sludges to
nonleaching silicates. The process can also
oxidize organics hi the waste stream and
incorporate the ash into the ceramic pellet matrix
(see figure below). The solid residual
consistency varies from a soil and sand density
and size distribution to a controlled size
distribution ceramic aggregate form. The residue
can be placed back in its original location or used
as a substitute for conventional aggregate. The
process uses clays with specific cation exchange
capacity as sites for physical and chemical
bonding of heavy metals to the clay.
The process is designed for continuous flow.
The input sludge and soil stream are carefully
ratioed with specific clays and then mixed in a
high-intensity mechanical mixer. The mixture is
then densified and formed into green or unfired
pellets of a desired size. The green pellets are
then direct-fired hi a rotary kiln for
approximately 30 minutes. The pellet
temperature slowly rises to 2,000°F, converting
the fired pellet to the ceramic state. Organics on
the pellet's surface are oxidized, and organics
inside the pellet are pyrolyzed as the temperature
rises. As the pellets reach 2,000°F, the available
silica sites in the clay chemically react with the
heavy metals hi the soil and sludge to form the
final metal silicate product.
The process residue is an inert ceramic product,
free of organics, with metal silicates providing a
molecular bonding structure that precludes
leaching. The kiln off-gas is processed in an
afterburner and wet scrub system before it is
released into the atmosphere. Excess scrub
solution is recycled to the front-end mixing
process.
To Stack
Recycled Scrub
Solution
Clay
Soils/
Sludges/
Sediments
Residual
Product
Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and Adsorption (CCBA) Process
Page 33O
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The CCBA process has been demonstrated
commercially on metal hydroxide sludges at a
throughput of 70 wet tons per month, based on
an 8-hour day, for a 25 percent solid feed. This
process can treat wastewater sludges, sediments,
and soils contaminated with most mixed organic
and heavy metal wastes.
STATUS:
The CCBA process was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in January 1991.
Under this program, the CCBA technology has
been modified to include soils contaminated with
both heavy metals and most organics. The SITE
studies were completed at a pilot facility with a
capacity of 10 pounds per hour. Proof tests
using contaminated soil have been completed.
The Emerging Technology Report, Emerging
Technology Summary, and Emerging
Technology Bulletin will be available from EPA
in early 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Vince Gallardo
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7176
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Donald Kelly
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 79728
Houston, TX 77279
713-533-9321
Fax: 713-533-9434
Bert Elkins
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc.
10626 Cerveza Drive
Escondido, CA 92026
619-749-8856
Fax: 619-749-8856
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 331
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ROY F. WESTON, INC.
(Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Ambersorb® 563 adsorbent is a regenerable
adsorbent that treats groundwater contaminated
with hazardous organics (see figure below).
Ambersorb 563 adsorbent has 5 to 10 times the
capacity of granular activated carbon (GAC) for
low concentrations of volatile organic compounds
(VOC).
Current GAC adsorption techniques require
either disposal or thermal regeneration of the
spent carbon. In these cases, the GAC must be
removed from the site and shipped as a
hazardous material to the disposal or regeneration
facility.
Ambersorb 563 adsorbent has unique properties
that provide the following benefits:
• Ambersorb 563 adsorbent can be
regenerated on site using steam, thus
eliminating the liability and cost of off-
site regeneration or disposal associated
with GAC treatment. Condensed
contaminants are recovered through
phase separation.
• Because Ambersorb 563 adsorbent has a
much higher capacity than GAC for
volatile organics (at low concentrations),
the process can operate for significantly
longer service cycle times before
regeneration is required.
STEAM SUPPLY
REGENERATION
CYCLE)
TREATED WATER
i L
CONDENSER
CONCENTRATED
ORGANIC PHASE
CONTAMINATED
OROUNDWATER
Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent
Page 332
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
• Ambersorb 563 adsorbent can operate at
higher flow rate loadings than GAC,
which translates into a smaller, more
compact system.
• Ambersorb 563 adsorbents .are hard,
nondusting, spherical beads with
excellent physical integrity, eliminating
handling problems and attrition losses
typically associated with GAC.
• Ambersorb 563 adsorbent is not prone to
bacterial fouling.
• Ambersorb 563 adsorbent has extremely
low ash levels.
In addition, the Ambersorb 563 carbonaceous
adsorbent-based remediation process can
eliminate the need to dispose of by-products.
Organics can be recovered in a form potentially
suitable for immediate reuse. For example,
removed organics could be burned for energy in
a power plant.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Ambersorb 563 adsorbent is applicable to any
water stream containing contaminants that can be
treated with GAC, such as 1,2-dichloroethane,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, tetrachloroethene, vinyl
chloride, xylene, toluene, and other VOCs.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1993. The
Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA/54Q/F-95/500),
the Emerging Technology Summary
(EPA/540/SR-95/516), and the Emerging
Technology Report (EPA/540/R-95/516) are
available from EPA.
The Ambersorb 563 technology evaluation was
conducted at the former Pease Air Force Base in
Newington, New Hampshire. The groundwater
contained vinyl chloride, 1,1-dichloroethene, and
trichloroethene. The field study was conducted
over a 12-week period. The tests included four
service cycles and three steam regenerations.
The effluent from the Ambersorb adsorbent
system consistently met drinking water standards.
On-site steam regeneration demonstrated that the
adsorption capacity of the Ambersorb system
remained essentially unchanged following
regeneration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Turner
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7775
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
John Thoroughgood
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380-1499
610-701-3728
Fax: 610-701-5129
Deborah Plantz
Rohm and Haas Company
5000 Richmond Street
Philadelphia, PA 19137
215-537-4061
Fax: 215-537-4157
E-mail: MAHZDP@ROHMHAAS.COM
Note: Ambersorb® is a registered trademark of
Rohm and Haas Company.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 333
-------
TABLE 4
Ongoing SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
ABB Environmental
Services, Inc.,
Wakefield, MA (E06)'
Arizona State University/
Zentox Corporation,
Tempe, AZ (E06)
Atomic Energy of Canada
Limited,
Chalk River, Ontario, Canada
(E01)
Electrokinetics, Inc.,
Baton Rouge, LA (E08);
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc.,
Princeton, NJ (E07)
General Atomics, Nuclear
Remediation Technologies
Division,
San Diego, CA (E06)
Geo-Microbial
Technologies, Inc.,
Ochelata, OK (E07)
High Voltage Environmental
Applications, Inc.,
Miami, FL (E06)
Institute of Gas Technology,
Des Plaines, IL (E07)
technology
Anaerobic-Aerobic
Sequential
Bioremediation of PCE
Photocaialytic
Oxidation with Air ••
Stripping
Ultrasonic-Aided
Leachate Treatment
In Situ Bioremediation
by Electrokinetic
Injection
Reductive Thermal and
Photo-Thermal
Oxidation Processes for
Enhanced Conversion-
of Chlorocarbons
Acoustic Barrier
Particulate Separator
Metals Release and
Removal from Wastes
High-Energy Electron
Beam Irradiation
Supercritical
Extraction/Liquid
Phase Oxidation
Teahnolpgy Contact
Willard Murray
617-245-6606
Gregory Raupp
602-965-2828
Craig Turchi
352-867-7482
Shiv Vijayan
Les Moschuk
613-584-3311
ext. 3220/6057
ElifAcar
504-753-8004
Moshe Lavid
609-799-7970
Robert Goforth
619455-4057
619455-2984
Donald Hitzman
918-535-2281
William Cooper
305-593-5330
Anil Goyal
847-768-0605
Michael Mensinger
847-768-0602
EPA Project
Manager
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Norma Lewis
513-569-7665
Joan Mattox
513-569-7624
Randy Parker
513-569-7271
Michelle Simon
513-569-7469
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Jack Hubbard
513-569-7507
Mary Stinson
908-321-6683
Brunilda Davila
513-569-7849
Applicable
Waste Media
Groundwater
Air Streams
Acid Mine
Drainage
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment
Air Streams
Gas Streams
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge
Soil, Sediment,
Sludge,
Ground water
Soil, Sludge
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals,
Radionuclides
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Metal and Radionuglide
Particles
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
PCE, TCE, DCE, Vinyl
Chloride
VOCs
Not Applicable
Nonspecific Organics
Volatile Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons
Nonspecific Organic
Particles
Nonspecific Organics
Pesticides, Insecticides,
Petroleum Residues, PCBs
PAHs, PCBs, Other
Organics
8
Solicitation number
-------
TABLE 4 (Continued)
Ongoing SITE Emerging Technology Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
IT Corporation,
Cincinnati, OH (E07)
KSE, Inc.,
Amherst, MA (E08)
OHM Remediation Services
Corporation,
Findlay, OH (EOS)
Phyfokinetics, Inc.,
North Logan, UT (EOS)
Pintail Systems, Inc.,
Aurora, CO (EOS)
Pulse Sciences, Inc.,
San Leandro, CA (E06)
TMA Thermo Analytical, Inc.,
Oak Ridge, TN (E07)
University of Houston,
Houston, TX (E07)
University of Wisconsin-
Madison,
Madison, WI (EOS)
Technology
Chelation/Electro-
deposition of Toxic
Metals from Soils
Adsorption-Integrated-
Reaction Process
Oxygen Microbubble In
Situ Bioremediation
PhytOremediation of
Contaminated Soils
Biomineralization of
Metals
X-Ray Treatment of
Organically
Contaminated Soils
Segmented Gate System
Concentrated Chloride
Extraction and
Recovery of Lead
Photoelectrocatalytic
Degradation and
Removal
Technology Contact
Radha Krishnan
513-782-4700
J,R. Kittreil
413-549-5506
Douglas Jerger
419-424-4932
Ari Ferro
801-750-0985
Leslie Thompson
303-367-8443
Vernon Bailey
510-632-5100
Jeffrey Brown
423-483-0683
Denni$ Clifford
713-743-4266.
Tim Newed
713-743-0751
Marc Anderson
608-262-2674
Charles Hill, Jr.
608-263-4593
EPA Project
Manager
George Moore
513-569-7991
Vince Gallardo
513-569-7176
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
Steven Rock
513-569-7149
Ronald Lewis
513-569-7856
George Moore
513-569-7991
Joan Mattox
513-569-7624
Eugene Harris
513-569-7862
Vince Gallardo
513-569-7176
Applicable
Waste Media
Soil, Sludge
Air Streams
Groundwater
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Acid .
Mine Drainage
Soil
Soil, Sludge,
Sediment, Sand
Soil
Groundwater,
Aqueous Waste
Streams
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Heavy Metals
Not Applicable
Gamma-Ray Emitting
Radionuclides
Lead
Heavy Metals
Organic
Not Applicable
VOCs
Petroleum Hydrocarbons,
VOC, SVOCs
PCP, PAHs, Chlorinated
Solvents, Insecticides,
Nitroaromatic Explosives
Not Applicable
VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Dissolved Organics
CO
01
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ABB ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.,
(Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of PCE)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (ABB-ES),
has demonstrated that sequential anaerobic-
aerobic biodegradation of tetrachloroethene
(PCE) is feasible under the proper conditions.
The anaerobic process can dechlorinate PCE
completely; however, dechlorination of the least-
chlorinated ethenes (1,2-dichloroethene [DCE]
and vinyl chloride [VC]) is the slowest step in
this process. Of the chlorinated ethenes, VC is
the most amenable to treatment by aerobic
cometabolic processes. Therefore, a two-step
process is thought to be the most efficient
treatment methodology to address highly
chlorinated solvents.
The first step in the ABB-ES technology is
anaerobic biodegradation, which rapidly
dechlorinates PCE and trichloroethene (TCE) to
produce DCE and VC. Since the anaerobic
dechlorination of DCE and VC to ethene can be
quite slow, a second, aerobic biodegradation step
is implemented that more quickly completes the
remediation process. The schematic diagram
below illustrates this technology.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes PCE, TCE, DCE, and
VC from groundwater.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1994.
ABB-ES will field-test its technology by creating
and maintaining the proper in situ conditions for
chlorinated ethene degradation in an aquifer. To
achieve this goal, ABB-ES will test methods of
carbon and mineral nutrient injection and
delivery into an aquifer contaminated with PCE
or TCE. Groundwater chemical conditions will
be monitored within and downgradient of the
CONTAMINANT
SOURCE
SATURATED J
ZONE \
IMPERMEABLE
LAYER
GROUNDWATER FLOW
Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of PCE
Page 336
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December J996
Ongoing Project
anaerobic treatment zone to gauge the efficiency
of the anaerobic process. If volatile organic
compound analyses show that dechlorination of
less-chlorinated ethenes is very slow under
anaerobic conditions, oxygen and methane will
be added to the groundwater to stimulate aerobic
degradation by indigenous methanotrophic
bacteria.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther Kong Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Willard Murray
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
Corporate Place 128
107 AudubonRoad
Wakefield,MA 01880
617-245-6606
Fax: 617-246-5060
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 337
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY/
ZENTOX CORPORATION
(Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air Stripping)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOC),
such as trichloroethene (TCE) and
perchloroethene (PCE), are readily removed
from groundwater and soil using established
methods such as air stripping and vapor
extraction. However, this solution produces a
VOC-contaminated air stream that requires
further treatment.
In gas-solid photocatalytic oxidation (PCO), the
VOC-laden air stream is brought hi contact with
a titania catalyst and near-ultraviolet (UV) light.
The UV light activates the catalyst, producing
oxidizing radicals. The VOCs are completely
destroyed to carbon dioxide and water in an
oxidation reaction that occurs at or near room
temperature. The treatment of chlorinated
organics also produces hydrochloric acid.
Arizona State University (ASU) is investigating
an integrated pilot-scale pump-and-treat system in
which chlorinated VOCs are transferred to an air
stream using air stripping. A PCO reactor
installed downstream from the air stripping unit
treats the contaminated air stream. The figure
below illustrates this system. The PCO unit
incorporates a flow-through photocatalytic
reactor for VOC destruction and a caustic
absorber bed for removal of hydrochloric acid.
The acid is neutralized to sodium chloride hi the
absorber bed.
PCO offers the following advantages over
conventional treatment technologies:
• The photocatalytic process allows VOCs
to be oxidized at or near room
temperature.
• Low-temperature operation allows the
use of plastic piping and construction,
reducing costs and minimizing acid
corrosion problems.
• Chemical additives are not required.
VOC-Laden Air
VOC-Contamlnated
Groundwater
Clean Air
Stripped
Water Out
Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air Stripping
Page 338
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
• The titania catalyst and fluorescent UV
lamps are inexpensive and commercially
available (modified catalyst formulations
are available for enhanced performance).
• A variety of halogenated and
nonhalogenated organic compounds can
be completely oxidized to innocuous or
easily neutralized products, such as
carbon dioxide and hydrochloric acid.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can treat VOC-contaminated
streams produced by air stripping contaminated
groundwater or soil vapor extraction of
contaminated soil. The technology is appropriate
for dilute VOC concentrations (such as 500 parts
per million by volume or less) and low to
moderate flow rates. Laboratory data indicate
that the PCO technology can also be adapted to
industrial facilities that emit dilute VOC-
contaminated air streams. Candidates include
chemical process plants, dry cleaners, painting
operations, solvent cleaning operations, and
wastewater and hazardous waste treatment
facilities. Air hi closed environments could also
be purified by integrating PCO units with
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems.
STATUS:
The PCO technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program hi 1993. Under
the program, ASU has conducted bench-scale
tests to evaluate the integration of a PCO unit
downstream of an existing air stripping unit.
Results of the bench-scale testing have provided
design data for a pilot-scale test at a Phoenix,
Arizona Superfund site that is contaminated with
chlorinated VOCs. ASU's previous laboratory
studies indicate rapid destruction to nondetectable
levels (98 to 99 percent removal) of various
concentrations of TCE and other chlorinated
ethenes in humid air streams.
In 1995, Zentox Corporation (Zentox) fielded a
prototype PCO system for the treatment of TCE
hi ah". Building on the data gained from that
system, Zentox is fabricating a second generation
system for use at the Phoenix site. Following
tests at the Phoenix site, this 50- to 100-cubic-
feet-per-minute pilot plant unit will be available
for trials at other locations.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7665
Fax: 513-569-7787
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Gregory Raupp
Department of Chemical, Biological
and Materials Engineering
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-6006
602-965-2828
Fax: 602-965-0037
E-mail: Raupp@asu.edu
Craig Turchi
Zentox Corporation
2140 NE 36th Avenue
Ocala, FL 34470
352-867-7482
Fax: 352-867-1320
E-mail: cturchi@mercury.net
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 339
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED
(Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The ultrasonic-aided leachate treatment process
involves enhanced chemical treatment of acidic
soil leachate solutions. These solutions, also
known as acid mine drainage, are caused by the
oxidation and dissolution of sulfide-bearing
wastes, which produces sulfuric acid. The
resulting acidic water leaches metal contaminants
from the exposed waste rock and mine tailings,
creating large volumes of toxic acidic leachates.
The ultrasonic-aided leachate treatment process
uses an ultrasonic field to improve contaminant
removal through precipitation, coprecipitation,
oxidation, ion scavenging, and sorption (see
figure below). These processes are followed by
solid-liquid separation by filtration equipment
using a filter press and a cross-flow microfilter
connected in series. The time required for
treatment depends on (1) the nature of acidic
waste to be treated, (2) the treated water quality
with respect to contaminant concentration, and
(3) the rate at which the physical and chemical
processes occur. The treatable leachate volume
is scalable.
The major difference between this technology
and conventional processes is the use of
ultrasonic mixing instead of mechanical agitation
in large tanks. Research indicates that an
ultrasonic field significantly increases both the
conversion rate of dissolved contaminants to
precipitates and the rate of oxidation and ion
exchange. Earlier studies by Atomic Energy of
Canada Limited (AECL) revealed that the time
required to precipitate heavy metals from
aqueous solutions decreased by an order of
magnitude in the presence of an ultrasonic field.
The ultrasonic-aided leachate treatment process is
compact, portable, and energy-efficient. Safety
and process controls are built in as necessary for
handling mixed radioactive solutions. This
process also generates minimal fugitive emissions
and produces a treated effluent that meets
Chemical Reagents Addition
pH Chemical
QxMant
Precipitant
Acidic Soil Loachate Feed
Percent Dissolved Solids:
5,000 to 10.000 ppm
Primary Contaminants:
(Heavy Metals & Radionuclides)
1.000 to 2,000 ppm
To Discharge
To Disposal
Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment
for Acidic Soil Leachate Solutions
Page 340
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
applicable discharge limits. The process may be
able to treat waste containing small amounts of
dissolved or suspended organics.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ultrasonic-aided leachate treatment process
treats acid mine drainage contaminated with
heavy metals and.radionuclides. The process can
also be combined with soil remediation
technologies.
STATUS:
The ultrasonic-aided leachate treatment process
was accepted into the SITE Emerging Technology
Program in 1993. Under this program, AECL is
developing and testing a pilot-scale unit to treat
acidic soil leachate solutions containing low
levels of metals and radionuclides.
The quality assurance and test plan was approved
in October 1994. Laboratory-scale testing using
acidic leachates from the Berkeley Pit in Butte,
Montana and from Stanleigh Mines in Elliot
Lake, Ontario, Canada is complete. The tests
were designed to find optimal single and
multistage treatment regimes to remove from the
leachates a variety of dissolved species (iron,
aluminum, manganese, magnesium, copper, zinc,
uranium, radium, and sulfate), either as
contaminants or as reusable resources.
Given optimum process chemistry, low energy
(less than 5 kilojoules per liter) and low frequency
(20 kilohertz) ultrasonic cavitation fields were
sufficient to remove the dissolved species to
levels meeting discharge requirements.
The energy input corresponds to a chemical
conditioning time of a few seconds to tens of
seconds. The underlying principles examined
include lime and limestone precipitation, copper
cementation, iron, and uranium oxidation, ion
sorption, and ion scavenging.
A Phase 1 interim report summarizing the
laboratory-scale results was issued in August
1995. A revised Phase 1 report was issued in
February 1996. Testing of the pilot-scale system
is scheduled to be complete in December 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Joan Mattox
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7624
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Shiv Vijayan or Les Moschuk
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Waste Technology
Chalk River Laboratories
Chalk River, Ontario, Canada KOJ 1JO
613-584-3311, ext. 3220/6057
Fax: 613-584-9182
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 341
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
ELECTROKINETICS, INC.
(In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
In situ bioremediation is the process of introducing
process nutrients into biologically active zones
(BAZ). These nutrients are usually introduced by
pumping recirculated groundwater through the
BAZ, relying on hydraulic gradients or the
permeability of the BAZ. However,
heterogeneities in aquifers often hinder the
introduction of the nutrients. For example, areas
with higher permeability result in preferential flow
paths, leading to incomplete biological treatment.
The inability to uniformly introduce nutrients and
other additives, such as surfactants and
cometabolites, has hindered the successful
implementation of in situ bioremediation.
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetics), is
developing an electrokinetic remediation
technology that stimulates and sustains in situ
bioremediation for treatment of organics and heavy
metals. The technology involves applying to soil
or groundwater a low-level direct current (DC)
electrical potential difference or an electrical
current using electrodes placed in an open or
closed flow arrangement. Groundwater or an
externally supplied processing fluid is used as the
conductive medium. The low-level DC causes
physicochemical and hydrological changes in both
the waste and the conductive medium, thereby
enabling uniform transport of process additives and
nutrients into the BAZ, as shown in the figure
below.
The Electrokinetics technology is designed to
overcome the problems associated with aquifer
heterogeneities, unlike conventional in situ
injection by hydraulic techniques. The rate of
nutrient and additive transport under electrical
gradients is at least one order of magnitude greater
than that achieved under chemical gradients.
Process Control System
Processing/
Additives
Biotreated aquifer
| AQUITARD"
Schematic Diagram of In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection
Page 342
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Electrokinetic injection can be used for any waste
that can be treated by bioremediation. The
technique allows in situ treatment of contaminated
subsurface deposits, sediments, and sludges. The
technology can be engineered to remove inorganics
through electromigration and electroosmosis, while
process additives and nutrients are added to the
processing fluids to enhance bioremediation of
organics.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1995. Pilot-
scale studies under the Emerging Technology
Program will be used to develop operating
parameters and to demonstrate the efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of the technology during a full-
scale application. The SITE evaluation may take
place in 1997 at a military base or a U.S.
Department of Energy site.
Electrokinetics is studying enhancement techniques
to remove, or prevent the formation of,
precipitates near the cathode during removal of
inorganics. A 1993 study suggested that adding
acetic acid may depolarize the cathode reaction,
preventing precipitate formation. This study was
conducted by Electrokinetics and Argonne
National Laboratory under a U.S. Department of
Defense Small Business Innovative Research grant.
The study assessed nutrient movement through
clean soils of different hydraulic conductivities;
samples for the study were taken from Idaho
National Engineering Laboratory and the Savannah
River Site. Currently, bench- and pilot-scale tests
are being conducted on soils containing
trichloroethene and hydrocarbons of interest.
Electrokinetics has remediated several sites in
conjunction with its proprietary electrode system
(CADEX™ electrodes). Under a Small Business
Innovative Research grant from the U.S.
Waterways Experiment Station, Electrokinetics has
tested its technology on soils from Fort Polk in
Louisiana, and the Naval Depot in Hastings,
Nebraska. Current activities include movement of
biological additives through mixed soil horizons
and directing these additives to sources of organic
compounds for electrokinetically enhanced
degradation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Randy Parker
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7271
Fax: 513-569-7571
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Elif Acar
Electrokinetics, Inc.
11552 Cedar Park Avenue
Baton Rouge, LA 70809
504-753-8004
Fax: 504-753-0028
E-mail: ekinc@pipeline.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 343
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
M.L. ENERGIA, INC.
(Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Two innovative processes, Reductive Thermal
Oxidation (RTO) and Reductive Photo-Thermal
Oxidation (RFTO), are designed to safely and
cost-effectively convert chlorinated hydrocarbons
(C1HC) into environmentally benign and useful
materials in the presence of a reducing
atmosphere. Both processes have evolved from
M.L. Energia, Inc.'s, Reductive Photo-
Dechlorination (RPD) technology, which does
not permit the presence of air (oxygen).
The RTO/RPTO processes treat air streams laden
with ClHCs. RTO converts ClHCs at moderate
temperatures by cleaving carbon-chlorine bonds
in the absence of ultraviolet light. RPTO operates
under similar conditions but in the presence of
ultraviolet light. Subsequent reactions between
ensuing radicals and the reducing gas results in
chain-propagation reactions. The presence of air
(oxygen) during the conversion process
accelerates the overall reaction rate without
significant oxidation. The final products are
useful hydrocarbons (HC) and environmentally
Reducing Gas
safe materials including hydrogen chloride,
carbon dioxide, and water.
The RTO/RPTO processes are shown in the
figure below. The process consists of six main
units: (1) input/mixer; (2) photo-thermal
chamber; (3) scrubber; (4) separator;
(5) storage/sale; and (6) conventional catalytic
oxidation unit. Air laden with ClHCs is mixed
with reducing gas and passed into a photo-
thermal chamber, which is unique to the
RTO/RPTO technology. In Ms chamber, the
mixture is heated to moderate temperatures to
sustain the radical chain reactions. Depending on
the physical and chemical characteristics of the
particular ClHCs treated, conversion can take
place hi two ways: the RTO process is purely
thermal, and the RPTO process is photo-thermal.
After suitable residence time, HC1 is removed by
passing the stream through an aqueous scrubber.
The stream can then be treated hi an optional
second storage, or separated and sent to storage.
Excess reducing gas is recycled, and residual
(sub parts per million) ClHCs, HCs, and CO are
treated by catalytic oxidation. Volatile
Exhaust
Exhaust
Reducing Gas
Make-up
Reductive Thermal Oxidation (RTO)
and Photo-Thermal Oxidation (RPTO) Processes
Page 344
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
hydrocarbons can also be recycled as an energy
source for process heating, if partial oxidation at
the photo-thermal chamber does not generate
enough heat.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology is designed to remove volatile
hydrocarbons from air streams. Field
applications include direct treatment of air
streams contaminated with chlorocarbons, wastes
discharged from soil vapor extraction or vented
from industrial hoods and stacks, and those
adsorbed on granular activated carbon. M.L.
ENERGIA, Inc., claims that the process can also
be applicable for in situ treatment of sites
containing contaminated surface waters and
groundwaters. The process has not yet been
tested on these sites.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1994.
During the first year, laboratory-scale tests were
conducted on two saturated ClHCs
(dichloromethane and trichloroethane) and on
two representatives of unsaturated CIHGs (1,2-
dichloroethene and trichloroethene). The RTO/
RPTO processes have demonstrated 99 percent or
more conversion/dechlorination with high
selectivity towards saleable hydrocarbon products
(methane and ethane). During the second year,
a field demonstration will be conducted with a
pilot-scale prototype unit, followed by
performance evaluation and cost analysis.
These processes will be available for
commercialization after the completion of the
field demonstration.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Michelle Simon
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7469
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Moshe Lavid
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc.
P.O. Box 470
Princeton, NJ 08542-470
609-799-7970
Fax: 609-799-0312
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 345
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
GENERAL ATOMICS,
NUCLEAR REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGIES DIVISION
(Acoustic Barrier Particulate Separator)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The acoustic barrier particulate separator
separates particulates in a high temperature gas
flow. The separator produces an acoustic
waveform directed against the gas flow, causing
particulates to move opposite the flow. The
particulates drift to the wall of the separator,
where they aggregate with other particulates and
precipitate into a collection hopper. The acoustic
barrier particulate separator differs from other
separators by combining both high efficiency and
high temperature capabilities.
The figure below presents a conceptual design.
High temperature inlet gas flows through a
muffler chamber and an agglomeration segment
before entering the separation chamber. In the
separation chamber, particulates stagnate due to
the acoustic force and drift to the chamber wall,
where they collect as a dust cake that falls into a
collection hopper. The solids are transported
from the collection hopper by a screw-type
conveyor against a clean purge gas counterflow.
The purge gas cools the solids and guards against
contamination of particulates by inlet-gas
volatiles in the process stream.
SCRUBBER
OUTLET
GAS "
::=?-
COOLING AND
SAMPLING
LOCATION
The gas flows past the acoustic source and leaves
the separation chamber through an exit port. The
gas then passes through another muffler chamber
and flows through sections where it is cooled and
any remaining gas-borne particulate samples are
collected. Finally, the gas is further scrubbed or
filtered as necessary before it is discharged.
The separator can remove the entire range of
particle sizes; it has a removal efficiency of
greater than 90 percent for submicron particles
and an overall removal efficiency of greater than
99 percent. Due to the large diameter of the
separator, the system is not prone to fouling.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology can treat off-gas streams from
thermal desorption, pyrolysis, and incineration of
soil, sediment, sludges, other solid wastes, and
liquid wastes. The acoustic barrier particulate
separator is a high-temperature, high-throughput
process with a high removal efficiency for fine
dust and fly ash. It is particularly suited for
thermal processes where high temperatures must
be maintained to prevent condensation onto
particulates. Applications include removal of
INLET
GAS ~
AGGLOMERATION
SEGMENT
SEPARATION
CHAMBER
MUFFLER
^"s
PURGE
GAS
SOLIDS
Acoustic Barrier Particulate Separator
Page 346
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Ongoing Project
gas-borne solids during thermal treatment of
semivolatile organics, such as polychlorinated
biphenyls, and gas-phase separation of
radioactive particles from condensible hazardous
materials.
STATUS:
The acoustic barrier particulate separator was
accepted into the SITE Emerging Technology
Program in 1993. The principal objective of this
project will be to design, construct, and test a
pilot-scale acoustic barrier particulate separator
that is suitable for parallel arrangement into
larger systems. The separator will be designed
for a flow of 300 cubic feet per minute and will
be tested using a simulated flue gas composed of
heated gas and injected dust.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Robert Goforth
General Atomics
Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division
MS 2/633
P.O. Box 85608
San Diego, CA 92186-9784
619-455-4057 or 619-455-2984
Fax: 619-455-3233
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 347
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
GEO-MICROBIAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC,
(Metals Release and Removal from Wastes)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc., has developed
an anaerobic biotreatment technology to release
metals from liquefaction catalyst wastes derived
from spent coal that are also contaminated with
complex organic compounds. This anaerobic
metals release (AMR) technology may be adapted
to treat other wastes with metals contamination.
Current biohydrometallurgy systems use aerobic
acidophilic bacteria, which oxidize mineral
sulfldes while solubilizing metals and forming
large amounts of acid. This aerobic process can
result in acidic drainage from natural sources of
metal sulfldes. For example, acidophilic bacteria
convert the pyrite and iron-containing minerals in
coal into oxidized iron and sulfuric acid. The acid
then further solubilizes the pyrite and other
sulfide minerals. The result is contamination of
streams and lakes due to acidification and an
increase in soluble heavy metals.
The AMR technology operates anaerobically and
at a near-neutral pH, employing anaerobic
Thiobacillus cultures in consortium with
heterotrophic denitrifying cultures. The diversity
of the inhabiting denitrifers allows multiple
carbon sources, including some organic
pollutants, to be used and treated.
The anaerobic environment is adjusted by
introducing low levels of nitrate salts that function
as an alternate electron acceptor source,
selectively enhancing the inherent denitrifying
microflora.
This process increases the denitrifying population
that releases the metals. The soils containing the
metals are then flooded with the dilute nitrate
solutions. These improved anaerobic leaching
solutions permeate the soils, allowing the metals
to be solubilized into the leachate by the
microbial consortium. The nitrate concentration
is adjusted so that the effluent is free of nitrate;
the nitrate concentration is monitored so that the
process operation can be closely controlled. The
solubilized metals in the leachate are recaptured
by established processes, and the metal-free
effluent is recycled within the process. The
nitrate-based ecology has the added advantage of
decreasing levels of sulfate-reducing bacteria and
sulfide generation.
The versatility and low operating constraints of
the AMR technology offer multiple process
options. The technology can be adapted for in
situ flooding or modified to flood a waste pile in
a heap-leaching operation. The elimination of
any aeration requirement allows the process to be
easily designed and considered for bioslurry
applications. Thus, the technology offers a
greater range of treatment applications for
environmental waste situations that were
considered difficult to treat.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The AMR technology targets toxic metal-
contaminated soils, sludges, and sediments,
which can also be contaminated with other
wastes, including hydrocarbons and organic
pollutants. While metals are the primary
pollutant treated, the biological system is also
designed to degrade and remove associated
organic contaminants.
Page 348
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
December 1996
Ongoing Project
STATUS: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
This technology was accepted into the SITE EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Emerging Technology Program in July 1994. JackHubbard
Studies under the Emerging Technology Program U.S. EPA
will evaluate how effectively the AMR National Risk Management Research
technology removes metals from soil. Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7507
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Donald Hitzman
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc.
East Main Street
P.O. Box 132
Ochelata, OK 74051
918-535-2281
Fax: 918-535-2564
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 349
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
fflGH VOLTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATIONS, INC.
(High-Energy Electron Beam Irradiation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The high-energy electron beam irradiation
technology is a low-temperature method for
destroying complex mixtures of hazardous
organic chemicals in hazardous wastes. These
wastes include slurried soils, river or harbor
sediments, and sludges. The technology can also
treat contaminated soils and groundwater.
The figure below illustrates the mobile electron
beam treatment system. The system consists of
a computer-automated, portable electron beam
accelerator and a delivery system. The 500-
kilovolt electron accelerator produces a
continuously variable beam current from 0 to 40
milliamperes. At full power, the system is rated
at 20 kilowatts. The waste feed rate and beam
current can be varied to obtain doses of up to
2,000 kilorads in a one-pass, flow-through mode.
The system is trailer-mounted and is completely
self-contained, including a 100-kilowatt generator
for remote locations or line connectors where
power is available. The system requires only a
mixing tank to slurry the treatable solids. The
system also includes all necessary safety checks.
The computerized control system continuously
monitors the waste feed rate, absorbed dose,
accelerator potential, beam current, and all safety
shutdown features. The feed rate is monitored
with a calibrated flow valve. The absorbed dose
is estimated based on the difference in the
temperature of the waste stream before and after
irradiation. The system is equipped with
monitoring devices that measure the waste stream
temperature before and after irradiation. Both
the accelerating potential and the beam current
are obtained directly from the transformer.
PUMPING SYSTEM ELECTRON ACCELERATOR
CONTROL ROOM
OFFICE/LAB
^ f"
<
k
L±
1
1
1
i
1
/•
/
/
^^^^s
^s
r
c
1
i
^^™ ^^^^^^^^™
=¥=;
^\
\
\
F
I
1
i
i
— 1
i
HVAC
UNIT
I
VJ
}
CO
^
r~
^
b
a
o
1
•v
1
AIR D
j
i^\*7
KT/iiE
T^Szfr \
Is •VK'
K
P
,
^
O
iT
•V s
W
\
i
>
>
f
V
<
f
N
r-
\
CM'
y 1
f
\
^™
/ /
— ff
^Hl
1.
AIR DUCT
LANDING
LEGS
^ 110 3/'
^
t
| [
| 3D"
Kr->
'" ^
HVAl
UNIT
I
30"|
*? *^\
<. >
Mobile Electron Beam Treatment System
Page 350
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
Except for slurrying, this technology does not
require pretreatment of wastes.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology treats a variety of organic
compounds, including wood-treating chemicals,
pesticides, insecticides, petroleum residues, and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in slurried soils,
sediments, and sludges.
STATUS:
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc.
(HVEA), was accepted into the SITE Emerging,
Technology Program in 1993. Under this
program, HVEA will demonstrate its mobile pilot
plant on soils, sediments, or sludges at various
hazardous waste sites. Candidate sites are being
identified. On-site studies will last up to 2
months.
Initial studies by HVEA have shown that electron
beam irradiation effectively removes 2,4,6-
trinitrotoluene from soil slurries.
As part of the Emerging Technology Program,
HVEA has identified 350 tons of soil
contaminated with an average Aroclor 1260
concentration of approximately 1,000 milligrams
per kilogram. A small 1-ton feasibility study
occurred hi August 1995. After results are
available from the 1-ton study, HVEA plans to
make its mobile unit available for full-scale
remediations.
In a recent bench-scale study, a multisource
hazardous waste leachate containing 1 percent
dense nonaqueous phase liquid was successfully
treated. In another bench-scale study, a leachate
containing a light nonaqueous phase liquid
contaminated with PCBs was treated to F039
standards.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Mary Stinson
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
MS-104, Building 10
2890 Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
908-321-6683
Fax: 908-321-6640
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
William Cooper
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc.
9562 Doral Boulevard
Miami, FL 33178
305-593-5330
Fax: 305-593-0071
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 351
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
INSTITUTE OF GAS TECHNOLOGY
(Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Institute of Gas Technology's (IGT)
Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation
(SELPhOx) process (see figure below) removes
organic contaminants from soils and sludges and
destroys them. SELPhOx combines two
processing steps: (1) supercritical extraction
(SCE) of organic contaminants in liquids, and (2)
wet air oxidation (WAO) destruction of the
contaminants. The two-step process, linked by a
contaminant collection stage, offers great
flexibility for removing and destroying both high
and low concentrations of organic contaminants.
Combining SCE and WAO in a single two-step
process allows development of a highly efficient
and economical process for remediating
contaminated soils. Supercritical extraction with
carbon dioxide (COj) removes organic
contaminants from the soil and transfers them to
EXTRACTION
an aqueous phase while leaving much of the
original soil organic matrix in place. The
contaminants are then collected on activated
carbon in a contaminant collection vessel. The
activated carbon with sorbed contaminants is then
transported in an aqueous stream to a WAO
reactor for destruction. Concentrating the
organic contaminants on activated carbon hi
water provides a suitable matrix for the WAO
feed stream and improves process economics by
decreasing WAO reactor size. The activated
carbon is regenerated hi the WAO reactor with
minimal carbon loss and can be recycled to the
contaminant collection vessel.
The SELPhOx process requires only water, air,
makeup activated carbon, and the extractant
(COj). Primary treatment products include
cleaned soil, water, nitrogen (from the air fed to
the WAO step), and CO2. Organic sulfur,
nitrogen, and chloride compounds that may be
WET AIR OXIDATION
CONTAMINATED
SOIL
CLEANED
SOIL
VESSEL HEATERS
Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation (SELPhOx) Process
Page 352
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Ongoing Project
present in the original soil or sludge matrix are
transformed to relatively innocuous compounds
in the product water. These compounds include
sulfuric acid and hydrogen chloride, or their
salts. The treated soil can be returned to the
original site, and the water can be safely
discharged after thermal energy recovery and
minor secondary treatment. The gas can be
depressurized by a turbo expander for energy
recovery and then vented through a filter.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SELPhOx process removes organic
contaminants from soils and sludges, including
chlorinated and nonchlorinated polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), polychlorinated
biphenyls, and other organic contaminants. The
process is targeted toward sites that are
contaminated with high levels of these organics
(hot spots).
STATUS:
The SELPhOx process was accepted into the
SITE Emerging Technology Program in July
1994. The primary objectives of the project are
to (1) evaluate SCE's contaminant removal
efficiency, (2) determine the potential for CO2
recovery and reuse, and (3) determine destruction
efficiencies of extracted contaminants hi the
WAO process. Analytical results from the
project will provide the necessary information for
the full-scale process design.
Laboratory-scale SCE tests have been completed
using soils contaminated with PAHs. Operating
conditions for the SCE stage and the activated
carbon adsorption stage have been selected. A
transportable field test unit has been constructed.
Testing of this unit with PAH-contaminated soil
is underway.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Brunilda Davila
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7849
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Anil Goyal
Institute of Gas Technology
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018-1804
847-768-0605
Fax: 847-768-0671
E-Mail: goyal@igt.org
Michael Mensinger
ENDESCO Services, Inc.
1700 South Mount Prospect Road
Des Plaines, IL 60018-1804
847-768-0602
Fax: 847-768-0516
E-mail: mensing@igt.org
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 353
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
IT CORPORATION
(Chelation/Electrodeposition of Toxic Metals from Soils)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
IT Corporation has conducted laboratory-scale
research on an innovative process that removes
heavy metals from contaminated soils and sludges
by forming a soluble chelate. The metals and the
chelating agent are then separated from the soils
and recovered.
The treatment employs two key steps (see figure
below): (1) a water-soluble chelating agent, such
as ethylenediamine tetra acetic acid, bonds with
heavy metals and forms a chelate; and (2) an
electromembrane reactor (EMR) recovers the
heavy metals from the chelate and regenerates the
chelating agent.
Soils are screened before the chelation step to
remove large particles such as wood, metal
scrap, and large rocks.
The chelate is dewatered to separate the water-
soluble chelating agent from the solid phase. The
separated chelating agent, which contains heavy
metals, is then treated in the EMR. The EMR
consists of an electrolytic cell with a cation
transfer membrane separating the cathode and
anode chambers.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The technology may be applicable to a wide
variety of metal-contaminated hazardous wastes,
including soils and sludges. Limited work has
also been conducted to determine its effectiveness
in removing cadmium from soils and sludges.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1994.
The Jack's Creek site, located near Maitland,
Pennsylvania, was selected for evaluation of the
technology. The site was operated as a precious
and nonprecious metal smelting and nonferrous
metal recycling operation from 1958 to 1977. A
portion of the property is currently operated as a
scrap yard. The lead concentration in the
contaminated soil used for the evaluation was
approximately 2 percent. Toxicity characteristic
Regenerated Chelating Agent
Contaminated Soil
Wastewater
(Solid Phase)
Simplified Process Flow Diagram of Treatment Process
Page 354
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December T996
Ongoing Project
leaching procedure (TCLP) analysis on the
contaminated soil showed lead levels of 7.7
milligrams per liter (mg/L), which is above the
regulatory limit of 5 mg/L. During the project,
IT Corporation will establish appropriate
conditions for removal of lead from the soil and
reduce TCLP concentrations of lead in the soil to
below regulatory levels.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
George Moore
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7991
Fax: 513-569-7276
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Radha Krishnan
IT Corporation
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, OH 45246-4012
513-782-4700
Fax: 513-782-4807
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 355
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
KSE, INC.
(Adsorption-Integrated-Reaction Process)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Adsorption-Integrated-Reaction (AIR-II)
process combines two unit operations, adsorption
and chemical reaction, to treat air streams
containing dilute concentrations of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) (see photograph
below).
The contaminated air stream containing dilute
concentrations of VOCs flows into a
photocatalytic reactor, where chlorinated and
nonchlorinated VOCs are destroyed. The VOCs
are trapped on the surface of a proprietary
catalytic adsorbent. This catalytic adsorbent is
continuously illuminated with ultraviolet light,
destroying the trapped, concentrated VOCs
through enhanced photocatalytic oxidation. This
system design simultaneously destroys VOCs and
continuously regenerates the catalytic adsorbent.
Only oxygen in the air is needed as a reactant.
The treated effluent air contains carbon dioxide
and water, which are carried out in the air stream
exiting the reactor. For chlorinated VOCs, the
chlorine atoms are converted to hydrogen
chloride with some chlorine gas. If needed, these
gases can be removed from the air stream with
conventional scrubbers and adsorbents.
The AIR-n process offers advantages over other
photocatalytic technologies because of the high
activity, stability, and selectivity of the
photocatalyst. The photocatalyst, which is not
primarily titanium dioxide, contains a number of
different semiconductors, which allows for rapid
and economical treatment of VOCs in air.
Previous results indicate that the photocatalyst is
highly resistant to deactivation, even after
thousands of hours of operation in the field.
The photocatalyst is particulate-based, which
allows for more freedom in reactor design and
AIR-H Process Unit
Page 356
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
more economical scale-up than reactors with a
catalyst film coated on a support medium.
Packed beds, annular reactors, and monolithic
reactors are all feasible reactor designs. Because
the catalytic adsorbent is continuously
regenerated, it does not require disposal or
removal from treatment for regeneration, as does
traditional carbon adsorption. The AIR-II
process produces no residual wastes or by-
products needing further treatment or disposal as
hazardous waste. The treatment system is self-
contained and mobile, requires a small amount of
space, and requires less energy than thermal
incineration or catalytic oxidation. In addition, it
has lower total system costs than these traditional
technologies.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The AIR-II process is designed to treat a wide
range of VOCs in air, present at low
concentrations from less than 1 part per million
(ppm) to thousands of ppm. The process can
destroy the following VOCs: chlorinated
hydrocarbons, aromatic and aliphatic
hydrocarbons, alcohols, ethers, ketones, and
aldehydes.
The AIR-II process can be integrated with
existing technologies, such as thermal desorption,
air stripping, or soil vapor extraction, to treat
additional media, including soils, sludges, and
groundwater.
STATUS:
The AIR-II process was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1995. Studies
under the Emerging Technology Program are
focusing on (1) developing photocatalysts for a
broad range of chlorinated and nonchlorinated
VOCs, and (2) designing advanced and cost-
effective photocatalytic reactors for remediation
and industrial service.
The AIR-II Process was initially evaluated at
full-scale operation for treatment of soil
vapor extraction off-gas at Loring Air Force
Base (AFB). Destruction efficiency of
perchloroethene exceeded 99.8 percent. The
performance results were presented at the 1996
World Environmental Congress.
This system's forerunner, the AIR-I process, was
tested extensively at the laboratory scale on
chlorinated VOCs in air with concentrations
ranging from 1 to 3,000 ppm. The AIR-I
process was demonstrated as part of a
groundwater remediation demonstration project
at Dover AFB in Dover, Delaware. The process
was used to treat effluent air from a groundwater
stripper. Test results showed over 99 percent
removal of dichloroethane (DCA) from air
initially containing about 1 ppm DCA and
saturated with water vapor.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Vince Gallardo
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7176
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
J.R. Kittrell
KSE, Inc.
P.O. Box 368
Amherst, MA 01004
413-549-5506
Fax: 413-549-5788
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 357
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
OHM REMEDIATION SERVICES CORPORATION
(Oxygen Microbubble In Situ Bioremediation)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The use of in situ bioremediation on
contaminated soils and groundwater is becoming
more widespread and accepted; however, one of
the difficulties with in situ bioremediation is the
limitations of oxygen delivery to the microflora
for the degradation of the target contaminant.
Oxygen microbubble technology may be effective
in overcoming this limitation.
The oxygen microbubble technology (see figure
below) uses a continuously generated stream of
oxygen and water solution containing low
concentrations of a surfactant. A water stream
containing about 200 milligrams per liter of
surfactant is mixed with oxygen under pressure.
The resulting oxygen and water mixture is
pumped through a microbubble generator that
produces a zone of high-energy mixing. The
result is a 60 to 80 percent by volume dispersion
of bubbles with a typical bubble diameter ranging
from 50 to 100 microns. The microbubble
dispersion is then pumped through an injection
well into the treatment zone. The microbubbles
deliver oxygen into the contaminated
groundwater, providing an oxygen source for the
biodegradation of the contaminant by the
indigenous microflora.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The process has successfully treated groundwater
contaminated with a number of organic
compounds including volatile organic
compounds, semivolatile organic compounds,
and petroleum hydrocarbons.
S£M£TE PRESSURE
REGULATING
n..-,,™... MICROBUBBLE
INJECTION COLLECTION
POINT
LEGEND
© PRESSURE SWITCH
M CHECK VALVE
&- PRESSURE RELIEF
VALVE
iSi
101
SAMPLE PORT
SOLENOID VALVE (NORMALLY CLOSED)
BALL/SHUT OFF VALVE
Oxygen Microbubble In Situ Bioremediation of Groundwater
Page 358
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
STATUS:
The Oxygen Microbubble In Situ Bioremediation
process was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in summer 1992. This
process is being evaluated at a jet fuel spill site at
Tyndall Air Force Base in Panama City, Florida.
The overall objective of this project is to evaluate
the in situ application of the oxygen microbubble
technology for bioremedation. The goals are to
determine the subsurface oxygen transfer to the
groundwater, retention of the microbubble in the
soil matrix, and the biodegradation of the
petroleum hydrocarbons present in the soil and
groundwater.
A pilot test was performed at the site in 1995.
The objective of this test was to determine the
rate at which generated microbubbles could be
injected into the surficial aquifer at the site. In
addition, changes that occurred in the
microbubbles and the aquifer during injection
were monitored. Parameters that were monitored
included the following:
• Microbubble quality, quantity, and
stability
• Microbubble injection rate and pressure
• Lateral migration rates of microbubbles
• Lateral extent of migration of surfactant
in the aquifer
• Lateral changes in dissolved oxygen
concentration in the aquifer
• Rate of migration of tracer gas (helium)
in the vadose zone
• Oxygen in the vadose zone
The pilot test verified that microbubbles can be
injected into a shallow aquifer consisting of
unconsolidated, fine-grained sediments. The
study also verified that aquifer characteristics
allowed the injection of the microbubble foam at
rates of at least 1 gallon per minute (foam).
Continued injection of foam after about 45
minutes resulted in coalescence of the foam based
on pressure measurements. The microbubble
foam was observed to be persistent in the aquifer
for long periods of time. This testing supported
the use of oxygen microbubbles as an oxygen
delivery system for in situ bioremediation.
The next testing phase at the site began in fall
1996. During this test, multiple injection points
will be used to determine the maximum rate of
foam injection while maintaining foam stability.
Oxygen will be used as the gas for microbubble
production. The rentention of oxygen
microbubbles will be compared to sparged air to
determine oxygen delivery efficiency.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Douglas Jerger
OHM Remediation Services Corporation
16406 U.S. Route 224 East
P.O. Box 551
Findlay, OH 45840
419-424-4932
Fax: 419-425-6031
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 359
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
PHYTOKINETICS, INC.
(Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Phytoremediation is the use of plants for the in
situ cleanup of contaminated soils, sediments,
and water. The specific technology described in
this profile is the use of grasses to remediate
surface soils contaminated with organic chemical
wastes. Many types of organic contaminants,
including pentachlorophenol (PCP), biodegrade
more rapidly in planted soils than in implanted
soils.
The ability of plants to enhance biodegradation is
based, in part, on plant root exudates. Plants
release into the soil organic chemical exudates
(sugars, acids, alcohols, and proteins) which can
enhance biodegradation in the following ways:
(1) the exudates stimulate soil microorganisms in
the rhizosphere (the zone immediately
surrounding the plant root) by serving as a food
source. Rhizosphere soils contain 10 to 100
times more metabolically active microorganisms
than unplanted soils; (2) exudates from the roots
contain enzymes which can transform organic
contaminants; (3) exudates can stimulate
cometabolic transformations of contaminants by
soil microorganisms.
Another important factor in phytoremediation is
that plants themselves can take up and detoxify
certain organic contaminants. Also, plants can
stabilize soils against erosion by wind and water.
Grasses appear to be ideal for phytoremediation
of surface soils because their fibrous root systems
form a continuous dense rhizosphere.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
Organic chemical contaminants which are more
rapidly removed in planted (rhizosphere) soils
than unplanted soils include PCP, certain
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),
chlorinated solvents, insecticides, and
nitroaromatic explosives. For phytoremediation
Greenhouse-Scale Phytoremediation Study
Small-Scale Outdoor Study
Page 360
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
to be effective, soil contaminants must be in the
surficial soil, within the root zone of plants (top
2 to 3 feet), and must be present at intermediate,
non-phytotoxic levels. Although phytoremediation
may be cost effective, especially for larger sites, it
is slower than more intensive approaches (such as
excavation or ex situ treatments) and may require
several growing seasons.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in 1995 for a 2-year
greenhouse and field trial. Under the Emerging
Technology Program, Phytokinetics, Inc.
(Phytokinetics), will demonstrate the
effectiveness of the technology for surficial soils
contaminated with PCP and PAHs from the
McCormick & Baxter (M&B) Superfund site in
Portland, Oregon. The plant species used is
perennial ryegrass (Loliumperenne).
The study consists of two phases. The first
phase, which began in March 1996, consists of a
greenhouse study conducted under optimal
conditions for plant growth. The second phase,
which began in April 1996, is taking place in the
field, at an area within the M&B site (see
photographs on previous page). For both phases,
contaminant removal rates are being compared in
planted and implanted (nutriated) soils, as well as
in unplanted unamended soils. The latter
treatment allows assessment of rates of natural
(intrinsic) bioremediation. Preliminary results
from the first phase suggest that plants accelerate
initial rates of removal of PCP, chrysene,
benzo(a)anthracene, and pyrene relative to
controls.
Phytokinetics' personnel have also conducted
laboratory-scale studies using crested wheatgrass
(Agropyron cristatuni). The fate of uniformly
radiolabeled PCP, added to soil at a
concentration of 100 milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg), was compared in three planted and
three unplanted systems. Employing a
specifically designed flow-through test system, a
budget was maintained for the PCP-derived
radiolabel, and the extent of mineralization and
volatilization of the radiolabel were monitored
during a 155-day test.
In the unplanted systems, an average of 88
percent of the total radiolabel remained in the
soil, and only 6 percent was mineralized. In the
planted systems, 33 percent of the radiolabel
remained in the soil, 22 percent was mineralized,
and 36 percent was associated with plant tissue.
Other tests using the same system were
conducted with radiolabeled pyrene (initial
concentrations of 100 mg/kg soil). The onset of
mineralization occurred sooner in planted
systems (mean = 45 days) than in uplanted
systems (mean = 75 days). However, the extent
of radiolabeled pyrene mineralization was the
same in the two types of systems.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steven Rock
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
28 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7149
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Ari Ferro
Phytokinetics, Inc.
1770 North Research Park Way
Suite 110
North Logan, UT 84341-1941
801-750-0985
Fax: 801-750-6296
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 361
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
PINTAIL SYSTEMS, INC.
(Biomineralization of Metals)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Pintail Systems, Inc. (PSI), has evaluated the use
of bioremediation processes for in situ
biomineralization of heavy metals in mine
wastes. Biomineralization processes are part of
a natural cycle hi which minerals are
continuously formed, transformed, and degraded.
In situ biomineralization capitalizes on the role
that microorganisms play in natural ore formation
and involves accelerating the biological reactions
to remediate waste.
During biomineralization, microorganisms initiate
a complex series of reactions. Effective metal
removal mechanisms are influenced by
biologically catalyzed remineralization reactions.
PSI's research indicates that biomineralization
begins when microorganisms attach to the ore's
surface, forming a "bioslime" layer. Soluble
metals then bind to cell walls and extracellular
products. Next, metal hydroxides, oxides, and
carbonates precipitate into the bioslime layer as
amorphous mineral precursors, which provide a
template for further mineralization as they
stabilize.
A microbial population for biomineralization may
be used hi either batch or continuous treatment
mode for in situ bioremediation. In batch mode,
bacteria and nutrient solutions may be applied
directly to contaminated soil, sediments, or
2.5 million ton Spent Ore Cyanide Field Detox
Metals analysis before and after application of bacteria treatment solutions
to the heap to degrade cyanide. Analysis of heap leachate solutions.
Results In mg/L
1
0.978
Cadmium
Chromium
Iron
Results In mg/L
-
Cof
0.334
••••_
>per
.
2.07
0.005
aBefori
After t
0.488
I 1 0.054
) treatment
reatment
4.16
0.007
Mercury Silver Zinc
Biomineralization of Metals
Page 362
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
aqueous solutions to catalyze bioaccumulation
and biomineralization. For continuous treatment,
microorganisms may be immobilized in a porous
matrix or fixed film reactor to remove metals
from aqueous solutions.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The PSI biomineralization process is designed to
treat solids (soils, sludges, and sediments) that
contain heavy metals or organics. It can also be
applied to acid rock drainage that occurs
naturally or results from mining or energy
production operations. The process can be
applied at battery waste sites, urban lead sites,
mines, and metal production and fabrication
sites.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the Emerging
Technology Program in 1995. Under the
Emerging Technology Program, PSI intends to
complete development of its biomineralization
process, resulting in a field-ready in situ
biomineralization technology. PSI will conduct
batch and continuous treatment tests at its
laboratory and pilot plant in Aurora, Colorado,
using soils, ore, sludges, and tailings from
several Superfund sites.
PSI has developed and applied full-scale
detoxification processes for spent ore at several
mines in the western U.S. In addition to cyanide
detoxification, metals removal or
remineralization has been observed during
treatment at these mines. PSI has also
demonstrated biomineralization of metals in
laboratory- and pilot-scale tests for mining
industry clients at mines in Idaho, Nevada,
Arizona, California, Colorado, Mexico, and
Canada, including the Summitville Mine
Superfund site in Colorado. Results from the use
of biomineralization is shown in the figure on the
previous page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Ronald Lewis
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7856
Fax: 513-569-7105
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Leslie Thompson
Pintail Systems, Inc.
11801 E. 33rd Avenue, Suite C
Aurora, CO 80010
303-367-8443
Fax: 303-364-2120
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 363
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
PULSE SCIENCES, INC.
(X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
X-ray treatment of organically contaminated soils
is based on in-depth deposition of ionizing
radiation. Energetic photons (X-rays) collide
with matter to generate a shower of lower-
energy, secondary electrons within the
contaminated waste material. These secondary
electrons ionize and excite the atomic electrons,
break up the complex contaminant molecules,
and form highly reactive radicals. These radicals
react with contaminants to form compounds such
as water, carbon dioxide, and oxygen.
Other sources of ionizing radiation, such as
ultraviolet radiation or direct electron beam
processing, do not penetrate the treatable material
deeply enough. Ultraviolet radiation heats only
the surface layer, while a 1.5-million electron
volt (MeV) electron penetrates about 4
millimeters into the soil. X-rays, however,
penetrate up to 20 centimeters, allowing treat-
ment of thicker samples. In situ treatment, which
reduces material handling requirements, may also
be possible with X-ray treatment.
An efficient, high-power, high-energy, linear
induction accelerator (LIA) plus X-ray converter
generates the X-rays used in the treatment
process (see figure below). The LIA energy,
which must be small enough to avoid nuclear
activation and as large as possible to increase the
bremsstrahlung conversation efficiency, usually
ranges from 8 to 10 MeV. A repetitive pulse of
electrons 50 to 100 nanoseconds long is directed
onto a cooled converter of high atomic number to
efficiently generate X-rays. The X-rays penetrate
and treat the organically contaminated soils.
The physical mechanism by which volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and semivolatile
organic compounds (SVOC) are removed
primarily depends on the contaminant present.
Because of the moisture hi contaminated soil,
sludge, and sediments, the shower of secondary
electrons resulting from X-ray deposition
produces both highly oxidizing hydroxyl radicals
and highly reducing aqueous electrons. While
hazardous by-products may form during X-ray
treatment, contaminants and by-products, if
found, may be completely converted at
Waste
Treatment
Area
Conveyor
Waste
Storage
LIA
1-10 MeV
Electron
Beam
X-Ray
Converter
(Ta)
X-rays
- Disposal
X-Ray Treatment Process
Page 364
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
sufficiently high dose levels without undesirable
waste residuals or air pollution.
X-rays can treat contaminated soil on a conveyor
or contained hi disposal barrels. Since X-rays
penetrate about 20 centimeters into soil, large
soil volumes can be treated without losing a
significant fraction of the ionizing radiation in
standard container walls. Pulse Sciences, Inc.,
estimates that the cost of high throughput X-ray
processing is competitive with alternative
processes which decompose the contaminants.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
X-ray treatment of organically'contaminated soils
has the potential to treat large numbers of
contaminants with minimum waste handling or
preparation. Also, X-ray treatment can be
applied hi situ. In situ treatment may be of
significant importance hi cases where it is
impossible or unpractical to reconfigure the
waste volume for the ionizing radiation range of
electrons or ultraviolet radiation. Treatable
organic contaminants include benzene, toluene,
xylene, trichloroethene, tetrachloroethene,
carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and polychlori-
nated biphenyls.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in 1993. A
1.2-MeV, 800-ampere (amp), 50-watt LIA and a
10.8-MeV, 0.2-amp, 10,000-watt radio
frequency (RF) linac will be used in the program.
The primary objectives are to (1) demonstrate
that X-ray treatment can reduce VOC and
SVOC levels in soils to acceptable levels,
and (2) determine any hazardous by-product that
may be produced.
Samples with identical initial contaminant
concentration levels will be irradiated at
increasing dose levels to determine (1) the rate
(concentration versus dose) at which the
contaminants are being destroyed, and (2) the
X-ray dose required to reduce organic
contamination to acceptable levels. The 10.8-
MeV RF linac, which produces more penetrating
X-rays, should provide information on the
optimum X-ray energy for the treatment process.
Increasing the accelerator energy allows a more
efficient conversion from electrons to X-rays hi
the converter, but an upper limit (about 10 MeV)
restricts the energy treatment, since higher
energy activates the soil. The experimental
database will be used to develop a conceptual
design and cost estimate for a high throughput
X-ray treatment system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
George Moore
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7991
Fax: 513-569-7276
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Vernon Bailey
Pulse Sciences, Inc.
600 McCormick Street
San Leandro, CA 94577
510-632-5100
Fax: 510-632-5300
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 365
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
THERMO NUTECH
(formerly TMA THERMO ANALYTICAL, INC.)
(Segmented Gate System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
TMA Thermo Analytical, Inc. (TMA), has
conducted many radiological surveys of soil
contaminated with low and intermediate levels of
radioactivity. Cleanup of these sites is a highly
labor-intensive process requiring numerous
personnel to conduct radiological surveys with
portable hand-held instruments. When
contamination is encountered, an attempt is made
to manually excise it. When surveys disclose
larger areas of contamination, heavy equipment
is used to remove the contaminated material.
Since pinpoint excision with earthmoving
equipment is difficult, large amounts of
uncontaminated soil are removed along with the
contaminant. Few sites have been characterized
to be uniformly and/or homogeneously
contaminated above release criteria over the
entire site area.
As a result, TMA developed the Segmented Gate
System (SGS) to physically separate and
segregate radioactive material from otherwise
"clean" soil (see figure below). The SGS
removes only a minimal amount of clean soil
with the radioactive particles, significantly
reducing the overall amount of material requiring
disposal. The SGS works by conveying
radiologically contaminated feed material on
Gate Opens
to Catch
Contaminated
Material
.Contaminated
Soil Storage
Contaminated
Soil for
Disposal
Reclaimed Clean Soil
TMA's Segmented Gate System
Page 366
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
moving conveyor belts under an array of
sensitive, rapidly reacting radiation detectors.
The moving material is assayed, and radioactivity
content is logged. Copyrighted computer
software tracks the radioactive material as it is
transported by the conveyor and triggers a
diversion by one or more of the SGS chutes when
the material reaches the end of the conveyor.
Clean soil goes in one direction, and
contaminated material in another.
The key advantage to this system is automation,
which affords a much higher degree of accuracy
compared to manual methods. Contaminants can
be isolated and removed by locating small
particles of radioactive material dispersed
throughout the soil. All of the soil is analyzed
continuously during processing to document the
level of radioactivity in the waste and to
demonstrate that cleaned soil meets release
criteria. This automation and analysis results in
a significant cost reduction for special handling,
packaging, and disposal of the site's radioactive
waste.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SGS locates, analyzes, and removes gamma
ray-emitting radionuclides from soil, sand, dry
sludge, or any host matrix that can be transported
by conveyor belts. The SGS can identify hot
particles, which are assayed in units of
picoCuries, and can quantify distributed
radioactivity, which is assayed in units of
picoCuries per gram (pCi/g) of host material.
The lower limit of detection (LLD) for the
system depends on the ambient radiation
background, conveyor belt speed, thickness of
host material on conveyor, arid contaminant
gamma ray energy and abundance. However,
LLDs for americium-241 of 2 pCi/g and for
radium-226 of 5 pCi/g have been successfully
demonstrated.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in July 1994.
Pilot- and field-scale tests using TMA-owned
mobile equipment were initiated at a U.S.
Department of Energy facility in March 1995.
Further evaluations have been temporarily
postponed. Future tests will demonstrate the
technology's applicability to other radionuclides
and other host matrices.
A similar system has been used on Johnston Atoll
in the mid-Pacific since January 1992; TMA is
currently under contract to the U.S Defense
Nuclear Agency to process coral soil
contaminated with plutonium and americium
using the SGS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Joan Mattox
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7624
Fax: 513-569-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jeffrey Brown
Thermo NUtech
601 Scarboro Road
Oak Ridge, TN 37830
423-481-0683
Fax: 423-483-4621
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 367
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON
(Concentrated Chloride Extraction and Recovery of Lead)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This technology recovers lead from soils using an
aqueous solvent extraction process that takes
advantage of the high solubility of
chlorocomplexes of lead. The extract solution
contains greater than 4 molar sodium chloride
and operates at a pH of -4. The figure below
depicts the three-stage continuous countercurrent
pilot plant used to study the process.
To operate the pilot plant, soil is sieved to
remove particles greater than 1.12 millimeters in
diameter, and is placed in the first chloride
extraction tank (Ml) for extraction with
concentrated chloride solution. This soil and
solvent slurry passes into a thickener (SI). The
soil and solvent slurry has an average residence
tune of 1 hour in each extraction tank hi the
system.
The bottoms of the thickener flow by gravity to
the second chloride extraction tank (M2). The
solution exiting the second chloride extraction
tank flows to the second thickener (S2). The
bottoms of the second thickener feed the third
stage.
The third stage is the last soil stage, but the first
solvent stage; fresh solvent enters the system at
stage three. The bottoms of the third thickener
(S3) flow by gravity into the soil rinse system
I Vacuum
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
(VF1) to remove excess salt. The rinsed soil in
VF1 is the clean product soil. The overflows
from S3 pass to M2, the overflows from S2 pass
to the Ml, and the overflows from SI pass to the
lead precipitation system (M4/S4). In M4/S4,
lead hydroxide [(Pb(OH)J is recovered by simply
raising the pH of the spent extraction solution to
10. After Pb(OH)2 removal, the spent chloride
solution flows to the solvent makeup unit (Tl)
where it is acidified to pH 4 hi preparation for
reuse.
This technology produces treated soil, suitable
for replacement on site, and Pb(OH)2, possibly
suitable for reprocessing to recover pure lead.
The ease of solvent regeneration minimizes waste
disposal. Solvent recycling is very successful,
and pilot-plant tests have required little or no salt
or water makeup.
The pilot plant has treated soil from two lead
battery waste sites (LEWS). One LEWS soil
contained high fines (about 50 percent clay and
silt) and the other contained low fines (less than
20 percent clay and silt). The pilot plant's
method of transferring soil by gravity eases much
of the soil handling problems inherent in high
clay soils. After treatment, both soils easily
passed the toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure test. The total lead concentration in
the high fines and low fines soil was reduced
from 7 percent to about 0.15 percent and 1.5
percent to 0.07 percent, respectively.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This technology removes high concentrations of
lead from soil, particularly at LEWS, while
producing a treated soil usable as backfill and a
recyclable, concentrated lead salt.
STATUS:
This technology was accepted into the SITE
Emerging Technology Program in September
1994. Batch extraction testing was completed in
1995. Treatability tests using the pilot plant on
the high and low fines soils were completed hi
August 1996. The high fines soil came from a
LEWS located in Houston, Texas, and the low
fines soil came from the Sapp Battery National
Priority List site in Florida. Future plans include
expanding the applications of the technology by
studying additional waste-site soils. The
evaluation of the technology is expected to be
completed by August 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eugene Harris
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7862
Fax: 513-568-7676
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Dennis Clifford or Tim Nedwed
Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering
University of Houston
4800 Calhoun Street
Houston, TX 77204-4791
713-743-4266 or 713-743-0751
Fax: 713-743-4260
E-mail: DAClifford@uh.edu or
w408@egrlO.cive.uh.edu
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 369
-------
Technology Profile
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON
(Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and Removal)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-
Madison) is developing a photocatalytic
technology that uses titanium dioxide (TiO2)
suspensions to coat various supporting materials
used in treatment applications. For this
application, the suspensions are used to coat a
conductive metallic or carbon mesh. Coating the
mesh with a suitable thickness of TiO2 catalyst
provides the basis for a photoreactor that uses most
of the available ultraviolet (UV) radiation. An
electrical field can also be applied across the
catalyst to improve its performance.
The figure below shows a possible photoreactor
design that uses a ceramic film. In this design, the
TiO2 coating on the porous metal acts as a
photoanode. An electric potential can then be
placed across the coating to direct the flow of
electrons to a porous carbon counter-electrode that
Water Outlet
has a high surface area and would collect any
heavy metal ions present in the liquid. In addition,
an applied electric potential can improve the
destruction efficiency of organic contaminants by
reducing electron-hole recombination on the
catalyst surface. This recombination is seen as a
primary reason for the observed inefficiency of
other UV/TiO2 systems when treating organics in
groundwater. Lastly, the electric potential has been
shown to reduce the interference of electrolytes on
the oxidation process. Electrolytes such as the
biocarbonate ion are known hydroxyl radical
scavengers and can be problematic in the UV/TiO2
treatment of contaminated groundwater.
This technology improves on liquid-phase
photocatalytic technologies by distributing radiation
uniformly throughout the reactor. Also, the
technology does not require additional oxidants,
such as peroxide or ozone, to cause complete
mineralization or to improve reaction rates. In
Ti02 Coated
Metal Mesh F'hotoanode
Water Inlet
Reference Electrode
U.V. Lamp
Porous Carbon Cathode
Photoreactor Design using Ceramic Film
Page 370
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Ongoing Project
addition, it eliminates the need for an additional
unit to separate and recover the catalyst from the
purified water after the reaction is complete.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
This particular technology is designed to treat
groundwater and dilute aqueous waste streams
contaminated with organics and heavy metals.
Organics are completely oxidized to carbon
dioxide, water, and halide ions. Heavy metals are
subsequently stripped from the cathode and
recovered.
STATUS:
The UW-Madison phqtocatalytic technology was
accepted into the SITE Emerging Technology
Program in 1995. The overall objective of the
Emerging Technology Program study is to refine
the reactor design, enabling it to treat heavy metals
as well as organic contaminants. Testing of a
bench-scale unit is currently underway.
UW-Madison has tested its photocatalytic reactor at
the laboratory scale on aqueous solutions of several
organic contaminants, including polychlorinated
biphenyls, chlorosalicylic acid, salicylic acid, and
ethylenediamine tetraacetate. UW-Madison has
also used similar reactors to remove volatile organic
compounds, such as trichloroethene,
tetrachloroethene, benzene, and ethylene from air
streams. Photooxidation of trichloroethene and
tetrachloroethene has been successfully field-tested
at low flow rates (<0.1 standard cubic feet per
minute).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Vince Gallardo
U.S. EPA
National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7176
Fax: 513-569-7620
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Marc Anderson
Water Chemistry Program
University of Wisconsin-Madison
660 North Park Street
Madison, WI 53706
608-262-2674
Fax: 608-262-0454
Charles Hill, Jr.
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Engineering Hall
1415 Engineering Drive, Room 1004
Madison, WI 53706
608-263-4593
Fax: 608-262-5434
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 371
-------
I
1
I
I
I
-------
The purpose of the Characterization and Monitoring Program (CaMP), formerly the Monitoring and
Measurement Technologies Program (MMTP), is to accelerate the development, demonstration, and use of
innovative monitoring, measurement, and characterization technologies at Superfund sites. These
technologies are used to assess the nature and extent of contamination and evaluate the progress and
effectiveness of remedial actions. The CaMP places high priority on technologies that provide cost-effective,
faster, and safer methods than conventional technologies for producing real-time or near-real-time data.
The CaMP is interested in new or modified technologies that can detect, monitor, and measure hazardous
and toxic substances in the surface (soil and sediment), subsurface (saturated and vadose zones), air,
biological tissues, wastes, and surface waters, as well as technologies that characterize the physical properties
of sites. Technologies of interest include chemical sensors for in situ measurements; groundwater sampling
devices; soil and core sampling devices; soil gas sampling devices; fluid sampling devices for the vadose
zone; in situ and field-portable analytical methods; and other systems that support field sampling or data
acquisition and analysis.
The identification of candidate technologies is ongoing; therefore, technology developers are encouraged
to submit new and updated information at any time. This information is reviewed, cataloged, and
incorporated into a technology matrix, from which EPA makes a preliminary determination of possible
candidates for participation. Developers interested in participating should contact Stephen Billets at
702-798-2232.
Evaluations or demonstrations have been completed for 31 projects in the CaMP. These technologies are
presented in alphabetical order in Table 4 and are included in the technology profiles that follow.
Page 373
-------
TABLE 5
Completed SITE Characterization and Monitoring Program Projects as of December 1996
Developer
Analytical and Remedial
Technology, Inc.,
Milpitas, CA
Bruker Analytical Systems,
Inc., :
Billerica, MA
Dexsil Corporation,
Hamden, CT
(Two Demonstrations)
Environmental Technologies
Group, Inc.
Fugro Geosciences, Inc.,
(formerly Loral
Corporation),
Houston, TX
Geoprobe Systems,
:Salina, KS
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP,
Inc.,
Watford, Hertsfordshire,
England/West Palm Beach, PL
(Two Demonstrations)
Hanby Environmental
Laboratory Procedures, Inc.,
Wimberley, TX
HNU Systems, Inc.,
Newton, MA
Technology
Automated Sampling
and Analytical Platform
Mobile Environmental
Monitor •
Environmental Test
Kits
AirSentry Fourier
Transform Infrared
Spectrometer
Rapid Optical
Screening Tool
Geoprobe Soil
Conductivity Sensor
Ion Mobility
Spectrometry
Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants jn Soil
and Water
HNU Source Excited
Fluorescence Analyzer-
Portable (SEFA-P)
X-Ray Fluorescence
Analyzer
Technology
Contact
Gary Hopkins
408-263-8931
John Wronka
508-667-9580
Jack Mahon
203-288-3509
Not Available
Andrew Taer
800-75FUGRO
Colin Christy
Troy Schmidt
913-825-1842
John Brokenshire
011-44-1923-816166
Martin Cohen
561-683-0507
John Hanby
512-8474212
Jack Driscoll
800-724-6690
617-964-6690
EPA Project
Manager
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
William McClenny
919-541-3158
Eric Koglin
702-798-2432
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Eric Koglin
702-798-2432
Eric Koglin
702-798-2432
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Applicable
Media
Aqueous Samples
Air Streams,
Water, Soil,
Sludge, Sediment
Soil, Sediment,
Transformer Oils
Air Streams
Soil
Soil, Rock,
Hydrogeologic
Fluids
Air Streams,
Vapor, Soil, Water
Soil, Water
Solids, Liquids,
Slurries, Powders
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals
Organic
VOCs, PAHs, lonizable
Organics
VOCs, SVOCs, FCBs,
PAHs
PCBs
Nonspecific Organics
Petroleum, PAHs,
VOCs
Nonspecific Organics
VOCs
PCP, PAHs, Other
Various Organic?
Not Applicable
00
8
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
Completed SITE Characterization and Monitoring Program Projects as of December 1996
'"•;. f Developer
HNU Systems, Inc.,
Newton, MA
Idetek, Inc, (formerly Binax
. Corporation, Antox
Division),
Sunnyvale, CA
Metorex, Inc.,
Bend, OR
Microsensor Systems,
Incorporated,
Bowling Green, KY
Millipore Corporation,
Bedford, MA
Millipore Corporation,
Bedford, MA
MTI Analytical Instruments
(formerly Microsensor
Technology, Incorporated),
Fremont, CA
Naval Command, Control, and
Ocean Surveillance Center,
San Diego, CA
NITON Corporation,
Bedford, MA
Photovac Monitoring
Instruments (formerly
Photovac International, Inc.)
Deer Park. NY
Technology
HNU GC 31 ID
Portable Gas
Chromatoeraoh
Equate* Imtmmoassay
Field Portable X-Ray
Fluorescence Analyzers
MSI-301A Vapor
Monitor
EnviroGard" PCB
Immunoassay Test Kit
EnviroGard" PCP
Immunoassay Test Kit
Portable Gas Analyzer
SCAPS Cone
Penetrometer
XL Spectrum Analyzer
PE Photovac Voyager
Portable Gas
Chromatograph
Technology
Contact
Jack Driscoll
800-724-6690
617-964-6690
Rjphard Lajikow
408-752*1353
lames Pasmore
800-229-9209
541-385-6748
Norman Davis
502-745-0090
Barbara Young
617-533-5207
Barbara Young
617-533-5207
David Sherve
510-490-0900
Thomas Hampton
619-553-1172
Stephen Shefsky
617-275-9275
Mark Collins
516-254-4199
EPA Project
Manager
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Jeanefte Van Emon
702-798-2154
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Jeanette Van Emon
702-798-2154
leanette Van Emon
702-798-2154
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Bob Lien
708-798-2232
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Applicable
Media
Air Streams
Water
Soil, Water
Air Streams
Soil, Sediment
Soil, Water
Air Streams, Soil
Gas
Soil
Soil
Air Streams
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Nonspecific
Inorganics
Not Applicable
Metals
Not Applicable
Organic
VOCs, Aromatic
Compounds,
Halocarbons, PCBs
Benzene, Toluene,
Xylene
Not Applicable
VOCs
PCBs
PCP
VOCs
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Not Applicable
VOCs
2"
Co
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
Completed SITE Characterization and Monitoring Program Projects as of December 1996
Co
Developer
SCITEC Corporation,
Kennewick, WA
Senfex Systems, Inc.,
Ridge.field, NJ
SRI Instruments,
Torrance, CA
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc.,
(formerly EnSys
Environmental Products,
Inc.,
Newtown, PA
(Two Demonstrations)
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc.,
(formerly Ohmicron
Corporation),
Newtown, PA
TN Spectrace
Round Rock, TX
Tri-Services,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD
United States Environmental
Protection Agency,
Washington, D,C.
XonTcch Incorporated,
Van Nuys, CA
Technology
Metal Analysis Probe
(MAP®) Portable
Assayer
Scentograpft PJus II
Portable Gas
Cinematograph
Compact Gas
Chromatograph
PBNTA RISa Test
System
RaPID Assay®
TN 9000 and TNPh
X-Ray Fluorescence
Analyzers
Site Characterization
and Analysis
Penetrometer System
(SCAPS)
Field Analytical
Screening Program
PCB Method
XonTech Sector
Sampler
Technology
Contact
Steve Santy
800-466-5323
509-783-9850
AmQS Unenberg
201-945-3694
Douglas Gavilanes
310-214-5092
Tim Lawruk
800-544-8881
215-860-5115
Craig Kostyshyn
215-860-5115,
ext. 634
Raj Natrajan
512-388-9100
George Robitaille
410-612-6865
John Ballard
601-634-2446
Howard Fribush
703-603-883}
Matt Yoong
818-787-7380
EPA Project
Manager
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Richard Berkley
919-541-2439
Jeanette Van Emon.
702-798-2154
i
Jeanette Van Emon
702-798-2154
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
Stephen Billets
702-798-2232
ErteKaglin
702-798-2432
Joachim Pleil
919-541-4680
Applicable
Media
Soil, Sediment,
Filter and Wipe
Samples
Air Streams
Air Streams, Soil,
Water
Soil, Water
Soil, Water
Soil, Sediment,
Filter and Wipe
Samples
Soil
Soil, Water -
Air Streams
Applicable Waste
Inorganic
Nonspecific Metals,
Lead
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Metals, Lead
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Organic
Not Applicable
VOCs
VOCs, BTEX, PCBs,
Pesticides
PCP
PCP
Not Applicable
Petroleum, PAHs,
VOCs
PCBs
VOCs
-------
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTER1ZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
ANALYTICAL AND REMEDIAL
TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(Automated Sampling and Analytical Platform)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc.
(A*RT), produces components that can be
assembled in various configurations to allow
automated sampling and analysis of water
streams. The A+RT components are mounted in
a custom case to produce an automated sampling
and analytical platform (ASAP). A complete
ASAP system consists of the following basic
components:
• An ASAP sampling manifold module
with internal pump
• An optional module to allow the ASAP
to control up to 48 Grundfos 2-inch
submersible pumps
Automated Sampling and Analytical Platform
• One or more ASAP sample preparation
modules
• One or more third-party gas or liquid
chromatographs with appropriate
detectors
• One or more third-party integrators for
processing raw data and producing hard
copies of chromatograms
• A Windows 3.X-compatible
microcomputer running A+RT software
to control the system, store results in a
database, and provide telecommunication
capabilities
The photograph below illustrates an ASAP
configured for automated sampling of 29 points
using 0.25-inch stainless steel tubing. The A+RT
purge-and-trap concentrator draws a precise
volume of water (selectable from 0.2 to
10 milliliters) from the selected sample stream
and prepares it for volatile organic compound
(VOC) analysis using a gas chromatograph. The
A+RT concentrator differs from the customary
batch purging approach in that it uses a
flow-through, countercurrent stripping cell.
The A+RT high performance liquid
chromatograph (HPLC) sample preparation
module collects a sample hi a fixed volume loop
and delivers it to the HPLC. With additional
components, the module can support a second
channel for HPLC analysis along with either
automated or manual sample selection. The
module can also be configured to process the
samples using solid-phase extraction. This
process concentrates analytes, which are then
backflushed with solvent and extracted for
subsequent HPLC analysis.
An optional Grundfos pump interface module
(GPIM) allows the ASAP, for a. given sample, to
select and operate one of up to 48 Grundfos
RediFlo-2™ 2-inch submersible pumps connected
to the ASAP. Thus, this module allows
automatic sampling of groundwater for
groundwater depths greater than 15 to 20 feet
Page 378
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
below surface. Control of up to 48 pumps
requires only one Grundfos MP1 controller
interfaced with the GPIM.
The A+RT components and software are
designed to allow continuous (24-hour)
monitoring for long periods of time (months to
years) with automated continuing calibration
checks and recalibration when necessary. The
ASAP is designed to be installed with the other
system components permanently or
semipermanently in a secure,
temperature-controlled space on site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The ASAP is designed for automated sampling
and analysis of aqueous samples, such as those
obtained from a treatment or process stream or
from wells emplaced hi a groundwater
contaminant plume. The ASAP can be
configured for a wide variety of contaminants,
including VOCs, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, ionizable organic chemicals, and
a range of inorganic substances.
STATUS:
Several commercial ASAP systems have been
purchased by universities for use in groundwater
remediation research at U.S. Department of
Defense facilities. The ASAP has considerably
broader capabilities than the prototype system
(the Automated Volatile Organics Analytical
System, or AVOAS) evaluated under the SITE
Program. The AVOAS was demonstrated in
May 1991 at the Wells G and H Superfund site in
EPA Region 1. The results of the demonstration
have been published by EPA ("Automated
On-Site Measurement of Volatile Organics in
Water," EPA/600/R-93/109, June 1993).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Gary Hopkins
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc.
473 Gemma Drive
Milpitas, CA 95035
408-263-8931
Fax: 408-263-8931
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 379
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
BRUKER ANALYTICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
(Mobile Environmental Monitor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Bruker),
mobile environmental monitor (see photograph
below) is a field-transportable, gas
chromatography/mass spectrometer (GC/MS)
designed to identity and measure organic
pollutants in various environmental media. The
MS uses a quadruple mass analyzer similar to
most conventional instruments. Like
conventional MSs, this instrument can identify
and quantify organic compounds on the basis of
their retention time, molecular weight, and
characteristic fragment pattern. The integrated
GC allows introduction of complex extracts for
separation into individual components and
subsequent analysis in the MS.
The Bruker instrument's design and electronics
are specially designed for field use. The
instrument is designed to operate with battery
power and can be used in various environmental
situations with minimum support requirements.
The mobile environmental monitor was originally
designed for the military to detect and monitor
chemical warfare agents. Environmental samples
may be introduced to the MS through the direct
air sampler or the GC. Results are collected and
stored in a computer, where data is reduced and
analyzed. The computer provides reports within
minutes of final data acquisition.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Bruker mobile environmental monitor is
designed to detect the full range of volatile and
semivolatile organic compounds directly in air
and in water, soil, sediment, sludge, and
hazardous waste extracts. It provides in-field,
Bmnker Mobile Environmental Monitor
Page 380
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 799G
Completed Project
real-time support during the characterization and
remediation phases of cleanup at a hazardous
waste site.
STATUS:
This technology was demonstrated at the Re-
Solve, Inc., and Westborough Superfund sites in
EPA Region 1. The technology was used to
analyze polychlorinated biphenyls and
polynuclear aromatics in soil and the full range of
Superfund-targeted volatile organic compounds in
water. Splits of all samples analyzed in the field
were shipped to a laboratory for confirmatory
analysis using standard EPA analytical methods.
The SITE demonstration was completed in
September 1990, and the final report
(EPA/600/X-91/079) is available from EPA.
The results of this study were presented at the
American Society for Mass Spectrometry
Conference in May 1991 and at the Superfund
Hazardous Waste Conference in July 1991. A
recent survey of regional laboratories identified
additional testing of this technology as a priority
need.
Bruker has developed an additional system that
addresses recommendations made in the project
report. This system, designated the EM640, has
increased mass range, decreased power
consumption, faster sample analysis, and
automated report generation. The EM640 was
demonstrated under the SITE Program in July
and September 1995.
The Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory-Las Vegas purchased a Bruker
mobile environmental monitor in fiscal year 1992
to pursue other applications and to expand the
scope of this project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGERS:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
John Wronka
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc.
19 Fortune Drive
Manning Park
Billerica, MA 01821
508-667-9580
Fax: 508-667-5993
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 381
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
DEXSIL CORPORATION
(Environmental Test Kits)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Dexsil Corporation (Dexsil) produces two
test kits that detect polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCB) in soil: the Dexsil Clor-N-Soil PCB
Screening Kit, and the Dexsil L2000 PCB/
Chloride Analyzer. The Dexsil Clor-N-Soil PCB
Screening Kit, (see photograph below) extracts
PCBs from soil and dissociates the PCBs with a
sodium reagent, freeing chloride ions. These
ions then react with mercuric ions to form
mercuric chloride. The extract is then treated
with diphenylcarbazone, which reacts with free
mercuric ions to form a purple color. The less
purple the color, the greater the concentration of
PCBs in the sample.
The Dexsil L2000 PCB/Chloride Analyzer (see
photograph on next page) also extracts PCBs
from soil and dissociates the PCBs with a sodium
reagent, freeing chloride ions. The extract is
then analyzed with a calibrated, chloride-specific
electrode. The L2000 instrument then translates
the output from the electrode into parts per
million (ppm) PCB.
These kits produce analytical results at different
data quality levels. The Dexsil Clor-N-Soil PCB
Screening Kit identifies samples above or below
a single concentration, which is generally tied to
regulatory action levels. The Dexsil L2000 PCB/
Chloride Analyzer quantifies specific
concentrations of PCBs, from 2 to 2,000 ppm, in
a sample. The applicability of these methods
depends on the data quality needs of a specific
project. Both technologies can be used on site
for site characterization or a removal action.
Dexsil Clor-N-Soil PCB Screening Kit
Page 382
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Dexsil Clor-N-Soil PCB Screening Kit and
the Dexsil L2000 PCB/Chloride Analyzer can
detect PCBs in soil, sediment, and transformer
oils.
STATUS:
These test kits were demonstrated at a PCB-
contaminated facility in EPA Region 7. About
200 soil samples were collected and analyzed on
site using the Dexsil test kits. Soil samples were
not dried prior to analysis. Split samples were
submitted to an off-site laboratory for
confirmatory analysis by SW-846 Method 8080.
Demonstration data were used to evaluate the
accuracy and precision of the test kits relative to
internal quality control samples and to formal
laboratory data. These data were also used to
determine operating costs.
The sampling and field analyses for this
technology demonstration were completed in
August 1992. The Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-95/518) is
available from EPA. The Office of Solid Waste
has designated the L2000 Method for PCB
screening of soil as Method 9078, to be included
in the third update to the third edition of SW-846.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-789-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jack Mahon
Dexsil Corporation
One Hamden Park Drive
Hamden, CT 06517
203-288-3509
Fax: 203-248-6235
E-mail: dexsil@aol.com
Web Page: http:\\www.dexsil.com
Dexsil L2000 PCB/Chloride Analyzer
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 383
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTER1ZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, INC.
(AirSentry Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This air monitoring system (see photograph
below) is a field-deployable, open-path Fourier
transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer that
measures infrared absorption by infrared-active
molecules. The spectrometer system transmits an
infrared beam along an open air path to a
retroflector target that returns it to the
spectrometer. The total air path can be up to
1 kilometer long. Analysis is performed using a
quantitative reference spectrum of known
concentration, together with classical least
squares data fitting software routines. The
system does not require acquisition of an air
sample; this factor enhances data integrity by
eliminating the potential for error inherent to
many air sampling techniques.
A measurement over several hundred meters
requires only a few minutes, which allows
determination of temporal profiles for pollutant
gas concentrations. The spectrometer requires
performance verification procedures, but does
not require calibration.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The AirSentry FTIR spectrometer can measure
various airborne vapors, including both organic
and inorganic compounds, especially those that
are too volatile to be collected by
AirSentry Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer
Page 384
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
preconcentration methods. It can be used to
monitor emissions from hazardous waste sites
during remediation and removal.
STATUS:
The AirSentry FTIR spectrometer was
demonstrated during a 1990 SITE study at
Shaver's Farm, a Superfund site in northwest
Georgia. The purpose of this demonstration was
to test performance during remedial activities and
to develop and test on-site quality assurance
procedures. Results of this study were published
in a paper titled "Use of a Fourier Transform
Spectrometer As a Remote Sensor at Superfund
Sites," presented at a 1991 conference.
The AirSentry FTIR spectrometer has been
evaluated in several other field studies and has
been proven capable of detecting various
airborne atmospheric vapors. The AirSentry
FTIR gas analysis software, which automatically
identifies and quantifies compounds in the
presence of background interferences, was
evaluated in a 1991 field study sponsored by
EPA Region 7. Results of this field evaluation
are published in an EPA report titled "A Field-
Based Intercomparison of the Qualitative and
Quantitative Performance of Multiple Open-Path
FTIR Systems for Measurement of Selected
Toxic Air Pollutants."
Another field evaluation of the AirSentry FTIR
spectrometer was conducted at a Superfund site
in January 1992. During the field evaluation, the
FTIR spectrometer was compared with gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry techniques
using air samples collected in canisters. Results
from this field evaluation are published in an
EPA report titled "Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation, The Delaware SITE
Study, 1992" (EPA/600/A3-91/071).
Using other funding sources, EPA has continued
research in this area and has released a guidance
document applicable to all FTIR-based open path
monitoring systems. The document is available
from EPA (EPA/600/R-96/040). A guidance
document detailing the steps required for
successful field operation of the FTIR-based open
path monitoring system is available from EPA in
draft form. For a copy of the draft document,
contact the EPA Project Manager listed below.
The final version of the document will be added
to the "EPA Compendium of Methods for
Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds hi
the Ambient Air" as method TO-16.
This technology is no longer available from the
developer. For further information about the
technology, contact the EPA Project Manager.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
William McClenny
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-3158
Fax: 919-541-3527
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 385
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTER1ZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
FUGRO GEOSCIENCES, INC.
(formerly LORAL CORPORATION)
(Rapid Optical Screening Tool)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Fugro Geoscience, Inc., (Fugro) Rapid
Optical Screening Tool (ROST) is a tunable dye
laser system used with a cone penetrometer. The
technology provides subsurface information such
as detection of aromatic hydrocarbon
contaminants in soils.
The ROST consists of a cone penetrometer (CPT)
probe connected to a laser-induced fluorescence
(LEF) sensor. A complete system consists of a
truck, hydraulic rams and controllers, and the
probe itself. The weight of the truck provides a
static reaction force, typically 25 tons, to advance
the CPT probe. The CPT probe, which is
mounted on the end of the series of push rods,
contains sensors that continuously log tip pressure
and sleeve friction. The data from these sensors
are used to map subsurface stratigraphy.
Conductivity or pore pressure sensors can be
pushed into the ground.
The ROST system can be deployed with any
conventional CPT system and advanced along
with other types of sensors. The CPT probe
contains a sapphire window that is mounted flush
with the outside of the stainless- steel probe
above the cone penetrometer tip. Light from an
excitation laser passes through the sapphire
window and is directed onto the soil as the CPT
probe is advanced. The aromatic contaminants in
the soil are fluoresced, and fiber optics return
this information to the surface.
The main ROST system components are as
follows:
• Neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum
garnet (Nd:YAG) primary laser
Rapid Optical Screening Tool
Page 386
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
• Tunable dye laser pumped by the
Nd:YAG laser
• Fiber optic cable
• Monochromator to resolve the return
fluorescence as a function of wavelength
• Photomultiplier tube (PMT) to convert
photons into electrical signals
• Digital storage oscilloscope to capture
waveforms from the PMT
• Control/analysis computer and software
The ROST system can be operated in both
dynamic (push) and static modes. In the dynamic
mode, the CPT probe equipped with the LIF
sensor is advanced into the soil. In this mode,
which Fugro refers to as fluorescence versus
depth, the excitation laser wavelength and
fluorescence emission monitoring wavelength are
held constant. The fluorescence emission
intensity is plotted as a function of depth below
ground surface. The excitation wavelength is
tunable across a range of wavelengths
(266 nanometers [run] to 310 nm) in order to
capture contaminants such as benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, xylene, naphthalene, and heavier
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). The
emission monochromator is set at a wavelength to
capture the peak intensity of the contaminants
being investigated.
Once areas of significant contamination have
been identified in the dynamic mode, the ROST
system can be operated in the static mode to
identify fuel types. In this mode, the CPT probe
is held at a fixed depth. The fluorescence
technician, who is observing the fluorescence
signal, can signal the hydraulic operator to halt
the push so that this "fingerprinting" information
can be obtained. The ROST system also can
operate in the static mode when additional push
rods are added to the string.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Fugro ROST system is designed to
qualitatively and semi-quantitatively identify
classes of petroleum, PAH, and volatile organic
compound contamination in subsurface soil
samples.
STATUS:
The ROST system was demonstrated in EPA
Region 7, at sites in Iowa, Kansas, and
Nebraska. The sampling and field analysis was
conducted during September 1994. The
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/519) is available from EPA.
ROST's performance was verified by the
Consortium for Site Characterization Technology
(CSCT) at sites in California and New Mexico.
CSCT is a partnership program involving EPA,
the Department of Defense, and the Department
of Energy. The CSCT field evaluations were
conducted in May and November 1995 and the
final report from the evaluation is available from
EPA or Fugro.
Since the SITE and CSCT evaluations, multi-
wavelength monitoring and continuous product
differentiation features have been added to the
system. These features are designed to further
enhance ROST's detection and source
identification capabilities.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eric Koglin
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2432
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Andrew Taer
Fugro Geosciences, Inc.
6105 Rookin
Houston, TX 77074
1-800-75FUGRO
Fax: 713-778-5501
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 387
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
GEOPROBE SYSTEMS
(Geoprobe Soil Conductivity Sensor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Geoprobe soil conductivity sensor, shown in
the figure below, identifies lithology and
potential contamination by measuring the
electrical conductivity of soil and hydrogeologic
fluids. Soils vary in their electrical conductivity
depending on particle size; for example, clays
and silts generally have high conductivities, while
sand and gravels exhibit low conductivities.
Overall, soil and rock are resistant to current.
Pore fluids and the amount of dissolved solids in
these fluids also influence soil conductivity.
The Geoprobe conductivity sensor uses an
isolated array of sensing rings to measure this
conductivity. The sensor is principally designed
to help determine subsurface stratigraphy. The
sensor may also help characterize subsurface
contamination, especially where high
conductivity leachates or brines are involved.
The principal components of the complete
Geoprobe system are as follows:
• A Geoprobe hydraulic soil probing
machine
• Standard sampling rods supplied with the
system
• A cable, threaded through the sampling
rod that introduces the current
• The conductivity sensor
• A data receiver connected to a personal
computer to record the sensor's
measurements
The hydraulic probing machine uses a
combination of pushing and hammering to
Strlngpot
Measures
Depth
Percussion
Probing
Machine
Data Acquisition System
with Real-Time Display of
Conductivity Versus Depth
Rack System for
Probe Rod With
Continuous Cable
Sensing Probe
Measures
Conductivity
Schematic Diagram of the Geoprobe Soil Conductivity Sensor
Page 388
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
advance 3-foot-long segments of 2.54-centimeter-
diameter hollow steel sampling rods. The
conductivity sensor is attached to the lead section
of the sampling rod.
The conductivity sensor consists of four stainless-
steel contact rings fitted around a central steel
shaft. Plastic electronically isolates the contact
rings from the steel shaft. A hollow steel rod
extends above the uppermost stainless steel ring,
housing a shielded signal cable that connects the
contact rings with an external power source,
measurement system, and data logging system.
The soil conductivity sensor can be used in a
dipole array or a Schlumberger array. The
dipole array is used when greater resolution is
required. The Schlumberger array is generally
used when optimal soil-to-probe contact cannot
be maintained.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Geoprobe conductivity sensor is designed to
determine subsurface stratigraphy. Only highly
conductive contaminants such as oil field brine
can be directly measured by the sensor.
STATUS:
The Geoprobe conductivity sensor field
demonstration was conducted in September 1994.
The final report will be available in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Steve Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-3146
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
Colin Christy
Troy Schmidt
Geoprobe Systems
601 North Broadway Boulevard
Salina, KS 67401
913-825-1842
Fax: 913-825-2097
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 389
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTER1ZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
GRASEBY IONICS, LTD., and PCP, INC.
(Ion Mobility Spectrometry)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) is a technique
used to detect and characterize organic vapors in
air. IMS involves the ionization of molecules and
their subsequent temporal drift through an
electric field. Analysis and characterization are
based on analyte separations resulting from ionic
mobilities rather than ionic masses; this difference
distinguishes IMS from mass spectrometry. IMS
operates at atmospheric pressure, a characteristic
that has practical advantages over mass
spectrometry, allowing a smaller analytical unit,
lower power requirements, lighter weight, and
easier use. These factors may facilitate use of
IMS for mobile, field applications.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The IMS units, which are intended to be used hi
a preprogrammed fashion, can monitor
chloroform, ethylbenzene, and other volatile
organic compounds in a defined situation. IMS
units can analyze air, vapor, soil, and water
samples. However, for analysis of liquid and
solid materials, the contaminants must be
introduced to the instrument in the gas phase,
requiring some sample preparation.
STATUS:
Graseby Ionics, Ltd. (Graseby), and PCP, Inc.
(PCP), participated in a laboratory demonstration
in 1990. Graseby used a commercially available,
ENVIRONMENTAL CAP -
NOZZLE PROTECTIVE CAP
(Position when A.V.M. is in use)
Airborne Vapor Monitor for IMS
Page 390
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
self-contained instrument that weighs about 2
kilograms (kg) (see figure on previous page).
PCP used a larger (12 kg) transportable MS.
This laboratory demonstration was the first
opportunity to test the instruments on
environmental samples. The demonstration
results highlighted that the following needs must
be satisfied before IMS is ready for field
applications:
• Additional development of sampling or
sample preparation strategies for soil and
water analysis
• Improvements in the design and
performance of IMS inlets, in conjunction
with the development of sampling and
presentation procedures
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eric Koglin
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2432
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
John Brokenshire
Graseby Ionics, Ltd.
Analytical Division
Park Avenue, Bushey
Watford, Hertfordshire
WD22BW
England
011-44-1923-816166
Martin J. Cohen
PCP, Inc.
2155 Indian Road
West Palm Beach, PL 33409-3287
561-683-0507
Fax: 561-683-0507 (call first)
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 391
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTER1ZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
HANBY ENVIRONMENTAL
LABORATORY PROCEDURES, INC.
(Test Kits for Organic Contaminants in Soil and Water)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures,
Inc. (H.E.L.P), field test kits for soil and water
provide rapid, sensitive analyses for a broad
range of organic contaminants. The kits have
been used at spill and leak sites for petroleum
substances including fuels, solvents, oils,
pesticides, herbicides, and indirectly wood
preservatives such as pentachlorophenols (PCP).
The test kit methods are based on simple
extraction and colorimetric procedures using
Friedel-Crafts (F-C) chemical reactions. During
analyses for PCPs suspended in diesel fuel carrier
solvent, where the actual analyte does not
undergo F-C reactions, it is necessary to perform
other analyses to determine the ratio of the target
compound to the detected carrier solvent.
At locations where the type of contaminant is
known, such as gasoline or diesel fuel sites, the
appropriate calibration photograph for the
substance is used which provides precise
quantitative analytical information.
Alternatively, H.E.L.P. provides a portable
spectrophotometer which reads the sample
results, identifying a wider variety of chemicals.
The test kits provide the equipment and reagents
to perform 15 soil or water samples. Soil tests
are performed using the following steps:
• Using the electronic balance, weigh 5
grams of soil into a beaker.
• Empty one solvent ampule into the beaker.
• Stir the sample for 2 minutes (extraction).
• Pour extract from the beaker into one of
Hanby Test Kit
Page 392
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
the sample test tubes.
• Empty one catalyst powder vial into the
test tube, cap and shake for 3 minutes.
• Compare the developed color of the
sample to the appropriate calibration
photograph, or insert the test tube into the
spectrophotometer for readout.
Water testing is performed in a similar manner,
except that the extraction procedure is performed
on a 500-milliliter water sample in a separatory
funnel which comes with the water test kit.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
H.E.L.P. field test kits analyze aromatic,
halogenated, and other compounds which
participate in F-C reactions. These compounds
include the complete range of fuel types such as
gasoline, diesel fuel, and jet fuel, as well as all
types of crude oils. The test kits are also used
for the measurement of many other types of
substances such as new and used motor oils,
transformer oils, hydraulic fluids, and other types
of organic liquids which contain only small
amounts of F-C reacting compounds. The
intense color of these reactions allows
sensitivities of detection from 1 to 25 parts per
million (ppm).
The availability of two solvent types for the kits
provides a range from 1 ppm (with the lower
range solvent) to 100,00 ppm (with the high
range solvent).
STATUS:
The H.E.L.P. test kit was used to indirectly
screen and quantify PCP contamination in soils
for a SITE demonstration in Morris ville, North
Carolina in August 1993, using samples collected
from a wood preserving site in Winona,
Missouri. These samples contained PCP in a
diesel carrier solvent. When the ratio of carrier
solvent to PCP was constant, the PCP
concentration data obtained using the H.E.L.P.
test kit correlated well with sample splits
analyzed at an off-site laboratory. Results from
the demonstration have been published in an
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/514), which is available from
EPA.
The field test kits and the associated
spectrophotometer, the H.E.L.P. MATE 2000,
were selected by the U.S. Department of
Commerce and EPA Rapid Commercialization
Initiative (RCI) as representative of "best
available demonstrated technology" in March
1996. The technologies selected for RCI will be
demonstrated and assessed by EPA, the U.S.
Departments of Energy, Commerce, and
Defense, the California EPA, the Western
Governor's Association, and the Southern States
Energy Board throughout 1996 and 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eric Koglin
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2432
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
John Hanby
Hanby Environmental Laboratory
Procedures, Inc.
501 Sandy Point Road
Wimberley, TX 78676
512-847-1212
Fax: 512-847-1454
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 393
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
HNU SYSTEMS, INC.
(HNU Source Excited Fluorescence
Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P] X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
HNU developed the SEFA-P, a portable X-ray
technology, to selectively determine metals
concentrations in soils and other media at
hazardous waste sites or industrial locations.
Three excitation sources are offered with the
SEFA-P X-ray fluorescence (XRF) Analyzer:
Iron-55, Cadmium-109, and Americium-241.
The SEFA-P in its most basic form consists of
the following components: one main cabinet that
encloses the sample chamber; the excitation
sources; a liquid nitrogen-cooled Si(Li) detector;
a preamplifier; spectrometer .electronics; an
MCA; and a battery charger. The internal
battery can power the MCA for 8 hours. The
MCA has an RS232 interface that allows the
SEFA-P to be externally controlled through a PC
Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable (SEFA-P) XRF Analyzer
Page 394
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
or laptop computer. The
approximately 50 pounds.
SEFA-P weighs
The SEFA-P can be calibrated empirically or
using the Compton ratio. Quantitive results for
samples are displayed on the PC screen in units
of parts per million. The SEFA-P only analyzes
soil samples in the intrusive mode; soil samples
are placed in sample cups prior to analysis.
After calibrating the unit, analyzing quality
control samples, and preparing samples, it is
possible to analyze 30 to 50 samples in an 8- to
10-hour day.
The SEFA-P is sold with a general license, so the
operator does not have to be specifically licensed
in each state in which it is used. As of 1995, the
SEFA-P retailed for approximately $45,000
depending on the options included. This price
includes one in-house operational training course.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SEFA-P can detect elements from aluminum
through uranium in soil or other media, such as
those elements at mining and smelting sites, drum
recycling facilities, or plating facilities. The
instrument can provide real-time, on-site
analytical results during field screening and
remedial operations. XRF analysis is faster and
more cost-effective compared to conventional
laboratory analysis.
STATUS:
The SEFA-P has been used at a number of
Superfund sites across the country. A SITE
demonstration of the SEFA-P was conducted in
February 1995. The instrument was used to
identify and quantify concentrations of metals in
soils. A preliminary evaluation of the results
yielded field-based method detection limits,
accuracy, and precision data from the analysis of
standard reference materials and performance
evaluation samples. Comparability of the XRF
results to an EPA-approved reference laboratory
method was also assessed. An SW-846 method
for XRF analysis of soils is scheduled to be
published in 1997. A comprehensive evaluation
of all results will be presented in a technical
report from EPA in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jack Driscoll
HNU Systems, Inc.
160 Charlemont Street
Newton, MA 02161-9987
800-724-6690
617-964-6690
Fax: 617-558-0056
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 395
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
HNU SYSTEMS, INC.
(HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The field-deployable HNU GC 31 ID portable
gas Chromatograph monitors a wide range of
compound emissions from hazardous waste sites
and other emissions sources before and during
remediation (see figure below). It has an internal
carrier gas supply, operates on 110-volt line
power, is microprocessor-controlled, and is
temperature programmable. An internal printer
plots chromatograms and prints data. Data can
also be reported to an external computer, which
is connected through an RS-232 outlet.
The instrument has simultaneous dual-detector
capability and allows the user to choose from
four interchangeable detectors: photoionization,
flame ionization, electron-capture, and far
ultraviolet absorbance. Capillary columns of all
sizes can be installed. The instrument is capable
of autosampling.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The HNU GC 31 ID is applicable to a wide
variety of vapor-phase pollutants. The
photoionization detector is sensitive to
compounds that ionize below 11.7 electron volts,
such as aromatic compounds and unsaturated
halocarbons. The flame ionization detector is
sensitive to hydrocarbons. The electron-capture
detector is sensitive to halocarbons and
HNU GC 31 ID Portable Gas Chromatograph
Page 396
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
polychlorinated biphenyls. The far ultraviolet
absorbance is a universal detector with
characteristics similar to that of a TCD.
STATUS:
The instrument was evaluated in January 1992 at
a Superfund site under remediation. Results
from the demonstration are presented in a peer-
reviewed article entitled "Evaluation of Portable
Gas Chromatographs" in the Proceedings of the
1993 U.S. EPA/Air and Waste Management
Association International Symposium, VTP-33,
Volume 2, 1993. A final report will not be
prepared.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Jack Driscoll
HNU Systems, Inc.
160 Charlemont Street
Newton, MA 02161-9987
800-724-6690
617-964-6690
Fax: 617-558-0056
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 397
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
IDETEK, INC.
(formerly BINAX CORPORATION, ANTOX DIVISION)
(Equate® Immunoassay)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Equate® immunoassay (see photograph
below) uses an anti-benzene, toluene, and xylene
(BTX) polyclonal antibody to facilitate analysis of
BTX in water. A hapten-enzyme conjugate
mimics free BTX hydrocarbons and competes for
binding to the polyclonal antibody immobilized
on a test tube. After the test tube is washed to
remove unbound conjugate, a substrate
chromogen mixture is added and a colored
enzymatic reaction product forms. The
enzymatic reaction is stopped by adding a few
drops of sulfuric acid, which colors the
enzymatic product yellow.
As with other competitive enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assays, the color intensity of the
enzymatic product is inversely proportional to the
sample analyte concentration. Each sample is
run with a reference sample of deionized water.
The optical density of the colored enzymatic
product is read on a portable digital colorimeter
equipped with a filter that passes light at a peak
wavelength of 450 nanometers. The ratio of the
sample to the reference optical density values is
used to estimate the aromatic hydrocarbon level
in the low parts per million (ppm) range. The
test is sensitive to about 1 ppm and requires 5 to
10 minutes per analysis.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Equate® immunoassay
measure BTX in water.
is designed to
Equate® Immunoassay Kit
Page 398
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The National Exposure Research Laboratory-Las
Vegas evaluated several versions of the Equate®
immunoassay. The evaluation focused on cross-
reactivity and interference testing and on analysis
of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
and gasoline standard curves.
As a preliminary field evaluation, the Equate®
immunoassay was used to analyze in duplicate
five well samples and a creek sample, both in the
field and the laboratory. Confirmatory analysis
was conducted using purge-and-trap gas
chromatography with an electron-capture
detector, in parallel with a photoionization
detector.
A SITE demonstration of the Equate®
immunoassay was conducted in 1992. Results
from this demonstration were published in June
1994 in an EPA report entitled "Superfund
Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program Evaluation Report for Antox BTX
Water Screen (BTX Immunoassay)"
(EPA/540/R-93/518).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jeanette Van Emon
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2154
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Richard Lankow
Idetek, Inc.
1245 Reamwood Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
408-752-1353
Fax: 408-745-0243
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 399
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
METOREX, INC.
(Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
Metorex, Inc. (Metorex), manufactures, sells,
rents, leases, and provides analytical and repair
services for its X-MET line of field portable X--
ray fluorescence (FPXRF) analyzers. The latest
X-MET models in this series of instruments are
the 920 and 940 X-MET systems. The X-MET
920 series includes the X-MET 920-P and 920-
MP. The X-MET analyzers are specifically
calibrated for on-site or in situ hazardous waste
analysis. These analyzers provide rapid,
nondestructive measurements of inorganic
contaminants in soil, thin film such as lead in
paint, or water matrices.
Each X-MET 920 series analyzer is built from
modules into systems based on customers'
analytical and logistical needs. X-MET PC
System (XPCS) can either be built into the
expansion slot of the computer or is provided as
a standalone, battery- operated XPCS module for
direct interface to a computer's RS-232 port.
The X-MET 940 is a custom, miniaturized,
field-hardened, battery-operated, DOS-based
computer which is dedicated to field XRF
application. The system uses a flash or electronic
hard disk to provide extreme durability under
field operating conditions. It is among the
smallest, lightest commercially available FPXRF
with the full range of analytical capabilities.
The X-MET 920-P is equipped, with a solid state
Si(Li) contained in a hand-held probe. The X-
MET 920 MP is equipped with a gas-filled
proportional counter detector contained in a
hand-held probe. The basic analyzer
configuration includes the PC, XRF software,
XPCS, and the analysis probe with excitation
source. The XPCS contains a 2,048-channel
multichannel analyzer (MCA) that collects,
analyzes, and displays the X-ray pulse-height
spectrum. The high-resolution Si(Li) detector is
liquid nitrogen cooled by a 0.5-liter dewar built
into the probe. The gas-filled proportional
detector operates at ambient temperatures.
Metorex offers iron55, cadmium , and
americium M1 radioisotope excitation sources.
Dual source configurations are available.
All software is menu driven. These instruments
are factory-calibrated and can be field-calibrated
using either empirical calibration or standardless-
fundamental parameters (FP). Empirical
calibration requires a set of site-typical or
analyzed site-specific samples for the initial
calibration. FP calibration requires one certified
standard. Metorex claims that 50 or more soil
samples can be analyzed in an 8- to 10-hour day
with intrusive sampling, rigorous sample
preparation, and long measurement times (200 to
300 seconds per sample) and up to 200 samples
per day with in situ screening and short (10 to
100 seconds per sample) measurement times.
Page 400
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
The X-MET 920-P, equipped with a Si(Li)
detector, dual radioisotope sources, and a
portable sealed computer, sells for $47,950. The
X-MET 920 MP sells for $36,325 and the X-
MET 940 sells for $62,430. These prices include
factory training for two people at the Metorex
facility. The X-MET can also be rented or
leased from Metorex.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The X-MET technology is designed to identify
more than 60 elements in soil or other matrices,
such as those at mining and smelting sites, drum
recycling facilities, or plating facilities. The
instrument can provide real-time, on-site
analytical results during field screening and
remediation operations. FPXRF analysis is faster
and more cost-effective compared to conventional
laboratory analysis.
STATUS:
The X-MET 920-P, 920-MP, and 940 were
evaluated under the SITE Program in April 1995.
The instruments were used to identify and
quantify concentrations of metals in soils. A
preliminary evaluation of the results yielded
field-based method detection limits, accuracy,
and precision data from the analysis of standard
reference materials and performance evaluation
samples. Comparability of the FPXRF results to
an EPA-approved reference laboratory method
was also assessed. A SW-846 method for
FPXRF analysis of soils is scheduled to be
published in 1996. The results from the
evaluation of the X-MET 920-P and 940
analyzers were combined in a single report.
Results from the evaluation of the X-MET 920-
MP analyzer were reported in a separate report.
A comprehensive evaluation of all results will be
presented in a technical report from EPA in
1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
James Pasmore
Metorex, Inc.
1900 N.E. Division Street, Suite 204
Bend, OR 97701
800-229-9209
541-385-6748
Fax: 541-385-6750
The SITE Program assesses but does not
, approve or endorse technologies.
Page 401
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
MICROSENSOR SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED
(MSI-301A Vapor Monitor)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The MSI-301A vapor monitor is a portable,
temperature-controlled gas chromatograph with
a highly selective surface acoustic wave detector
and an on-board computer (see photograph
below). The MSI-301A vapor monitor performs
the following functions:
• Preconcentrates samples and uses
scrubbed ambient air as a carrier gas
• Analyzes a limited group of preselected
compounds, such as benzene, toluene, and
xylenes, at part per billion levels
• Operates by battery and includes an
RS-232 interface
• Operates automatically as a stationary
sampler or manually as a mobile unit
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The MSI-301A vapor monitor can monitor many
volatile organic compound emissions from
hazardous waste sites and other sources before
and during remediation.
STATUS:
In January 1992, the MSI-301A vapor monitor
was evaluated in the field at a Superfund site.
Results from the demonstration are presented in
a peer-reviewed article entitled "Evaluation of
Portable Gas Chromatographs" in the
Proceedings of the 1993 U.S. EPA/Air and Waste
Management Association International
Symposium, VIP-33, Volume 2, 1993.
MSI-301A Vapor Monitor
Page 402.
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Norman Davis
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated
62 Corporate Court
Bowling Green, KY 42103
502-745-0099
Fax: 502-745-1168
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 403
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
MBLLIPORE CORPORATION
(EnviroGard™ PCB Immunoassay Test Kit)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The EnviroGard™ polychlorinated biphenyl
(PCB) immunoassay test kit rapidly analyzes for
PCB concentrations in samples of soil or
sediment. The operating procedure for this
competitive enzyme-linked immunoassay kit is
shown in the figure below.
Soil sample extracts are prepared using the
EnviroGard™ Soil Extraction Kit and methanol.
These extracts and assay calibration solutions are
added to plastic test tubes coated with antibodies.
PCB-enzyme conjugate is added to each test tube.
The test tubes then stand for 15 minutes. The
antibodies in each test tube bind with either PCB
molecules or enzyme conjugate. Next, the tubes
are washed to remove any material not bound to
the antibodies. A clear substrate/chromogen
solution is then added to each tube, and the tubes
are allowed to stand for 5 minutes. Any enzyme
conjugate bound to the tubes colors the clear
substrate blue. A deeper shade of blue in the test
tube indicates a lower PCB concentration.
Principles of the Test
Incubation 1:
Sample and conjugate are added
to the tube and compete for a
limited number of specific
binding sites on the
Immobilized antibodies.
Wash:
Unbound Compounds are washed
away, leaving only analyte and
conjugate bound to antibodies.
Incubation 2:
Colorless substrate and chromogen
are converted to color in proportion
to amount of bound enzyme.
L«ss color means more annlyte.
HM^I-
Hl *-»-
HH »-
HI E-»-
HH Jh-
^k. = Analyte
Y= Antl-Analyte
Antibody
E-^ = Enzyme
Conjugate
S = Substrate
C - Chromogen
Test Kit Procedure
Page 404
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
The color intensity in the test tubes is measured
at 450 nanometers using a small portable
photometer. The color intensity is compared to
one or more of the four calibrator solutions
included in the kit to yield data allowing
classification above or below 1, 5, 10, or
50 parts per million (ppm). Up to 18 sample
extracts can be analyzed in less than 30 minutes.
Millipore Corporation (Millipore) can provide
optional protocols for quantitative analysis of
specific Aroclors or for testing sediment, water,
or soil samples.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The EnviroGard™ PCB test kit measures PCB
concentrations in soil or sediment. The test is
calibrated to screen for Aroclors 1016, 1232,
1242, 1248, 1254, and 1260 at greater than
95 percent confidence interval.
STATUS:
In 1991, the EnviroGard™ PCB test kit was used
to screen and quantify PCB contamination in soils
at a SITE demonstration of a solvent extraction
system in Washburn, Maine.
Soil containing over 50 ppm PCB was required
for the demonstration at the Washburn, Maine
site. Calibrators at the 5 and 50 ppm level were
used to evaluate the kit's potential for segregating
soils. Additional tests were performed on
dilutions of the soil extracts to evaluate
quantitative performance. Highly contaminated
soils were easily identified, and quantitative tests
provided correlation to contaminant levels
obtained by off-site laboratory analysis using
EPA Method 8080. The Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-95/517) is
available from EPA.
The kit was also demonstrated at a U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) site hi Kansas
City, Missouri. Soils contaminated with Aroclor
1242 in ranges from nondetectable to greater than
1,000 ppm were analyzed with the test kit at the
DOE facility. Over 200 assays of environmental
samples and calibrators were performed to
evaluate correlation with both on-site and off-site
laboratory gas chromatograph data. Final
evaluation of the data will be presented in the
Technology Evaluation Report.
The EnviroGard™ PCB test kit has been accepted
by the EPA Office of Solid Waste for inclusion in
SW-846 as Method 4020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGERS:
Stephen Billets or Jeanette Van Emon
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232 or 702-798-2154
Fax:702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Barbara Young
Analytical Division
Millipore Corporation
80 Ashby Road
Bedford, MA 01730
617-533-5207
Fax: 617-533-3135
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 405
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
MILLIPORE CORPORATION
(EnviroGard™ PCP Immunoassay Test Kit)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The EnviroGard™ pentachlorophenol (PCP)
immunoassay test kit, shown in the photograph
below, rapidly analyzes soil and water samples at
sites contaminated with PCP. The procedure is
performed by adding a water or soil sample
extract to test tubes coated with a specific
antibody along with a PCP-enzyme conjugate.
The PCP from the sample and the enzyme
conjugate compete for immobilized anti-PCP
antibody binding sites. After the initial
competitive reaction, any unbound enzyme
conjugate is washed from the tubes and a clear
substrate is added. Any bound enzyme conjugate
colors the clear substrate blue. A small portable
photometer is used to measure the color intensity,
which is inversely related to the concentration of
the PCP in the original sample or calibrator
solution.
The amount of color in the sample tubes is
compared to calibrators corresponding to either
10 and 100 parts per million (ppm) for soil
samples or 5 and 50 parts per billion (ppb) for
water samples. Different detection levels can be
achieved by diluting either the soil sample extract
or the water sample.
The test kit has been tested for interferences with
humic acids, pH, water content in soil samples,
and oil co-contamination. Humic acid content in
sample extracts greater than 10,000 ppb may
cause false positive results. Samples with pH
within the range of 4 to 14 were found to be
correctly evaluated. The test kit correctly
EnviroGard™ PCP Immunoassay Test Kit
Page 406
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
evaluated soils containing water up to 30 percent
by weight, as well as samples containing water
up to 10 percent by weight. Soil samples
containing up to 10 percent oil were also
correctly evaluated by the test kit.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The EnviroGard™ PCP test kit measures PCP in
water samples and extracts of soil samples.
Detection limits are 10 ppm for soil samples and
5 ppb for water samples.
STATUS:
The EnviroGard™ PCP test kit was used to screen
and quantify PCP contamination in soil and
groundwater during a SITE demonstration in
Morrisville, North Carolina in August 1993.
The PCP carrier used at this site was a mixture of
isopropyl ether and butane. In addition, soil and
groundwater samples collected from a wood-
preserving site in Winona, Missouri were tested
during the demonstration. Diesel fuel was used
as the PCP carrier at this site.
The test kit did not meet acceptable accuracy
requirements during the demonstration.
Millipore has since developed a revised protocol
for PCP analysis. Millipore believes the revised
protocol improves the accuracy and
reproducibility of the test.
The Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/514), which details results from
the demonstration, is available from EPA.
The EnviroGard™ PCP test kit has been accepted
by the EPA Office of Solid Waste for inclusion in
SW-846 as Method 4010A.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jeanette Van Embn
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2154
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Barbara Young
Analytical Division
Millipore Corporation
80 Ashby Road
Bedford, MA 01730
617-533-5207
Fax: 617-533-3135
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 407
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
MTI ANALYTICAL INSTRUMENTS
(formerly MICROSENSOR TECHNOLOGY, INCORPORATED)
(Portable Gas Analyzer)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The MTI Analytical Instruments (MTI) P200 gas
analyzer, shown below, is a dual-channel, high-
speed, portable micro gas chromatograph (GC)
that provides isothermal analysis of gas-phase
samples. The injector and thermal conductivity
detector (TCD) are micromachined in silicon,
generating high-quality, high-precision
chromatographic components. The dimensions
of these silicon devices enable the use of
microbore capillary columns with an inner
diameter of 0.320 millimeter or less.
Gas-phase samples are drawn into a sample loop
with an internal vacuum pump. An aliquot of the
sample is then introduced onto the capillary
column using the microvalves of the silicon
injector. All analyses are completed in less than
160 seconds, making the P200 gas analyzer one
of the fastest commercially available GCs.
The P200 gas analyzer houses an internal sealed
lead acid battery and an internal supply cylinder
of carrier gas providing 6 to 8 hours of
continuous operation. When interfaced with a
laptop computer and used with MTFs
chromatography data system, the P200 is fully
capable of field operation.
The P200 gas analyzer has a minimum detectable
level of 1 part per million for a wide variety of
volatile organic compounds (VOC), including
xylenes. A heated sample inlet system enables
P200 Gas Analyzer
Page 408
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
the P200 gas analyzer to detect naphthalene and
hexachlorobutadiene. MTI's Trapper 2000
portable sample concentrator extends the
analytical detection limit of the P200 to about
1 to 10 parts per billion for EPA Method TO-14
compounds.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The P200 gas analyzer is capable of analyzing
soil gases, VOC contaminants in groundwater,
and, with the use of the Trapper 2000 portable
sample concentrator, VOCs in ambient air (for
example, Method TO-14 compounds). The
micro TCD is suitable for analyzing many types
of organic and inorganic vapor-phase
compounds. The P200 gas analyzer can be used
to monitor VOC emissions from hazardous waste
sites before and during remediation. Because of
its portability, high analytical speed, and
relatively low detection limit, this field GC
provides not only rapid field screening of VOCs,
but also provides results of similar, quality to
those produced by a laboratory GC mass
spectrometer.
STATUS:
The P200 gas analyzer was evaluated during a
field study hi August 1995. During the study,
downwind vapors from an artificial source
generator were analyzed. Preliminary results of
the demonstration were presented in an article
titled "Performance Comparison of Field-
Deployable Gas Chromatographs with Canister
TO-14 Analyses" in the Proceeding of the 1996
U.S. EPA/Air and Waste Management
Association International Symposium, VTP-64,
1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
David Sherve
MTI Analytical Instruments
41762 Christy Street
Fremont, CA 94538
510-490-0900
Fax: 510-490-0904
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 409
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
NAVAL COMMAND, CONTROL, AND
OCEAN SURVEILLANCE CENTER
(SCATS Cone Penetrometer)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Site Characterization and Analysis
Penetrometer System (SCAPS) was developed by
the Naval Command, Control and Ocean
Surveillance Center, Research, Development,
Test, and Evaluation Division. SCAPS is
mounted on a cone penetrometer testing (CPT)
platform for field use; it can be fitted with a
laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) sensor to
provide in situ field screening of petroleum
hydrocarbons in subsurface soils. CPT
technology has been widely used in the
geotechnical industry for determining soil
strength and soil type from measurements of tip
resistance and sleeve friction on an instrumented
probe. The SCAPS CPT platform equipped with
LIF sensors can provide real-time field screening
of the physical characteristics of soil and
chemical characteristics of petroleum
hydrocarbon contamination at hazardous waste
sites.
SCAPS is primarily designed to quickly and cost-
effectively distinguish hydrocarbon-contaminated
areas from uncontaminated areas. SCAPS also
provides geologic information and reduces the
amount of investigation-derived waste. This
capability allows further investigation and
remediation decisions to be made more efficiently
and reduces the number of samples that must be
submitted for laboratory analysis.
The OF system uses a pulsed laser coupled with
an optical detector to measure fluorescence
through optical fibers. Fluorescence is measured
through a sapphire window on a probe that is
pushed into the ground with a truck-mounted
CPT. LIF provides data on the in situ
distribution of petroleum hydrocarbons,
measured by the fluorescence response induced
in the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)
that comprise the petroleum hydrocarbon. LIF
detects PAHs hi the bulk soil matrix throughout
the vadose, capillary fringe, and saturated zones.
LIF also provides a detect-nondetect field
screening capability relative to a specified
detection limit derived for a specific fuel product
on a site-specific soil matrix. In addition, LIF
provides qualitative data derived from
spectrographic data at depths up to 150 feet.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
SCAPS CPT technology equipped with LIF
sensors can provide real-time qualitative analysis
of subsurface soils. This technology may be
useful in screening soils at oil refineries, tank
farms, and shipyards. The combined
technologies provide substantial cost savings and
quicker analyses compared to conventional
laboratories.
STATUS:
The SCAPS CPT and LIF technologies were
demonstrated at two hydrogeologically distinct
field sites under the SITE Characterization and
Monitoring Program. The demonstrations were
conducted at the Hydrocarbon National Test Site
at the Naval Construction Battalion Center in
Port Hueneme, California in May 1995, and the
Steam Plant Tank Farm, Sandia National
Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico hi
November 1995. An Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (ITER) (EPA/540/R-95/520)
was published by EPA.
The SCAPS project is meeting the Navy's goals
of (1) expedited development and regulatory
acceptance, (2) performance of urgently needed
petroleum, oil, and lubricant (POL) field
screening at Navy facilities, and (3) technology
transfer to industry for widespread use. The
SCAPS LIF technology is certified and verified.
The technology has matured to become a
platform with state-of-the-art sensor technology
and a suite of the latest CPT tools for sampling
and direct push well installations. On August 5,
1996, the California EPA Department of Toxic
Substance Control certified the SCAPS LIF as a
site characterization technology for real-time, in
Page 410
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
situ subsurface field screening for POL
contaminants, pursuant to California Health and
Safety Code, Section 25200.1.5.
Three SCAPS units are performing POL field
screenings at Navy facilities on a prioritized
basis. These screenings include plume chasing
and plume edge delineation on a finer scale than
has been feasible in the past.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS:
The results of the SCAPS demonstrations at Port
Hueneme and Sandia National Laboratories were
presented in the ITER and are summarized
below:
• SCAPS met the demonstration
objective of providing real-time
screening of the physical characteristics
of soil and chemical characteristics of
petroleum hydrocarbon contamination.
• SCAPS achieved better than 90 percent
agreement with the discrete soil
samples and analytical results.
• SCAPS is capable of mapping the
relative magnitude and the vertical and
horizontal extent of subsurface
fluorescent petroleum hydrocarbon
contaminant plumes in soil and
groundwater.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Bob Lien
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Thomas Hampton
Naval Command, Control, and Ocean
Surveillance Center,
Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation Division
NCCOSC RDTE DIV 5204
53560 Hull Street
San Diego, CA 92152-5001
619-553-1172
Fax: 619-553-1177
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 411
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
NITON CORPORATION
(XL Spectrum Analyzer)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
NITON Corporation (Niton) manufactures and
services the XL Spectrum Analyzer, a hand-held,
field portable X-ray fluorescence (FPXRF)
instrument. The XL Spectrum Analyzer allows
in situ and on-site measurement of select metals
in paint films, soil, and other media. Niton
originally designed the XL Spectrum Analyzer
for fast, accurate, nondestructive measurement of
lead in paint.
The XL Spectrum Analyzer includes a
cadmium-109 radioactive source (10 millicurie)
that provides the excitation energy which
produces characteristic fluorescent X-rays from
a sample. The instrument includes a silicon Pin-
diode detector, cooled by the thermoelectric
Peltier effect. The instrument also includes (1) a
multichannel analyzer of 1,024 channels, (2) an
RS-232 serial port for data transfer and printing,
(3) an internal memory for storing up to 500
readings with spectra, and (4) a back-lit graphic
liquid crystal display.
The instrument self-calibrates its energy scale and
uses a Compton backscatter calibration
technique. This calibration compensates for X-
ray absorption in the soil matrix. The instrument
is equipped with a removable battery pack that
provides up to 8 hours of continuous use. It can
analyze 200 to 300 samples in an 8- to 10-hour
day, based on a 60-second analysis time and
minimal sample preparation. The complete
instrument, shown in the photograph below,
weighs less than 3 pounds.
Niton requires a 2-day operator training and
radiation safety course, which is provided by Star
Environmental Services at a cost of $350 per
XL Spectrum Analyzer
Page 412
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
person. Niton manufactures the XL Spectrum
Analyzer under a specific license with the State
of Rhode Island. In general, an operator must be
state licensed to possess and operate the
instrument.
The standard XL Spectrum Analyzer costs
$11,990, which includes the battery pack and
charger, automotive power adapter, cable for
serial data downloading, waterproof carrying
case, operating and safety manual, paint film
standards, barcode wand, personal computer
software, and a 2-year warranty. The soil
analysis application package costs an additional
$6,000 and includes application software, sample
collection and preparation equipment, accessories
for measuring soil in place or in sample cups,
soil standards, a user's manual, and a plastic
carrying case. An extra battery pack costs $300.
The cadmium-109 source, which has a half-life
of 15 months, costs $2,200 to replace.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The XL Spectrum Analyzer can detect more than
15 elements in soil samples, such as those
obtained from lead-contaminated residences,
mining and smelting sites, drum recycling
facilities, and plating facilities. The instrument
can provide real-time, on-site analytical results
during field screening and remediation
operations. FPXRF analysis is faster and more
cost-effective compared to conventional
laboratory analysis.
STATUS:
The XL Spectrum Analyzer was demonstrated
under the SITE Program in April 1995. The
instrument was used to identify and quantify
concentrations of metals in soils. A preliminary
evaluation of the results yielded field-based
method detection limits, accuracy, and precision
data from the analysis of standard reference
materials and performance evaluation samples.
Comparability of the FPXRF results to an EPA-
approved reference laboratory method was also
assessed. An SW-846 method for FPXRF
analysis of soils was published in 1996. A
comprehensive evaluation of all results will be
presented hi a technical report from EPA in
1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Stephen Shefsky
NITON Corporation
74 Loomis Street
P.O. Box 368
Bedford, MA 01730-0368
617-275-9275
Fax: 617-275-2397
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 413
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
PHOTOVAC MONITORING INSTRUMENTS
(formerly PHOTOVAC INTERNATIONAL, INC.)
(PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas Chromatograph)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph (GC) is a lightweight, battery
powered, isothermal GC (see figure below). The
Voyager GC is designed to replace the Photovac
10S Plus GC and incorporates the following
design changes:
• A miniature analytical engine is
comprised of a precolumn/backflush
three-column set, with a dedicated
column for "light," "middle," and
"heavy" compounds; isothermal oven
with an operating temperature up to
80°C; a miniature all-steel valve array;
and a syringe/valve injection port. The
whole engine is maintained at the set
isothermal temperature.
The 10.6-electron-volt (eV)
photoionization detector (PID) matches
the sensitivity of the 10S Plus GC for
benzene, toluene, xylenes, and
chlorinated ethylenes.
The Voyager GC includes a variety of
detectors, such as an electron-capture
detector (BCD), to provide high
sensitivity for the chlorinated alkanes.
A total volatile organic compound
(VOC) function (using the PID only) is
intended primarily as a fast screening
tool for pre-GC analysis; the VOC
function supports either syringe or
automatic (using the internal pump)
injections.
Factory-programmed assay for up to 40
VOCs listed in EPA Method 624.
PE-Photovac Voyager Portable Gas Chromatograph
Page 414
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
• A "simplified" operating mode
designed to detect a subset of VOCs
selected from the preprogrammed
assay.
• An "advanced" operating mode allows
extensive method customization, such
as adding compounds to the
preprogrammed assay.
• Total weight with PID is 15 pounds.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Voyager GC can monitor VOC emissions
from hazardous waste sites and other emission
sources before, during, and after remediation. It
is more flexible in analytical functionality and has
an extended scope of compound separation
compared to the 10S Plus GC for monitoring
VOC at ambient background levels.
STATUS:
The Photovac 10S PLUS GC was evaluated in
January 1992 at a Superfund site under
remediation. Results from this demonstration are
presented hi a peer-reviewed article entitled
"Evaluation of Portable Gas Chromatographs" in
the Proceedings of the 1993 U.S. EPA/Air and
Waste Management Association International
Symposium, VIP-33, Volume 2, 1993.
The Voyager GC was evaluated during a field
study hi August 1995. During the study,
downwind vapors from an artificial source
generator were analyzed. Preliminary results of
the demonstration were presented in an article
titled "Performance Comparison of Field-
Deployable Gas Chromatographs with Canister
TO-14 Analyses" in the Proceeding of the 1996
U.S. EPA/Air and Waste Management
Association International Symposium, VIP-64,
1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Mark Collins
Photovac Monitoring Instruments
25-B Jefryn Boulevard West
Deer Park, NY 11729
516-254-4199
Fax: 516-254-4284
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 415
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
SCITEC CORPORATION
(Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer]
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The SCITEC Corporation MAP® Portable
Assayer (see photograph below) is a field
portable X-ray fluorescence (FPXRF) analyzer.
This FPXRF analyzer can simultaneously analyze
for select metals. It is compact, lightweight, and
does not require liquid nitrogen. A rechargeable
battery allows the FPXRF analyzer to be used at
remote sites where electricity is unavailable.
The MAP® Portable Assayer uses a silicon X-ray
detector to provide elemental resolution. The
unit demonstrated under the SITE Program used
a Cadmium-109 radioisotope as the excitation
source.
The MAP® Portable Assayer provides high
sample throughput and is reportedly easy to
operate. Analytical results obtained by this
instrument may be comparable to the results
obtained by EPA-approved methods.
The instrument is composed of a control console
connected to an ambient scanner with a cable.
The basic MAP® system also includes a carry
pack, rechargeable batteries, operator's manual,
target metal standard, and a shipping case. The
control console contains a 256-multichannel
analyzer (MCA) with a storage capacity of 325
spectra and analyses. The control console
weighs 7 pounds and the ambient scanner weighs
about 2.5 pounds.
The MAP® Portable Assayer is capable of
analyzing 70 samples in an 8- to 10-hour day
based on a 240-second analysis time. The
instrument is empirically calibrated by the
developer. SCITEC requires a 1-day operator
training and radiation safety course prior to
MAP® Portable Assayer
Page 416
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
obtaining a specific license to operate the
instrument. The standard MAP® Portable
Assayer package sells for $15,590.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The MAP® Portable Assayer can detect select
metals in soil and sediment samples and in filter
and wipe samples. It can also detect lead hi
paint. The MAP® Portable Assayer reportedly
can quantitate metals at concentrations ranging
from parts per million to percentage levels.
STATUS:
The MAP® Portable Assayer has been used at a
number of Superfund sites across the country. It
was evaluated in April 1995 as part of a SITE
demonstration of FPXRF instruments. The
instrument was used to identify and quantify
concentrations of metals hi soils. A preliminary
evaluation of the results yielded field-based
method detection limits, accuracy, and precision
data from the analysis of standard reference
materials and performance evaluation samples.
Comparability of the FPXRF results to an EPA-
approved reference analytical method was also
assessed during the demonstration. An EPA SW-
846 method for FPXRF analysis of soils was
published in 1996. A comprehensive evaluation
of all results will be presented in a technical
report from EPA in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Steve Santy
SCITEC Corporation
415 North Quay
Kennewick, WA 99336
800-466-5323
509-783-9850
Fax: 509-735-9696
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 417
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
SENTEX SYSTEMS, INC.
(Scentograph Plus n Portable Gas Chromatograph)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Scentograph Plus n portable gas
Chromatograph is designed to monitor volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions from
hazardous waste sites and other emission sources.
It operates by drawing air through a sorbent bed,
followed by rapid thermal desorption into the
carrier stream. The instrument operates in either
argon ionization or electron-capture modes.
The Scentograph Plus n portable gas
chroraatograph can operate for several hours on
internal batteries and has internal carrier gas and
calibration tanks. It can be fitted with capillary
columns (30 meters, 0.32 or 0.53 millimeter) or
packed columns. The instrument can be operated
isothermally at temperatures ranging from
ambient to 179 °C. Oven temperatures can be
programmed at a desired rate. The 11.7-
electron-volt ionization energy allows a detection
limit of about 1 part per billion. The instrument
is controlled by a detachable IBM personal
computer or compatible laptop computer (see
figure below).
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Scentograph Plus II portable gas
Chromatograph can monitor VOC emissions from
hazardous waste sites and other emission sources.
STATUS:
The Scentograph Plus II portable gas
Chromatograph was evaluated in January 1992 at
a Superfund site under remediation. Results
from this demonstration are presented in a
Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph
Page 478
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
December 1996
Completed Project
peer-reviewed article titled "Evaluation of
Portable Gas Chromatographs" in the
Proceedings of the 1993 U.S. EPA/Air and Waste
Management Association International
Symposium, VIP-33, Volume 2, 1993.
The technology was also evaluated in June 1994
at a landfill adjacent to a residental area. Results
from this demonstration are presented in a peer-
reviewed article titled "On-Site Monitoring of
Vinyl Chloride at Parts Per Trillion Levels in Air"
in the Proceedings of the 1995 U.S. EPA/Air and
Waste Management Association International
Symposium, VIP-47, Volume 1, 1995.
The Scentograph Plus n portable gas
chromatograph was also evaluated during a field
study in August 1995. During the study,
downwind vapors from an artificial source
generator were analyzed. Preliminary results of
the demonstration were presented in an article
titled "Performance Comparison of Field-
Deployable Gas Chromatographs with Canister
TO-14 Analyses" in the Proceeding of the 1996
U.S. EPA/Air and Waste Management
Association International Symposium, VIP-64,
1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Amos Linenberg
Sentex Systems, Inc.
553 Broad Avenue
Ridgefield, NJ 07657
201-945-3694
Fax: 201-941-6064
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 419
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
SRI INSTRUMENTS
(Compact Gas Chromatograph)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The SRI Instruments (SRI) line of compact
single- and dual-oven, portable gas
chromatographs (GC) are economical laboratory
instruments designed for on-site analysis of
organic compounds. SRI GCs are equipped with
temperature-programmable column ovens and
electronic pressure control of all system gases.
These GCs also include built-in, serially
interfaced data acquisition hardware and software
that permit use of EBM®-compatible desktop,
notebook, and palmtop PCs. Windows-
compatible software is also available in 16- and
32-bit versions. SRI GCs accept both packed and
capillary columns and may be equipped with
multiple injectors and detectors for series or
independent operation. Purge-and-trap, thermal
desorption, gas sampling, split-splitless, and
liquid autosampling systems are available. SRI
also manufacturers external detector units that
may be connected by a heated transfer line to
existing GCs.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The SRI GCs can monitor airborne emissions
from hazardous waste sites and other emission
sources before, during, and after remediation.
They can also analyze soil, water, and gas
samples for organic contaminants such as
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene,
polychlorinated biphenyls, and pesticides. Their
performance characteristics in the field have been
Compact Gas Chromatograph
Page 420
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
proven by a large private, commercial, and
government user base.
STATUS:
The SRI model 8610 GC was evaluated in
January 1992 at a Superfund site under
remediation. Results from this demonstration are
presented in a peer-reviewed article entitled
"Evaluation of Portable Gas Chromatographs" in
the Proceedings of the 1993 U.S. EPA/Air and
Waste Management Association International
Symposium, VTP-33, Volume 2, 1993.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Richard Berkley
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2439
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Douglas Gavilanes
SRI Instruments
3882 Del Amo Boulevard, Suite 601
Torrance, CA 90503
310-214-5092
Fax: 310-214-5097
E-Mail: srigc@compuserve.com
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 421
-------
Technology Profile
CHARA CTERIZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
STRATEGIC DIAGNOSTICS, INC.
(formerly ENSYS ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCTS, INC,,)
(PENTA RISc Test System)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PENTA RISc Test System is designed to
quickly provide semiquantitative results for
pentachlorophenol (PCP) in soil and water
samples. The system is shown in the photograph
below.
The technology uses immunoassay chemistry to
produce compound-specific reactions that detect
and quantify PCP. Polyclonal antibodies are
fixed to the inside wall of a test tube, where they
offer binding sites for PCP. An enzyme
conjugate containing a PCP derivative is added to
the test tube to compete with sample PCP for
antibody binding sites. Excess sample and
enzyme conjugate are washed from the test tube.
• Reagents are then added to the test tube to react
with the enzyme conjugate, forming a color.
After a designated time period, a solution is
added to the test tube to stop color formation.
The sample color is compared to the color
formed by a PCP standard. A differential
photometer compares the colors. The results
obtained from sou samples are compared against
a standard to determine the detection levels.
The system can be affected by extremes of
naturally occurring matrix effects such as humic
acids, pH, or salinity. Site-specific matrix effects
PENTA RISc Test System
Page 422
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 7996
Completed Project
that can affect the system include PCP carriers
such as petroleum hydrocarbons or solvents; and
other chemicals used in conjunction with PCP,
including creosote, copper-chromium-arsenate,
or herbicides. Specific chemicals similar in
structure to PCP can provide positive results, or
cross reactivity.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The PCP immunoassay measures PCP concen-
trations in soil and water. For semiquantitative
soil analysis, the concentration ranges are as
follows: greater than 50 parts per million (ppm),
between 50 and 5 ppm, between 5 and 0.5 ppm,
and less than 0.5 ppm. For water analysis, the
concentration ranges are as follows: greater than
5,000 parts per billion (ppb), between 5,000 and
500 ppb, between 500 and 5 ppb, and less than 5
ppb. These ranges can be customized to a user's
needs.
STATUS:
The SITE demonstration occurred in summer
1993 at Morrisville, North Carolina. Samples
collected from Winona, Missouri were
transported to the demonstration location for
testing. Samples from both sites were analyzed
to evaluate the effects of different sample
matrices and of different PCP carriers such as
diesel fuel and isopropyl ether-butane. During
the demonstration, the PENTA RISc Test System
analyzed 112 soil samples and 16 water samples.
The Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/514), which details results from
the demonstration, is available from EPA.
The PENTA RISc Test System has been accepted
under Solid Waste Method 4010 (SW-846, third
edition, second update). In the 4 years that it has
been available, more than 12,000 immunoassay-
based tests have been used on wood preserving
sites.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jeanette Van Emon
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2154
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Tim Lawruk
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc.
375 Pheasant Run
Newtown; PA 18940
800-544-8881
215-860-5115
Fax: 215-860-5213
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 423
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
STRATEGIC BIAGNOSTICS,INC.
(formerly OHMICRON CORPORATION)
(RaPID Assay®)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The RaPID Assay® kit is designed to quickly
provide quantitative results for pentachlorophenol
(PCP) concentrations in soil and water samples.
The kit uses immunoassay chemistry to produce
detectable and quantifiable compound-specific
reactions for PCP. Polyclonal antibodies bound
to paramagnetic particles are introduced into a
test tube where they offer binding sites for PCP.
An enzyme conjugate containing a PCP
derivative is added to the test tube, where it
competes with PCP from samples for antibody
binding sites. A magnetic field is applied to each
test tube to hold the paramagnetic particles
containing PCP and enzyme conjugate, while
excess sample and enzyme conjugate are washed
from the test tube.
Legend
O - (
A
D
Magnetic Particle with
Antibody Attached
Pentachlorophenol
Enzyme Conjugate
Pentachlorophenol
Chromogen/Substrate
Colored Product
Reagents are then added to the test tube, where
they react with the enzyme conjugate and form a
color. The color formed in the sample is
compared to the color formed by PCP calibration
standards. The comparison is made with a
spectrophotometer. Samples with PCP
concentrations above the calibration range can be
diluted and reanalyzed.
The RaPID Assay® kit has several advantages
and limitations when used under field conditions.
The method is field portable, easy and fast to
operate, and inexpensive. The RaPID Assay® kit
is limited in that (1) electricity is required to
operate the spectrophotometer, (2) the
immunoassay method may be affected by
temperature fluctuations, and (3) cross-reactivity
may occur for compounds similar to PCP.
1. Immunological Reaction
3. Color Development
RaPID Assay®
Page 424
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 799ff
Completed Project
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The RaPID Assay® kit can be used to identify
and quantify PCP in soil and water samples. The
developer reports the detection limit for soils at
0.1 part per million and water samples at 0.06
part per billion.
STATUS:
The RaPID Assay® kit was evaluated during a
SITE field' demonstration in Morrisville, North
Carolina in August 1993. In addition, samples
collected from a location in Winona, Missouri
were analyzed to evaluate the effects of different
matrices and PCP carriers. The Innovative
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA/540/R-95/514),
which details results from the demonstration, is
available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Jeanette Van Emon
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2154
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Craig Kostyshyn
Strategic Diagnostics,Inc.
375 Pheasant Run
Newtown, PA 18940
215-860-5115, ext. 634
Fax: 215-860-5213
RaPID Assay Used During the SITE Demonstration
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 425
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
TN SPECTRACE
(TN 9000 and TN Pb X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The TN 9000 X-ray fluorescence (XRF)
Analyzer is a field portable unit that
simultaneously analyzes elements ranging from
sulfur to uranium. The TN Pb Analyzer was
designed to analyze for lead in soil, paint and
paint chips, and other matrices. It can also
measure arsenic, chromium, iron, copper,
manganese, and zinc in soils. Both instruments
are compact, lightweight, and do not require
liquid nitrogen. A rechargeable battery allows
the XRF analyzers to be used at remote sites
where electricity is unavailable.
The TN 9000 analyzer and the TN Pb Analyzer
both use a high-resolution mercuric iodide
detector to provide elemental resolution and low
detection limits. The TN 9000 analyzer is
equipped with the three radioisotope sources,
iron-55, cadmium-109, and americium-241,
which allow for identification and quantitation of
26 elements. The TN Pb Analyzer is equipped
only with the cadmium-109 source, which allows
for the quantitation and identification of the seven
elements listed above.
The TN 9000 Analyzer and TN Pb Analyzer
consist of two main components: a probe and an
electronics unit. The probe is connected to the
electronics unit by a flexible cable that allows
analysis of soil samples in the in situ or intrusive
modes. The probe contains the detector and
excitation sources and weighs approximately 4
pounds. The electronics unit contains a 2,048-
multichannel analyzer (MCA) for spectral
analysis. A maximum of 300 sets of results and
120 spectra can be stored in the TN 9000 before
downloading to a PC. A maximum of 600 sets of
results and 100 spectra can be stored in the TN
Lead Analyzer before downloading to a PC.
All elemental concentrations are displayed in
parts per million on the LCD of the electronic
TN 9000 X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
Page 426
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
console. The electronics unit weighs
approximately 15 pounds and can be carried in
the field in a water- repellant carrying case. The
electronic unit is battery-powered and can run up
to 8 hours on a full charge.
Both instruments incorporate user-friendly,
menu-driven software to operate the instrument.
The TN 9000 Analyzer and TN Pb Analyzer are
calibrated using fundamental parameters, which
is a standardless calibration technique. At the
time of the SITE demonstration, the TN 9000 and
TN Pb Analyzers cost $58,000 and $39,500,
respectively. These costs included all equipment
necessary to operate the instrument. Leasing and
rental options are also available. The TN 9000
Analyzer, using all three excitation sources, is
capable of analyzing 100 samples per day. The
TN Pb Analyzer is capable of analyzing 300
samples per day using a 60-second count time for
the cadmium-109 source.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The TN 9000 and Pb Analyzers can detect select
elements hi soil, sediment, filter, and wipe
samples. The TN Pb Analyzer can also detect
lead in paint. Both units can identify select
elements at concentrations ranging from parts per
million to percentage levels in soil samples
obtained from mining and smelting sites, drum
recycling facilities, and plating facilities. These
instruments can provide real-time, on-site
analytical results during field screening and
remediation operations. XRF analysis is faster
and more cost-effective compared to conventional
laboratory analysis.
STATUS:
The TN 9000 and TN Pb Analyzers were
demonstrated under the SITE Pogram hi April
1995. The instruments were used to identify and
quantify concentrations of metals hi soils. A
preliminary evaluation of the results yielded
field-based method detection limits, accuracy,
and precision data from the analysis of standard
reference materials and performance evaluation
samples.
Comparability of the XRF results to an EPA-
approved reference laboratory method was also
assessed. An EPA SW-846 method for XRF
analysis of soils is scheduled to be published in
1996. A comprehensive evaluation of all results
will be presented in a technical report from EPA
in 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Raj Natrajan
TN Spectrace
2555 North IH 35
P.O. Box 800
Round Rock, TX 78680-0800
512-388-9100
Fax: 512-388-9200
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 427
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA T1ON AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
TRI-SERVICES
(Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS])
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The Tri-Services Site Characterization and
Analysis Penetrometer System (SCAPS) was
developed by the U.S. Army (U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station
[WES] and the Army Environmental Center
[AEC]), Navy (Naval Command, Control and
Ocean Surveillance Center), and the Air Force
(Armstrong Laboratory). The U.S. Army holds
a patent for the application of laser sensors
combined with cone penetrometry. The laser-
induced fluorescence (LEF) system used in the
SCAPS was modified from a design developed
by the Navy to detect petroleum, oil, and
lubricant fluorescence hi seawater.
A complete cone penetrometer (CPT) truck
system consists of a truck, hydraulic rams and
associated controllers, and the CPT itself. The
weight of the truck provides a static reaction
force, typically 20 tons, to advance the CPT.
The hydraulic system, working against the static
reaction force, advances 1-meter-long,
3.57-centimeter-diameter threaded push rod
segments into the ground. The CPT, which is
mounted on the end of the series of push rods,
contains LIF sensors that continuously log tip
stress and sleeve friction. The data from these
sensors are used to map subsurface stratigraphy.
Conductivity or pore pressure sensors can be
driven into the ground simultaneously. The
20-ton truck is designed with protected work
spaces.
The SCAPS has been modified to provide
automatic grouting of the penetrometer hole
during retraction of the CPT. It can also
Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System (SCAPS)
Page 428
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
decontaminate the push rods as they are retracted
from the soil. The 20-ton CPT system is capable
of pushing standard push rods to depths of
approximately 50 meters.
The main LIF sensor components are as follows:
• Nitrogen (Nj) laser
• Fiber optic cable
• Monochromator to resolve the
fluorescence emission as a function of
wavelength
• Photodiode array (PDA) to detect the
fluorescence emission spectrum and
transduce the optical signal into an
electrical signal
• OMA to interface between the optic
system and the computer system
• Computer system
To operate the SCAPS LIF sensor, the CPT is
positioned over a designated penetration point.
The LIF sensor response is checked using a
standard rhodamine solution held against the
sapphire window; sensor response is checked
before and after each penetration. The CPT is
then advanced into the soil.
The SCAPS LIF system is operated with a N2
laser. The PDA accumulates the fluorescence
emission response over 10 laser shots, and the
PDA retrieves an emission spectrum of the soil
fluorescence and returns this information to the
OMA and computer system. The LIF sensor and
stratigraphy data collection are interpreted by the
on-board computer system.
The spectral resolution of the LIF system under
these operating conditions is 2 centimeters. The
fluorescence intensity at peak emission
wavelength for each stored spectrum is displayed
along with the soil classification data.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The Tri-Services SCAPS was designed to
qualitatively and quantitatively identify classes of
petroleum, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon,
and volatile organic compound contamination in
subsurface soil samples.
STATUS:
The technology field demonstration was held in
EPA Region 7 during September 1994. The
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/520) is available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen Billets
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2232
Fax: 702-798-2261
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACTS:
George Robitaille
Army Environmental Center
Building 4430
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010
410-612-6865
Fax: 410-612-6836
John Ballard
Waterways Experiment Station
3909 Halls Ferry Road
Vicksburg, MS 39810
601-634-2446
Fax: 601-634-2732
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 429
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
(Field Analytical Screening Program PCB Method)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The field analytical screening program (FASP)
polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) method uses a
temperature-programmable gas chromatograph
(GC) equipped with an electron-capture detector
(BCD) to identify and quantify PCBs in soil and
water. Gas chromatography is an EPA-approved
method for determining PCB concentrations.
The FASP PCB method is a modified version of
EPA SW-846 Method 8080.
In the FASP PCB method for soil samples, PCBs
are extracted from the samples, injected into a
GC, and identified and quantified with an BCD.
Chromatograms for each sample are compared to
the chromatograms for PCB standards. Peak
patterns and retention times from the
chromatograms are used to identify and quantify
PCBs in the soil sample extract. In addition to
the GC, the operator may use an autosampler that
automatically injects equal amounts of the sample
extract into the GC column. The autosampler
ensures that the correct amount of extract is used
for each analysis and allows continual analysis
without an operator.
The FASP PCB method quickly provides results
with statistical accuracy and detection limits
comparable to those achieved by formal
laboratories. The method can also identify
individual Aroclors.
Instrumentation and equipment required for the
FASP PCB method are not highly portable.
When mounted in a mobile laboratory trailer,
however, the method can operate on or near most
sites relatively easily. Use of this method
requires electricity, and Aroclor standards
require refrigeration. An exhaust hood and
carrier gases also are needed.
Soil samples must be extracted before analysis
begins. Hexane and sulfuric acid are used during
the extraction process, which removes potential
interferences from the soil sample.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The FASP PCB method can identify and quantify
PCBs hi soil and water samples.
Page 430
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
STATUS:
The FASP PCB method was demonstrated under
the SITE Program at a well-characterized, PCB-
contaminated site. During the demonstration, the
method was used to analyze 112 soil samples, 32
field duplicates, and two performance evaluation
samples. Split samples were submitted to an off-
site laboratory for confirmatory analysis by SW-
846 Method 8080. Data generated by the FASP
PCB method were directly compared with the
data from the off-site laboratory to evaluate the
method's accuracy and precision. In addition,
the operational characteristics and performance
factors of the FASP PCB method were evaluated.
The Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-95/516) is available from EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Eric Koglin
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Characterization Research Division
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
702-798-2432
Fax: 702-798-2692
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Howard Fribush
U.S. EPA
Man Code 5204G
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
703-603-8831
Fax: 703-603-9112
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 431
-------
Technology Profile
CHARACTERIZA TION AND
MONITORING PROGRAM
XONTECH INCORPORATED
(XonTech Sector Sampler)
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The XonTech Incorporated (XonTech) sector
sampler collects tune-integrated whole air
samples in Summa™-polished canisters. The
wind sensor directs whole air, sampled at a
constant rate, into either an "in" sector canister
or an "out" sector canister. When wind velocity
exceeds 0.37 meter per second (m/s) from the
direction of the suspected emissions area (the
target), the first canister is filled. When the wind
velocity exceeds 0.37 m/s from any other
direction, the other canister is filled. When the
wind velocity falls below 0.37 m/s, either
canister or neither canister may receive the
sample. Over an extended period of time, a
target sample and a background sample are
collected. This method is analogous to upwind-
downwind sampling but does not require two
distinct sites or manual sampler control.
The sampler is portable and can be battery- or
AC-powered. The air samples are analyzed by
gas chromatograph (EPA Method TO-14) for
volatile organic compounds (VOC). The use of
sector samplers enables identification of VOCs
originating from the source and differentiation
between other sources in the vicinity.
WASTE APPLICABILITY:
The XonTech sector sampler can monitor VOC
emissions from hazardous waste sites and other
emission sources before and during remediation.
Short-term sampling can determine which high
concentration compounds are emitted from a site.
OUT SECTOR CANISTER PRESSURE GAUGE.
30" HG VACUUM - 30 PSIG
^ EXHAUST)
JOUT SECTOR OUTLET?
IN SECTOR CANISTER PRESSURE GUAGE.
30" HG VACUUM - 30 PSIG
\ IN SECTOR OUTLET
[WIND DIRECTION
Schematic Diagram of the XonTech Sector Sampler
Page 432
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
December 1996
Completed Project
Long-term monitoring can assess an emission
source's potential effects on the local population,
providing data to support risk analyses.
STATUS:
The XonTech sector sampler's usabililty has been
demonstrated in two short-term field studies.
This technology has been applied to industrial
emissions as well as emissions from landfill sites.
Mathematical methods for processing data have
been developed and shown to be appropriate.
The sampler is now commercially available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA PROJECT MANAGER:
Joachim Pleil
U.S. EPA
National Exposure Research Laboratory
MD-44
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-4680
Fax: 919-541-3527
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPER CONTACT:
Matt Yoong
XonTech Incorporated
6862 Hayvenhurst Avenue
Van Nuys, CA 91406
818-787-7380
Fax: 818-787-8132
The SITE Program assesses but does not
approve or endorse technologies.
Page 433
-------
-------
SB)
Documents Available from the
US EPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Superfund Technology Demonstration Division
General Publications
SITE Program: Annual Report to Congress 1994 (EPA/540/R-95/522)
SITE Profiles, Seventh Edition (EPA/540/r-94/526)
Survey of Materials Handling Technologies Used at Hazardous Waste
Sites (EPA/540/2-91/010)
Interim Status Report U.S. and German bilateral Agreement on Remediation of Hazardous
Waste Sites (EPA/540/R-94/500)
Demonstration Project Results
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc.—Pneumatic
Fracturing Extraction and Hot Gas Injection,
Phase 1
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/R-93/509)
PB93-216596
• Technology Demo. Summary
(EPA/540/SR-93/509)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/509)3
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/509)3
PB94-117439
Advanced Remediation Mixing, Inc. (formerly
Chemfix)-ChemicaI Fixation/Stabilization
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-89/01 la)3 PB91-127696
• Technology Evauation Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-89/01 lb)3 PB90-274127
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/011)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/011)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/011 )3
American Combustion, Inc.-Oxygen Enhanced
Incineration
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/5-89/008)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/008)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/008)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/008)3
AWD Technologies, Inc.- Integrated Vapor
Extraction and Steam Vacuum Stripping
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/002)
PB92-218379
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/002)3
Babcock & Wilcox Co-Cyclone Furnace Vitrification
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1 (EPA/540/R-92/017A)3
PB92-222215
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 (EPA/540/R-92/017B)3
PB92-222223
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/017)
PB93-122315
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/017)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/011)
Bergman USA-Soil and Sediment Washing System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/075)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/075)
Biogenesis Enterprises, Inc.-Soil and Sediment Washing
Processes
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/510)
• Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(EPA/540/R-93/510)
• SITE Technology Capsule (EPA/540/SR-93/510)3
Bio-Rem, Inc. - Augmented In-Situ Subsurface Biorem
Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/527)
BioTroI - Biological Aqueous Treatment System
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/5-91/001)3
PB92-110048
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/001)
PB91-227983
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/001)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/001)
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
2 Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 435
-------
Demonstration Project Results (Continued)
BioTrol - Soil Washing System
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1
(EPA/S40/S-91/003a)3 PB92-115310
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 Part A
(EPA/S40/5-91/003b)3 PB92-115328
« Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 Part B
(EPA/540/5-91/003c)3 PB92-115336
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/003)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/003)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/003)
Bricc Environmental Services Corporarion-Bescorp
Soil Washing System Battery Enterprises Site
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/503)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-93/503)
Brown and Root Environmental-Subsurface
Volaitilizarion and Ventilation System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/529)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/529a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-94/529)
Canonic Environmental Services Corporation-Low
Temperature Thermal Aeration (LTTA)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/504)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/504)
CeTcch Resources, Inc., formerly Chemfix
Technologies, Inc. - Chemical Fixation/Stabilization
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-89/01 la) PB91-127696
* Technology Evaluation Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-89/01 Ib) PB90-274127
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/011)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/011)3
PB91-921373
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/011)3
CF Systems Corporation-Liquified Gas Solvent
Extraction
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1 (EPA/540/5-90/002)
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-90/002a)3 PB90-186503
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-90/002)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/002)
Chemical Waste Management, Inc.-X-TRAX
Thermal Desorption System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/502)
Clean Berkshires, Inc. (Now Maxymiilian Technologies)-
Thermal Desorption System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/507)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/507a)3
Dehydro-Tech Corporation-Carver-Greenfield Process
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/R-92/002)3 PB92-
217462
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/002)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/002)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/002)
Dupont/Oberlin-Membrane Microfiltration System
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/5-90/007)3
PB92-153410
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-90/007)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/007)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-90/007)
Dynaphore, Inc.- Forager Sponge Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/522)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/522a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/522)
ECOVA Corporation - Bioslurry Reactor [Pilot-Scale
Demonstration of Slurry-Phase Biological Reactor for
Creosote-Contaminated Wastewater]
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-91/009)3 PB93-205532
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/009)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/009)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/009)
ELI Eco Logic International, Inc.
- GasPhase Chemical Reduction
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/522)
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1
(EPA/540/R-93/522a) PB95-100251
• Technology Evaluation Appendices
(EPA/540/R-93/522b)3 PB95-100251
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/522)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/522)
- Thermal Desorption Unit
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR94/504)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-94/504
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a. PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
Page 436
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Demonstration Project Results (Continued)
Environmental Technologies, Inc.-Metal-Enhanced
Abiotic Degradation Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR95/510)
EPOC Water, Inc. - Microfiltration Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR93/513)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/513)
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. - Colloid Polishing Filter
Method
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR95/501)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/501a) PB95-122792
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/501)
B95-122792
Geo-Con, Inc.-In-Situ Solidification and Stabilization
Process
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1 (EPA/540/5-89/004a)
• Technology Evaluation Appendices
(EPA/540/R-93/522b)3 PB95-100251
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-89)004b)3 PB89-194179
• Technology Evaluation Vol. Ill
(EPA/540/5-89/004c)3 PB90-269069
• Technology Evaluation Vol. IV
(EPA/540/5-89/004d)3 PB90-269077
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/004)
• Technology Demo. Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/004)
• Technology Demo. Summary, Update Report
(EPA/540/S5-89/004a)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/004)3
Geosafe Corporation - In-Situ Vitrification
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR94/520)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/520a)3 PB95-177101
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/520)
CIS/Solutions, Inc. - GIS/KEY Environmental Data
Management System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR94/505)
• Capsule (EPA/540/SR-94/505)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/505)
PB95-138319
Gruppa Italimpresse (developed by Shirco Infrared
Systems, Inc.) - Infrared Incineration
• Technology Evaluation -Peake Oil
CEPA/540/5-88/002a)
• Technology Evaluation Report - Peake Oil Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-88/002b) PB89-116024
• Technology Evaluation - Rose Township (EPA/540/5-
89/007a) PB89-125991
• Technology Evaluation- Rose Township Vol. 11
(EPA/540/5-89)007b) PB89-167910
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/010)
PB89-233423
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/007)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-88/002)3
Hazcon, Inc. (now Funderburk and Assoc.) -
Solidification Process
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1 (EPA/540/5-89/001 a)
PB89-1588103
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 (EPA/540/5-89)001 b)
PB89-1588283
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/001)
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/001)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/001)3
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc. - Flame
Reactor
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 1 (EPA/540/5-91/005)
PB92-205855
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/005)
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/005)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/005)
Hrubetz Environmental Services, Inc. - HRUBOUT
Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/524)
Huges Environmental Systems, Inc. - Steam Enhanced
Recovery Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR94/510)
• Capsule (EPA/540R-94/510a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/510)
FT Research Institute (Brown and Root Environmental,
Inc.) - Radio Frequency Heating
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR94/527)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/527a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/527)
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 437
-------
Demonstration Project Results (Continued)
Magnum Water Technology - CAV-OX Ultraviolet
Oxidation Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/520)
• Applications Analysts (EPA/540/AR-93/520)
PB94-189438
• Technology Evaluation Rep. (EPA/540/R-93/520)3
PB95-166161
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/520)
New York State Multi-Vendor Bioremediation:
- ENSR Consulting & Engineering/Larson
Engineers - Ex-Situ Biovault
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/524)
- R.E. Wright Environmental Inc. - In-Situ
Bioremediation System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/525)
-SBP Technologies, Inc. And Env. Laboratories,
Inc.-Vacuum-VaporizedWell (UVB) System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-96/506)
North American Technologies Group, Inc. - SFC
Oleofiltration System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/525)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/525a)3 PB95-167227
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Rept. (EPA/540/R-94/525)
Ogden Environmental Services, Inc. (now General
Atomics) - Ogden Circulating Bed Combustor
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/001)
• Technology Evaluation Rep. (EPA/540/MR-92/001)
Pet-oxidation Systems, Inc. (now Vulcan) - Perox-
Pure™ Chemical Oxidation V
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/501)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/501)
• Technology Evaluation Rep. (EPA/540/R-93/501)3
PB93-213528
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/501)
Resources Conservation Company - The Basic Extractive
Sludge Treatment (B.E.S.T.) - Solvent Extraction
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/079)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/079)
• Technology Evaluation -Vol. 1
(EPA/540/R-92/079a) PB93-227122
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11, Part 1
(EPA/540/R-92/079b)3 PB93-227130
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11, Part 2
(EPA/540/R-92/079c)3 PB93-227148
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11, Part 3 (EPA/540/R-
92)079d)3 PB93-227155
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/340/SR-92/079)
Retech, Inc. - Plasma Centrifugal Furnace (Plasma Arc
Vitrification)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-91/007)
• Technology Evaluation -Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-9 l/007a)3 PB92-216035
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 (EPA/540/5-9 l/007b)3
PB92-216043
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-91/007)
PB92-218791
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-91/007)
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
- and IT Corporation - Debris Washing System
• Technology Evaluation -Vol. 1 (EPA/540/5-9 l/006a)
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 (EPA/540/5-9 l/006b)3
PB91-231464
• Technology Demo Summary(EPA/540/S5-91/006)
- and University of Cincinnati-Hydraulic Fracturing
of Contaminated Soil
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/505)
• Technology Evaluation and Applications Analysis
Combined (EPA/540/R-93/505)
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/505)
-and USDA-Forest Products Techmology - Fungal
Treatment Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/514)
-Mobile Volume Reduction Unit at the Sand Creek
Superfund Site
• Treatability Study Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/512)
' Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at S13-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 438
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Demonstration Project Results (Continued)
-Mobile Volume Reduction Unit at the Escambia
Superfund Site
• Treatability Study Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/511)
-Volume Reduction Unit
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/508)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/508)
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/R-93/508)3
PB94-136264
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/508)
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
-and IEG Technologies-Unterdruck-Verdampfer-
Brunner Technology (UVB) Vacuum Vaporizing
Well
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/500)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/500a)
-Low Temperature Thermal Treatment (LT3)
System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/019)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/019)
SBP Technologies, Inc.-Membrant Filtration and
Bioremediation
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/014)
• • Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/014)
SilicateTechnology Corporation-
Solidification/Stabilization of Organic/Inorganic
Contaminants
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/010)
« Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/010)3
PB93-172948
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/R-92/010)3
PB95-255709
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/010)
Simplot, J.R. - Ex Situ Anaerobic Bioremediation
Technology: TNT
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/529)
• Capsule (EPA/540/MR-95/529a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/529)
Simplot, J.R. - Ex-Situ Anaerobic Bioremediation
System (The SABRE Process)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/508)
• Capsule (EPA/540R-94/508a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-94/508)
Soiltech ATP Systems, Inc.
-Aostra-SoilTech Anaerobic Thermal Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/008)
-SoilTech Anaerobic Thermal Processor
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/078)
Soliditech, Inc. - Solidification and Stabilization
• Technology Evaluation-Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-89/005a)3 PB90-191750
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 EPA/540/5-89/005b)3
PB90-191768
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/005)
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/005)3
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/005)3
Sonotech, Inc. - Cello Pulse Combustion Burner System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/502)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/502a)
TerraKIeen Response Group, Inc. - Solvent Extraction
Treatment System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/521)3
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/521 a)
Terra Vac, Inc. - In Situ Vacuum Extraction
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/003)3
• Technology Evaluation -Vol. 1
(EPA/540/5-89/003a)3 PB89-192025
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11 (EPA/540/5-89/003b)3
PB89-192033
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/003)
• Technology Demo Summary(EPA/540/S5-89/003)
Texaco, Inc. - Entrained-Bed Gasification Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-94/514)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-94/514a)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-94/514)
Thorneco, Inc. - Enzyme - Activated Cellulose
Technology
• Treataability Study Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/018)3
Toronto Harbour Commission - Soil Recycling
Treatment Train
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-92/015)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/517)
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/R-93/517)3
PB93-216067
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/517)
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERT) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
'Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 439
-------
Demonstration Project Results (Continued)
Toxic Treatments USA, Inc. (Now NOVATERRA,
Inc.)-In-Situ Steam/Hot Air Stripping
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-90/003)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-90/008)
Ultror, a Division of Zimpro Environmental, Inc. -
UV Ozone Treatment for Liquids
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/M5-89/012)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/A5-89/012)
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/5-89/012)3
PB90-198177
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/S5-89/012)
U.S. EPA - McColl Superfund Site - Demonstration
of a Trial Excavation
• Technology Evaluation (EPA/540/5-92/015)3
PB92-226448
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-92/015)
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/015)
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (formerly
Chemical Waste Management, Inc.) -PO*WW*ER™
Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-93/506)
• Applications Analysis (EPA/540/AR-93/506)
• Technology Evaluation -Vol. 1
(EPA/540/R-93/506a)3 PB94-160637
• Technology Evaluation Vol. 11
(EPA/540/R-93506b)3 PB94-160660
• Technology Demo Summary (EPA/S40/SR-93/506)
Zenon Environmental, Inc. - Zenon Cross-
FlowPervaporation Technology
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/511)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/51 la)
Zenon Environmental Systems - Zenogem Wastewater
Treatment Process
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/503)
• Capsule (EPA/540/R-95/503a)
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a. PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
Page 44O
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Emerging Technologies Program Reports
General Publications
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program: - Innovation Making a Difference
Emerging Tech. Brochure (EPA/540/F-94/505)
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program: - Technology with an Impact
Emerging Tech. Brochure (EPA/540/F-93/500)
SITE Emerging Technology Program (Brochure) (EPA/540/F-95/502)
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. - Two Zone
PCE Bioremediation System
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/510)
Aluminum Company of America - Bioscrubber for
Removing Hazardous Organic Emission from Soil,
Water, and Air Decontamination Process
• EmergingTeoh. Report (EPA/540/R- 93/521)3
PB93-227025
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/507)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/521)
• Journal Article AWMA Vol. 44, No. 3, March 1994
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited - Chemical
Treatment and Ultraflltration
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/002)
Babcock & Wilcox Co. - Cyclone Furnace (Soil
Vitrification)
• EmergingTech. Report (EPA/540/R-93/507)
PB93-163038
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/010)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/507)
Batelle Memorial Institute - In Situ Elecroacousric
Soil Decontamination
• Emerging Technology (EPA/540/5-90/004)3
PB90-204728
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/004)3
Bio-Recovery Systems, Inc. - Removal and Recovery
of Metal Ions from Ground-water (AlgaSORB)
• Emerging Technology (EPA/540/5-90/005a)
• Emerging Tech. - Appendices
(EPA/540/5-90/005b)3 PB90-252602
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/S5-90/005)
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/003)
Biotrol, Inc. - Mehanotrophic Bioreactor System
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/506)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/505)
• Journal Article AWMA Vol. 45, No. 1, Jan. 1995
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
- Acid Extraction Treatment System for Treatment of
Metal Contiminated Soils
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-94/513)3
PB94-188109
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-94/513)
- Reclamation of Lead from Superfund Waste Material
Using Secondary Lead Smelters
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/510)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-95/504)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-95/504)3
PB9-199022
Colorado School of Mines - Constructed Wetlands-Based
Treatment
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/001)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/523)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-93/523)3
PB93-233914
University of Dayton Research Institute - Development of
a Photothermal Detoxification Unit .
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/505)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-95/526)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-95/526)3
PB95-255733
Electro-Pure Systems, Inc. - Alternating Current
Electrocoagularion Technology
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/011)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/S-93/504)
• Journal Article AWMA V43, No. 43, May 1993
Electrokinetics, Inc., - Electrokinetic Soil Processing
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/504)
Energy and Environmental Engineering - Laser-Induced
Photochemical Oxidative Destruction
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/004)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-92/080)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-92/080)3
PB93-131431
* Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 441
-------
Emerging Technologies Program Reports
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation -
Hybrid Fluidized Bed System
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/508)
FERRO Corporation - Waste Vitrification Through
Electric Melting
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/503)
Florida International University (or Electron Beam
Research Facility)
- Electron Beam Treatment for Removal of Benzene
and Toluene from Aqueous Streams and Sludge
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/502)
- Electron Beam Treatment for the Trichloroethylene
and Tetrachloroethylene from Aqueous Stream
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/009)
-Removal of Phenol from Aqueous Solutions Using
High Energy Electron Beam Irradiation
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/509)
Institute of Gas technology
-Chemical and Biological Treatment (CBT)
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/504)
-Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/501)
IT Corporation - Photolysis/Biodegradation of PCB
and PCDD/PCDF Contaminated Soils
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/502)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-94/531)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-94/531)3
PB95-159992
IT Corporation - Process for the Treatment of
Volatile Organic Carbon & Heavy-Metal
Contaminated Soil
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/509)
J.R. Simplot - Anaerobic Destruction of
Nitroaromatics (the SABRE Process)
• Journal Article App.Env.Mcro, Vol. 58, pp. 1683-89
Matrix Photocatalytic, Inc. - Photocatalytic Water
Treatment
• Journal Article (EPA/600/A-93/282)3
PB94-130184
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. - Volatile
Organic Compound Removal from Air Streams by
Membrane Separation
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/503)
M.L. Energia- Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Process
for Safe Conversion of Hazardous Chlorocarbon Waste
Streams
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/508)
New Jersey Institute of Technology •• GHEA Associates
Process for Soil Washing and Wastewater Treatment
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-94/509)
PURUS, Inc. - Photolytic Oxidation Process [Destruction
of Organic Contaminants in Air Using Advanced
Ultraviolet Flashlamps]
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/501)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/516)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-93/516)
PB93-205383
Roy F. Weston, Inc. - Ambersorb 563 Adsorbent
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-95/500)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-9S/516)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-95/516)3
PB95-264164
University of Washington - Metals Treatment at
Superfund Sites by Adsorptive Filtration
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-92/008)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-93/515)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-93/515)3
PB94-170230
Wastewater Technology Centre - [A] Cross-Flow
Pervaporation System [for Removal of VOC's from
Contaminated Water]
• Emerging Tech. Bulletin (EPA/540/F-93/503)
• Emerging Tech. Summary (EPA/540/SR-94/512)
• Emerging Tech. Report (EPA/540/R-94/512)3
PB95-170230
' Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
1 Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 442
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Measuring and Monitoring Program Reports
PCP/PCB Immunoassay Test Kits
PCP Immunoassay Technologies: Ensys Inc. - PENTA
Rise: Ohmicron Corp., - Penta RaPid; Millipore Inc. -
Envirogard
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/514)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/514)
HNU-Hanby PCP Immunoassay Test Kit
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/515)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/515)
EnviroGard PCS Test Kit - Millipore Inc.
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/517)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/517)
Char-N-Soil PCS Test Kit
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/518)
' • Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/518)
Analytical Methods
Field Analytical Screening Program (FASP): PCS
Method ;
• Demoris.tration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/521)
• . Innovativei Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/521)
Field Analytical Screening Program (FASP): PCP
Method •',-
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/528)
• Innovatfyi Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/528)
\^g
ConePeiietrometer
The Rapid Optical Screening Tool (ROST)
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/519)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/519)
Site Characterization Analysis Penerrometer System
• Demonstration Bulletin (EPA/540/MR-95/520)
• Innovative Tech. Eval. Report (EPA/540/R-95/520)
1 Order documents free of charge by calling EPA's
Center for Environmental Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562 or Fax 513-569-8695.
'Documents with a PB number are out of stock and
must be ordered by that number at cost from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield VA 22161
Telephone 703-487-4650
3 Out of stock
Page 443
-------
-------
Jl
P3
ffl
c-t-
CO
rt-
§
SB.
O
Q>
(0
6
—3 '—' «*• tr
o jai » P
sr^ a-
EL hrl O
g.
O
O
•3
o
O
P
CO
p
3.
SITE/NRMRL
SUPERFUND VIDEOTAPE LIBRARY
ORDERING INSTRUCTIONS
To obtain your choice of tapes, complete the order
form on the opposite side of this page. Enclose
the form with your check, made out to Foster
Wheeler EnvironmentaJ Corporation and mail to:
Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation
Attn: Ms. Maria Witkowski
8 Peach Tree Hill Road
Livingston, New lersey 07039
Only PREPAID Orders can Be Accepted
For further information, contact
Ms. Witkowski at 1-800-580-3765
SITE VIDEOTAPES
These composite videotapes contain a
number of EPA-produced documentaries
on specific Superfund Innovative Tech-
nology Evaluation (SITE) Program
demonstrations.
S1 Site Program
(6 Technology Demonstrations):
ECOVA (SHIRCO) Infrared Incinera-
tion System, Brandon, FL - 6/87
ECOVA (SHIRCO) Infrared Incinera-
tion System, Rose Twp., MI - 3/89
EMTECH (HAZCON) Solidification
Process, Douglassville, PA - 10/87
TWT/GEO-CON In-Situ Stabilization
and Solidification, Hialeah, FL - 4/88
TERRA VAC Vacuum Extraction
System, Groveland, MA - 1/88
CF SYSTEMS Solvent Extraction
Unit, New Bedford, MA - 3/89
52 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
ULTROX Ultraviolet Radiation and
Oxidation, San Jose, CA - 3/89
BIOTROL Biological Aqueous Treat-
ment, New Brighton, MN - 9/89
BIOTROL Soil Washing System,
New Brighton, MN - 9/89
IT/RREL Debris Washing System,
Hopkinsville, KY - 12/89
55 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
SOLIDTECH Solidification and
Stabilization, Morganville, NJ - 12/88
CHEMFIX Solifidication and Stabili-
zation, Clackamas, OR - 3/89
NOVATERRA (TTUSA) In Situ
Steam and Air Stripping, San Pedro,
CA - 9/89
AWD Integrated Vapor Extraction/
Steam Vacuum Stripping, Burbank,
CA - 9/90
-------
S4 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
EJ. DUPONT/OBERLIN FILER
Membrane Microfiltration, Palmerton,
PA - 5/90
HORSEHEAD Flame Reactor, At-
lanta, GA-3/91
RETECH Plasma Centrifugal Fur-
nace, Butte, MT - 7/91
BABCOCK & WILCOX Cyclone Fur-
nace, Alliance, OH - 11/91
S5 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
STC Immobilization of Organic/ Inor-
ganic Contaminants in Soils, Selma,
CA- 11/90
THC Soil Recycle Treatment Train at
Toronto Harbor, Toronto, Ont, Canada
-5/92
R.C.C. Basic Extractive Sludge Treat-
ment (B.E.S.T.), Grand Calumet River,
Gary, IN - 7/92
PEROXIDATION SYSTEMS INC.
Purox-Pure Chemical Oxidation Treat-
ment, Altamont Hills, CA - 9/92
56 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
BERGMANN Soil/Sediment Washing
Technology, Saginaw Bay, MI - 2/93
BESCORP Soil Washing System,
Fairbanks, AK - 8/92
ELI Eco Logic International Inc., Hy-
drogen Reduction Gas-Phase Chemical
Reduction Process, Bay City, MI - 11/93
MAGNUM Water Technology CAV-OX
Ultraviolet Oxidation Process, Edwards
AFB, CA - 1/94
S7 Site Program
(4 Technology Demonstrations):
TEXACO Gasification Process, South El
Monte, CA - 6/95
SFC 0.5 Oleofiltration System, Pem-
broke, FL - 1/95
ITT Radio Frequency Heating Process,
Kelly AFB, San Antonio, TX - 3/95
KAI Radio Frequency Heating Process,
Kelly Air Force Base, San Antonio, TX -
4/95
R1 RREL/RCB Research Programs
This composite videotape contains five
documentaries conducted under the
auspices of the Risk Reduction Engi-
neering Laboratory's Releases Control
Branch:
^ Synthetic Soils Matrix (SSM) Pro-
gram
^> Dioxin and the Mobile Incineration
System
^> Mobile Carbon Regeneration System
^> Mobile Soils Washing System
^> Mobile In Situ Containment/ Treat-
ment Unit
Mail this form (with check) to:
Foster Wheeler Environmental Corporation
Attn: Ms. Maria Witkowski
8 Peach Tree Hill Road
Livingston, NJ 07039
Videotape Request Form
i'fltor- :
Gpptes
^"^flfcafcipf?; Titl^y
SI SITE Program Tape
S2 SITE Program Tape
S3 SITE Program Tape
S4 SITE Program Tape
S5 SITE Program Tape
S6 SITE Program Tape
S7 SITE Program Tape
Rl RREL/RCB
Research Programs
Tape
Cqf 1 peir
vTftp^:"
f. ;'• '• ".- .I": i
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
Stf>-
totjil
Shipping &
Handling
Int'l
Orders
$5.00 charge
per tape
International
surcharge per tape
$5.00
$10.00
Total Cost ^H
Ship to:
Name
Company
Address
City/State/Zip
Telephone
-------
The following pages contain the Trade Name Index and the Applicability Index. The Trade Name Index
cross-references all technologies that are registered or have a copyright, registered trademark, or service
mark. Former company names are also cross-referenced in the index.
The Applicability Index is organized by three different levels. The first level is media, the second is waste,
and the third is technology type. The 11 media categories include the following: (1) air, (2) gas, (3) leachate,
(4) liquid, (5) other, (6) sediment, (7) sludge, (8) soil, and (9) water. The 19 waste categories include the
following: (1) aromatic VOCs, (2) cyanide, (3) dioxins, (4) explosives, (5) furans, (6) halogenated VOCs, (7)
heavy metals, (8) herbicides, (9) hydrocarbons, (10) metals, (11) other, (12) PAHs, (13) PCBs, (14) PCPs,
(15) pesticides, (16) petroleum hydrocarbons, (17) radionuclides, (18) SVOCs, and (19) VOCs. The 14
technology type categories include the following: (1) biological degradation, (2) cone penetrometers, (3) field
portable x-ray fluorescence, (4) materials handling, (5) other, (6) physical/chemical, (7) physical/chemical
biological degradation, (8) physical/chemical radioactive waste treatment, (9) physical/chemical thermal
desorption, (10) portable gas chromatographs, (11) solidification/stabilization, (12) spectrometers, (13) test
kits, and (14) thermal destruction.
To use the Applicability Index, a three-step search must be completed. For example, to search for thermal
desorption technologies that clean up soil contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), first look under
soil, then PCBs, and finally physical/chemical thermal desorption.
Page 447
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
TRADE NAME INDEX
AGGCOM (Agglomerating Combustor) 282
AIR-II (Adsorption-Integrated-Reaction) Process 354
Alcoa Separation Technology, Inc 248
AlgaSORB© Biological Sorption 310
Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent 330
B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology 96
BCD (Base-Catalyzed Dechlorination) Process 108
Binax Corporation, Antox Division 396
Bio-Recovery Systems, Inc 310
BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process 32
C-G (Carver-Greenfield) Process® 52
Canonie Environmental Services Corporation 142
CAV-OX® Process 100
CCJ (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) 298
Chemical Waste Management, Inc •... 128, 172
Clean Berkshires, Inc 104
CMS™ (Cyclone Melting System) 230
Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification 196
Colorado School of Mines 188
CPFM® (Colloid Polishing Filler Method®) 68
CROW® (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 232
CRYOCELL® 218
CURE® - Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment System 74
DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology 82
DAVES (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) 216
DOW Environmental, Inc 130
Electro-Pure Systems, Inc 306
Electron Beam Research Facility, Florida International University, and University of Miami 86
Energy and Environmental Engineering, Inc 326
Ensys Environmental Products, Inc 420
Enviro-Sciences, Inc 250
EnviroGard™ PCB/PCP Immunoassay Test Kits 402,404
Equate® Immunoassay 396
EXXFLOW 66
FORAGER® Sponge : 56
GHEA Associates Process 300
GISYKEY™ Environmental Data Management System 80
Hazcon, Inc 70
HRUBOUT® Process , 90
Hydrologies, Inc 74
International Waste Technologies 76
Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation 198
LEEP® (Low-Energy Extraction Process) 250
LG-SX (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction) Technology 44
Loral Corporation 384
LT3® (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment) System 168
LTTA® (Low Temperature Thermal Aeration) ' 142
MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment Process 224
MAG*SEPSM Technology 222
MAP® (Metal Analysis Probe) Portable Assayer 414
Page 449
-------
TRADE NAME INDEX (Continued)
I
I
MeDDAS (Metals Immobilization and Decontamination of Aggregate Solids) 302 •
Microsensor Technology, Incorporated 406 *
Molecular Bonding System® 226
NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology 192 •
Ogden Environmental Services 72 |
Ohmicron Corporation 422
PACT (Plasma Arc Centrifugal Treatment) System 134 •
PENTA RISc Test System 420 |
perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation Technology 42
PFE ^ (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM) 20
2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process 174 •
PhotoCAT™ Process 326 •
Photovac International, Inc 412
PO*WW*ER™ Technology 172 •
Purus, Inc 316 |
PYRETON® Thermal Destruction 22
RaPID Assay® 422 —
ReTeC (Remediation Technologies, Inc.) 132 I
Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System 136 ™
ROST (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 384
SABRE™ (Simplot Anaerobic Biological Remediation) Process 140 I
SCAPS (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System) 408, 426 I
SEFA-P (Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable) 392
SELPhOx (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 350 •
Shirco Infrared Systems, Inc 84 •
Silicate Technology Corporation 150
SVVS® (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System) 30
TECHXTRACT® Process 190 •
TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System , 48 •
TOP (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
THERM-O-DETOX® System 108 •
TMA Thermo Analytical, Inc 364 |
Ultrox, A Division of Zimpro Environmental, Inc 160
UVB (Unterdruck-Verdampfer-Brunnen) System 120, 170 _
VaporSep® Membrane Process 294 I
Vulcan Peroxidation Systems, Inc 42 ~
Warren Spring Laboratory 246
WES-PHix® Stabilization Process 234 •
X'TRAX™ Thermal Desorption 128 •
ZenoGem™ Process 178
Page 45O
I
I
I
I
I
-------
APPLICABILITY INDEX
Air
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment) . . 310
Materials Handling
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and
Foam Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and
Catalytic Oxidation) 20
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (TiO2 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MS1-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) 432
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Dioxins
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Furans
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Page 451
-------
I
Air (continued) •
Haloqenated VOCs
Biological Degradation •
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment |
System) 184
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment) . . 310 mm
Materials Handling •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam m
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic •
Oxidation) 20 J
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268 •
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes ™
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (TiO2 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202 |
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296
Portable Gas Chromatographs mm
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 I
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
XonTech Incorporated {XonTech Sector Sampler) 432 ||
Thermal Destruction
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322 _
Herbicides •
Portable Gas Chromatographs ™
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 |
Thermal Destruction
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322 mm
Hydrocarbons •
Biological Degradation
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
Metals •
Physical/Chemical Treatment • m
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier
Paniculate Separator) 346 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs |
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Thermal Destruction _
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272 •
Page 452
r
i
-------
Air (continued)
PAHs
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
PCBs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier
Particulate Separator) 346
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Pesticides
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Materials Handling
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic
Oxidation) 20
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier
Particulate Separator) 346
Page 453
-------
I
I
Air (continued) •
SVOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) 432 •
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322 I
VOCs •
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment •
System) 184 |
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
Materials Handling _
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam •
Supression Methods) 162 '
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment |
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction31*" and Catalytic
Oxidation) 20 «
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air •
Stripping) 338
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (TiO2 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202 •
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296 |
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 _
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 I
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402 ™
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas •
Chromatograph) 414 |
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
Spectrometers •
Environmental Technologies Group, Inc. (AirSentry Fourier Transform Infrared
Spectrometer) 384
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 I
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) 432 •
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 •
I
Page 454
I
I
I
-------
Gas
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment) . . 310
Materials Handling
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic
Oxidation) 20
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (TiO2 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) 432
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Dioxins
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Furans
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Page 455
-------
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
I
I
I
Gas (continued)
Haloqenated VOCs
Biological Degradation m
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment •
System) 184
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Biofilm Reactor for Chlorinated Gas Treatment) . . 310 _
Materials Handling •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam ™
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic •
Oxidation) 20 •
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268 I
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes I
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Ti02 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202 |
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296
Portable Gas Chromatographs _
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas ™
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 I
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 |
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) . 390 •
XonTech Incorporated (XonTech Sector Sampler) 432 I
Thermal Destruction
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Heavy Metals •
Portable Gas Chromatographs M
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Herbicides •
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers _
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
Thermal Destruction •
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Hydrocarbons •
Biological Degradation |
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250
Metals «
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier
Particulate Separator) 346
Portable Gas Chromatographs I
Page 456
I
I
-------
Gas (continued)
Metals
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Reactor Filter System) 272
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
PAHs
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
PCBs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier
Particulate Separator) 346
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Pesticides
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. {Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Materials Handling
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214
Page 457
-------
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
XonTech Incorporated {XonTech Sector Sampler) 432
I
I
Gas (continued)
SVOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment m
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic I
Oxidation) 20
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes _
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344 •
General Atomics, Nuclear Remediation Technologies Division (Acoustic Barrier ~
Particulate Separator) 346
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 |
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
XonTech Incorporated {XonTech Sector Sampler) 432 I
Thermal Destruction
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 I
University of Dayton Research Institute (Photothermal Detoxification Unit) 322 •
VOCs
Biological Degradation •
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment |
System) 184
Aluminum Company of America (Bioscrubber) 250 _
Materials Handling •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam ™
Supression Methods) '. 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction31*" and Catalytic •
Oxidation) 20 I
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
M.L ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268 •
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Thermal and Photo-Thermal Oxidation Processes •
for Enhanced Conversion of Chlorocarbons) 344
KSE, Inc. (Adsorption-lntegrated-Reaction Process) 356 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (TiO2 Photocatalytic Air Treatment) 202 |
Membrane Technology and Research, Inc. (VaporSep® Membrane Process) 296
Portable Gas Chromatographs _
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 ™
Microsensor Systems, Incorporated (MSI-301A Vapor Monitor) 402
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408 I
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas I
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 •
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
Spectrometers
Environmental Technologies Group, Inc. (AirSentry Fourier Transform Infrared _
Spectrometer) 384 •
Page 458
I
I
-------
Gas (continued)
VOCs
Thermal Destruction
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Leachate
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) • 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical
Platform) 378
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCS Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Cyanide
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Dioxins
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock .& Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Page 459
-------
I
Leachate (continued) I
Explosives
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 |
Physical/Chemical Treatment
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 B
Furans •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 I
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 I
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Haloqenated VOCs •
Biological Degradation |
BioTrol®, Inc. (Methanotrophic Bioreactor System) 258
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 «
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc. (In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic •
Degradation of Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater) .... 64
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100 I
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 _
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 I
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 ™
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332 •
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 |
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical I
Platform) 378
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 I
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Herbicides
Biological Degradation •
RinTrnl® Inrv (Rinlnnirnl Aniipnnc Treatment
-------
Leachate (continued)
Halogenated VQCs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Physical/Chemical Treatment
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Metals
Biological Degradation
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Constructed Wetlands-
Based Treatment) 188
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment) 340
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, and Oberiin Filter Co. (Membrane
Microfiltration) 54
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) 66
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc./Hickson Corporation (Chromated Copper
Arsenate Soil Leaching Process) 294
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
University of Washington (Adsorptive Filtration) 326
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Page 461
-------
I
Babcock & Wiicox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
I
I
Leachate (continued) •
Metals
Portable Gas Chromatographs
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wiicox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
PAHs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) .124 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Portable Gas Chromatographs m
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
PCBs
Biological Degradation I
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 •
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) , 302 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 I
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base •
Grouting Technology) 106 I
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 I
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 I
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 I
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 I
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 —
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening I
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
Test Kits I
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 «
Thermal Destruction I
Page 462
I
I
-------
Leachate (continued)
PCPs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
Test Kits
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
. Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCS Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Page 463
-------
I
Leachate (continued) I
Radionuclides
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment m
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68 I
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254 ™
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment) 340
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222 •
Thermal Destruction |
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
SVOCs • _
Biological Degradation •
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption I
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42 _
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 I
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 I
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 I
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical •
Platform) 373 I
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening _
Program PCB Method) 430 I
Spectrometers B
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 I
VOCs
Biological Degradation _
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36 I
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 I
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Physical/Chemical Treatment m
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation |
Technology) 42
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342 m
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc. (In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic I
Degradation of Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater) .... 64
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102 I
Page 464
I
-------
Leachate (continued)
VOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Other
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. {Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EPOC Water, Inc. {Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) . . 66
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308
Liquid
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) "... 86
Page 465
-------
I
Liquid (continued) •
Aromatic VOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102 |
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 _
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170 ™
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174 •
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176 |
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical m
Platform) 378 |
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas I
Chromatograph) 414 •
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening |
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers _
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
7esr Kits U
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 I
Thermal Destruction I
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Cyanide •
Biological Degradation |
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Thermal Destruction _
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Dioxins ™
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment |
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 tm
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers I
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 •
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 |
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Explosives _
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 I
Page 466
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Liquid (continued)
Furans
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Haloqenated VOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of
PCE) 336
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Methanotrophic Bioreactor System) . 258
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
Page 467
-------
I
Liquid (continued) ™
Halooenated VOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical |
Platform) 378
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas •
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 I
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening •
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 jj
Thermal Destruction
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156 m
Heavy Metals •
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394 I
Herbicides I
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36 •
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 •
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 •
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 I
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers I
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 •
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134 •
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation _
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System •
[SVVS®]) 30 •
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Metals •
Biological Degradation •
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Constructed Wetlands-
Based Treatment) 188 _
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362 •
I
Page 468
I
-------
Liquid (continued)
Metals
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Resource Management & Recovery (AlgaSORB® Biological Sorption) 312
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, and Oberlin Filter Co. (Membrane
Microfiltration) 54
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) 66
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc./Hickson Corporation (Chromated Copper
Arsenate Soil Leaching Process) 294
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308
Seientec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
University of Washington (Adsorptive Filtration) 326
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) 370
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) . 134
PAHs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Liquid (continued)
Page 469
-------
I
PCBs •
Biological Degradation
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 •
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence |
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment I
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation •
Technology) 42
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102 I
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106 _
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124 I
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 ™
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center •
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 I
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and •
Removal) 370 •
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs —
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 •
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers _
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 I
Test Kits m
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 I
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 |
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
PCPJL _
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
Test Kits •
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422 •
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic •
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 I
Liquid (continued)
I
Page 470
I
I
-------
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) 370
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Materials Handling
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Page 471
-------
I
Liquid (continued) I
Radionuclides
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment •
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68 |
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74 _
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254 ™
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
Thermal Destruction H
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 |
SVOCs
Biological Degradation m
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ •
Treatment Technology) 246
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 I
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption H
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 |
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment _
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation •
Technology) 42
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124 I
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and •
Removal) 370 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) . . .~ 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 _
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs *
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical
Platform) 378 •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Spectrometers I
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 I
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 •
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Other M
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction |
Process) 28
VOCs _
Biological Degradation •
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 I
Page 472
I
-------
Liquid (continued)
VOCs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
KA! Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
Radian International LLC (Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum
Stripping) 130
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) . 342
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocataiytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCS Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Page 473
-------
I
Liquid (continued) •
VOCs
Test Kits m
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic •
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Thermal Destruction _
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 •
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134 •
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Other •
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction |
Process) 28
Other «
Biological Degradation •
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. (HMD Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P] I
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394 •
Materials Handling
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and •
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 |
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) . 66 _
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308 •
Thermal Destruction
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Sediment I
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation m
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 I
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82 _
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 •
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and ™
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright •
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122 I
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam •
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of •
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) ..216 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) . 144 |
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment «
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
Page 474
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
Aromatic VOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 35°
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Cyanide
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Thermal Destruction
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Dioxins
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 1°8
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Page 475
-------
Sediment (continued)
Dioxins
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) . 232
Explosives
Biological Degradation
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Furans
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) i 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) . . . 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) . 232
Haloqenated VOCs
Biological Degradation
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
Page 476
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
Haloaenated VOCs
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCS- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) . 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Thermal Destruction
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Heavy Metals
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
SCITEC Corporation (Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer) 416
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262
Herbicides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140
Page 477
-------
I
Sediment (continued) |
Herbicides
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation _
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption m
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128 |
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment _
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) , 342 |
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 _
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
Solidification/Stabilization , m
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 Jj
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 _
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134 •
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232 ~
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation I
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 •
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) ..82 •
Metals ' I
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266 •
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc. (Metals Release and Removal from Wastes) .... 348 •
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Phytotech (Phytoremediation Technology) 208 •
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362 |
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence m
NITON Corporation (XL Spectrum Analyzer) 412 •
SCITEC Corporation (Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer) 416
TN Spectrace (TN 9000 and TN Pb X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers) 426
Materials Hand/ing I
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation •
and Washing Process) 248
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) . 76 •
Page 478
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
Metals
Materials Handling
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) . . . 300
University of South Carolina (In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water) . 324
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagne™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Acid Extraction Treatment System) .... 260
COGNIS, Inc. (TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System) 48
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286
IT Corporation (Chelation/Electrodeposition of Toxic Metals from Soils) 354
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Co. and Geokinetics International, Inc.
(Electrokinetic Remediation Process) 200
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) 158
Solidification/Stabilization
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
Ferro Corporation (Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting) 276
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) . 224
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
SOLUCORP Industries (Molecular Bonding System®) 228
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Wheelabrator Technologies Inc. (WES-PHix® Stabilization Process) 236
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc. (Flame Reactor) 88
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
PAHs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Environmental BioTechnologies, Inc. (Fungal Degradation Process) 274
Page 479
-------
I
Sediment (continued) •
PAHs
Biological Degradation m
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 |
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132 •
Materials Handling •
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 _
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 ™
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) ..216 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 |
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 J|
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 •
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38 .
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 I
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) . . . 206
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 |
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 _
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 I
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128 ™
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 |
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals _
Stabilization) 262 •
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50 •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350 •
Page 480
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
PCBs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) ..... 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) . 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) . . . 108
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) . 390
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) . 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
PCPs
Biological Degradation
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Test Kits
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Thermal Destruction
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Page 481
-------
Sediment (continued)
Pesticides
I
I
Biological Degradation I
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 |
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Materials Handling mm
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 |
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216 H
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal •
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32 •
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) . 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam •
Irradiation) 350 |
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 mm
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 •
Terra-KIeen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152 •
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contarninated
Soil Detoxification) 320 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs |
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening mm
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Solidification/Stabilization
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) .-. . . . 70
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 I
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 •
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 •
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382 •
Page 482
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
Pesticides
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) . 58
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
Physical/Chemical Treatment
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Solid!fica tion/Stabiliza tion
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
Radibnuclides
Materials Handling
Thermo NUtech (Segmented Gate System) 366
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
Solidification/Stabilization
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) 224
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
ECOVA Corporation {Bioslurry Reactor) 58
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and INTECH 180 Corporation
(Fungal Treatment Technology) 112
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Page 483
-------
I
Sediment (continued) •
Materials Handling m
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) . 76 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of •
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 |
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 _
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128 ™
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal •
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment |
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals _
Stabilization) 262 I
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) . . 194 ~
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108 Jj
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) 158
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 "
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization M
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) • • • • 150 •
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330 I
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction •
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22 |
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) . . 84 _
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 •
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232 I
I
Page 484
I
-------
Sediment (continued)
VOCs
Biological Degradation
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) . . 58
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/SBP Technologies,
Inc. (Vacuum-Vaporized Well System) . . 120
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process') 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) . 430
Solidification/Stabiliza tion
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Page 485
-------
I
I
Sediment (continued) •
VOCs
Thermal Destruction •
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22 |
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 _
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134 •
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 ™
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Other
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280 I
Materials Handling
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) ... 300
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 B
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262 •
Solidification/Stabilization |
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabitization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150 «
Thermal Destruction •
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Sludge
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 •
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82 |
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and _
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118 •
Materials Handling ™
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam •
Supression Methods) 162 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of •
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 I
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 I
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 «•
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 |
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam «
Irradiation) 350 •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
I
Page 486
I
-------
Sludge (continued)
Aromatic VOCs
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidifica tion/Stabiliza tion
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Cyanide
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Thermal Destruction
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Comfaustor) 72
Dioxins
Biological Degradation
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) . 108
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Page 487
-------
I
Sludge (continued) I
Dioxins
Thermal Destruction •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 •
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Explosives
Biological Degradation I
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
Furans |
Biological Degradation
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 _
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 I
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) . . . 168 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 _
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition ™
Process) 108
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152 •
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCS- and Organochlorine-Contaminated |
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs im
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 |
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Haloqenated VOCs _
Biological Degradation I
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118 I
Materials Handling m
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam •
Supression Methods) 162 |
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) , 198 _
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption I
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 1 26 •
I
Page 488
I
-------
Sludge (continued)
Halogenated VOCs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) . . . 288
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCS- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCS Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Heavy Metals
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Herbicides
Biological Degradation
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagne™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) ........ 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Page 489
-------
Sludge (continued)
Herbicides
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Page 490
I
I
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition _
Process) 108 •
I
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134 •
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation •
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 •
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Metals •
Biological Degradation |
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc. (Metals Release and Removal from Wastes) .... 348
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82 _
Phytotech (Phytoremediation Technology) 208 I
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence I
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P] •
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
NITON Corporation (XL Spectrum Analyzer) 412 •
TN Spectrace (TN 9000 and TN Pb X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers) 426 |
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation _
and Washing Process) 248 •
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) . . . 300
University of South Carolina (In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water) 324 H
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation |
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption mm
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32 _
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Acid Extraction Treatment System) .... 260 •
COGNIS, Inc. (TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System) .48 •
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56
Electrokinetics, Inc. {Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 •
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286 |
IT Corporation (Chelation/Electrodeposition of Toxic Metals from Soils) 354
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 m*
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sludge (continued)
Metals
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Co. and Geokinetics International, Inc.
(Electrokinetic Remediation Process) 200
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. {Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) 158
Solidification/Stabilization
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
Ferro Corporation (Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting) 276
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) . . . 70
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) 224
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
SOLUCORP Industries (Molecular Bonding System®) 228
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Wheelabrator Technologies Inc. (WES-PHix® Stabilization Process) 236
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) . . 72
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc. (Flame Reactor) 88
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
PSI Technologies, A Division of Physical Sciences Inc. (Metals Immobilization and
Decontamination of Aggregate Solids) 304
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
PAHs
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Environmental BioTechnologies, Inc. (Fungal Degradation Process) 274
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. {Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Page 491
-------
I
Sludge (continued) ~
PAHs
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 |
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 _
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148 I
PCBs •
Biological Degradation
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 •
Materials Handling |
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of •
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 |
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128 •
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) ..216 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50 . |
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350 «
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) , 288 I
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center •
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 |
Terra-KIeen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated _
Soil Detoxification) 320 I
Portable Gas Chromatographs ™
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening I
Program PCB Method) 430 |
Solidification/Stabilization
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70 •
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 I
Page 492
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sludge (continued)
PCBs
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
PCPs
Biological Degradation
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCS- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) . 320
Test Kits ,
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
Page 493
-------
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
I
I
Sludge (continued)
Pesticides
Physical/Chemical Treatment M
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 I
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center •
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 •
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated •
Soil Detoxification) 320 |
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 »
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening •
Program PCB Method) 430 ™
Solidification/Stabilization
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70 I
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) . 76 I
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146 •
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 |
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 _
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 '
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 I
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232 •
Petroleum Hydrocarbons I
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132 I
Materials Handling •
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal •
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 I
Physical/Chemical Treatment ™
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Solidification/Stabilization I
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146 •
Radionuclides
Materials Handling •
Thermo NUtech (Segmented Gate System) 366 |
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 _
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 I
Page 494
I
I
-------
Sludge (continued)
Radionuclides
Solidification/Stabilization
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) 224
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) . 132
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
KAl Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) ......... 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) . 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) . 158
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Page 495
-------
I
Sludge (continued) •
SVOCs
Solidification/Stabilization •
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 g
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150 _
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 •
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and ™
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers I
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 |
Thermal Destruction
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22 •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 |
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316 •
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156 B
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
VOCs •
Biological Degradation |
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58 _
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280 •
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/SBP Technologies, •
Inc. (Vacuum-Vaporized Well System) 120 •
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation •
and Washing Process) 248 |
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam _
Supression Methods) 162 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption *
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 I
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216 |
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 B
Physical/Chemical Treatment
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 |
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) . 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 •
Page 496
I
-------
Sludge (continued)
VOCs
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Svedaia Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Other
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) , 58
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Materials Handling
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) . . . 300
Solidification/Stabilization
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
Thermal Destruction
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Soil
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Page 497
-------
I
Soil (continued) •
Aromatic VOCs
Biological Degradation m
Hazardous Substance Management Research Center at New Jersey Institute of •
Technology and Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey (Pneumatic
Fracturing and Bioremediation Process) 278
Institute of Gas Technology {Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) . . . . 282 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Bioventing) 204 •
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118 •
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright |
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
Cone Penetrometers mm
Fugro Geosciences, Inc. (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 386 •
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and H
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 I
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92 •
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam, and Air Stripping]) 126
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 |
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 mm
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic
Oxidation) 20
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352 mm
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils) 364
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218 •
Terra Vac (In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction) 154 I
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs |
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) . . . 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 _
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas •
Chromatograph) 414
I
Page 498
I
I
-------
Soil (continued)
Aromatic VOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) .- 392
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Cyanide
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104
Thermal Destruction
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Dioxins
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) . . 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Page 499
-------
I
I
Soil (continued)
Dioxins
Spectrometers —
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 I
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 |
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Explosives •
Biological Degradation •
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
Furans •
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 |
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 _
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 ~
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108 _
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218 •
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152 '
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contarninated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization mm
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 •
WASTECH,.lnc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 I
Thermal Destruction , I
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284 |
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Haloqenated VOCs , _
Biological Degradation I
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of
PCE) 336
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ I
Treatment Technology) 246 •
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184 •
I
Page 500
I
-------
Soil (continued)
Haloaenated VOCs
Biological Degradation
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic
Oxidation) 20
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils) 364
Thermatrix, Inc. (Photolytic Oxidation Process) . . 318
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
Terra Vac (In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction) 154
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
Page 501
-------
I
Soil (continued) •
Halogenated VOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414 _
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening •
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization •
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) . . 76 |
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) . . 166 «
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) . 382 •
Thermal Destruction •
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316 •
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156 |
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Heavy Metals _
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence I
SCITEC Corporation (Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer) 416 ™
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals I
Stabilization) 262 I
Herbicides
Biological Degradation m
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) . 38 |
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282 _
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360 I
J.R. Simplot Company (The SABRE™ Process) 140 •
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198 I
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104 •
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 I
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 H
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252 |
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals «
Stabilization) 262 I
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 I
Page 502
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Soil (continued)
Herbicides
Physical/Chemical Treatment
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Solidification/Stabilization
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Bioventing) 204
Metals
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
Geo-Microbial Technologies, Inc. (Metals Release and Removal from Wastes) .... 348
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Phytotech (Phytoremediation Technology) 208
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
NITON Corporation (XL Spectrum Analyzer) 412
SCITEC Corporation (Metal Analysis Probe [MAP®] Portable Assayer) 416
TN Spectrace (TN 9000 and TN Pb X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers) 426
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Air-Sparged Hydrocyclone) . . 298
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) . . . 300
University of South Carolina (In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water) 324
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Geotech Development Corporation (Cold-Top Ex Situ Vitrification of Chromium-
Contaminated Soils) 196
Page 5O3
-------
I
Soil (continued) I
Metals
Physical/Chemical Treatment m
Battelle Memorial Institute (In Situ Electroacoustic Soil Decontamination) 256 •
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Brice Environmental Services Corporation (Soil Washing Process) 40 •
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Acid Extraction Treatment System) .... 260 I
COGNIS, Inc. (TERRAMET® Soil Remediation System) 48
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 •
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286 |
IT Corporation (Chelation/Electrodeposition of Toxic Metals from Soils) 354
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288 _
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc./Hickson Corporation (Chromated Copper I
Arsenate Soil Leaching Process) 294 ™
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Co. and Geokinetics International, Inc.
(Electrokinetic Remediation Process) 200 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Volume Reduction Unit) 110 I
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
Sandia National Laboratories (In Situ Electrokinetic Extraction System) 220 . •
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center •
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Toronto Harbour Commission (Soil Recycling) 158
University of Houston (Concentrated Chloride Extraction and Recovery of Lead) . . . 368 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Solidification/Stabilization M
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46 |
Ferro Corporation (Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting) 276
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70 M
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) . . . 76 •
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) 224 •
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146 •
SOLUCORP Industries (Molecular Bonding System®) 228
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization •
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150 |
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and _
Adsorption Process) 330 I
Wheelabrator Technologies Inc. (WES-PHix® Stabilization Process) 236 ™
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 I
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Smelting Lead-Containing Waste) 264 •
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Horsehead Resource Development Co., Inc. (Flame Reactor) 88 |
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
PSI Technologies, A Division of Physical Sciences Inc. (Metals Immobilization and _
Decontamination of Aggregate Solids) 304 •
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) .134 ™
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232 I
Page 504
I
-------
Soil (continued)
PAHs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Environmental BioTechnologies, Inc. (Fungal Degradation Process) 274
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Bioventing) 204
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
Phytokinetics, Inc. {Phytoremediation Process) 206
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Cone Penetrometers
Fugro Geosciences, Inc. (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 386
Naval Command, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center (SCAPS Cone
Penetrometer) 410
Tri-Services (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS]) . . 428
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Thermal Destruction
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
PCBs
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Page 5O5
-------
Soil (continued)
PCBs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
I
I
ysicai/^nemtcai inermai uesorpuon mm
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 *
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128 •
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. {Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment |
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32 •
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals •
Stabilization) 262
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50 |
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
IT Corporation (Photolytic and Biological Soil Detoxification) 290 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218 •
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center |
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) .152 «
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated * •
Soil Detoxification) 320 U
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 •
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70 _
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 I
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 ™
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic •
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 •
Millipore Corporation (EnviroGard™ PCB Immunoassay Test Kit) 404
Thermal Destruction _
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 •
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270 ™
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84 •
I
I
Page 506
I
-------
Soil (continued)
PCBs
Thermal Destruction
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) ......... 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
PCPs
Biological Degradation
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. {Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Volume Reduction Unit) 110
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochlorine-Contaminated
Soil Detoxification) 320
Test Kits
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Thermal Destruction
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) . . 84
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) . . . 62
IIT Research Institute/Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) ... 94
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) ........ 128
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment
ART International, Inc. (Low-Energy Extraction Process [LEEP®]) 252
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Page 507
-------
I
Soil (continued) I
Pesticides
Physical/Chemical Treatment m
Commodore Environmental Services, Inc. (Solvated Electron Remediation System) . . 50 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam I
Irradiation) ' 350 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) ,. 288 •
IT Corporation (Photolytic and Biological Soil Detoxification) 290 |
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition
Process) 108 «
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) . 218 •
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center m
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) . 152 •
Trinity Environmental Technologies, Inc. (PCB- and Organochiorine-Contaminated I
Soil Detoxification) 320
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 |
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening _
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Solidification/Stabilization ™
Funderburk & Associates (Dechlorination and Immobilization) 70
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 •
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166 m
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits _
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382 I
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic •
Contaminants in Soil and Water) . 392
Thermal Destruction •
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 I
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 •
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84 •
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232 I
Petroleum Hydrocarbons •
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment •
System) 184 |
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58 _
Hazardous Substance Management Research Center at New Jersey Institute of I
Technology and Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey (Pneumatic
Fracturing and Bioremediation Process) 278
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132 •
Page 508
I
-------
Soil (continued)
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Cone Penetrometers
Fugro Geosciences, Inc. (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 386
Naval Command, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center (SCAPS Cone
Penetrometer) 410
Tri-Services (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS]) . . 428
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
IIT Research Institute/Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) ... 94
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
Physical/Chemical Treatment
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Solidification/Stabilization
Soliditech, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 146
Radionuclides
Materials Handling
Thermo NUtech (Segmented Gate System) 366
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Arctic Foundations Inc. (Cryogenic Barrier) 186
Brice Environmental Services Corporation (Soil Washing Process) 40
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
Solidification/Stabilization
Chemfix Technologies, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 46
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (MAECTITE® Chemical Treatment
Process) . 224
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
BioTrol®, Inc. (Soil Washing System) 38
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
GRACE Bioremediation Technologies. (DARAMEND™ Bioremediation Technology) . . 82
Hazardous Substance Management Research Center at New Jersey Institute of
Technology and Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey (Pneumatic
Fracturing and Bioremediation Process) 278
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluid Extraction-Biological Degradation Process) .... 282
IT Corporation (Tekno Associates Bioslurry Reactor) 292
Page 509
-------
I
Soil (continued) •
SVOCs
Biological Degradation •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Bioventing) 204 J
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and INTECH 180 Corporation
(Fungal Treatment Technology) 112
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and I
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118 '
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122 •
Remediation Technologies, Inc. (Liquid and Solids Biological Treatment) 132 |
Materials Handling
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam •
Supression Methods) 162
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of •
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Thermal Desorption Unit) 62 •
IIT Research Institute/Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) ... 94 |
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104 _
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 I
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 ™
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (X*TRAX™ Thermal Desorption) 128
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212 •
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) ..216 I
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142 •
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 |
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168 _
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing ExtractionSM and Catalytic ™
Oxidation) 20
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26 •
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals |
Stabilization) 262
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (Electrokinetic Soil Processing) 194 •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Beam
Irradiation) 350
Hrubetz Environmental Services, Inc. (HRUBOUT® Process) 90 •
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 •
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Base-Catalyzed Decomposition •
Process) 108 |
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Volume Reduction Unit) 110
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils) 364 •
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218 •
SIVE Services (Steam Injection and Vacuum Extraction) 226
Terra-KIeen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152
Terra Vac (In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction) 154 I
Page 510
I
-------
Soil (continued)
SVOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Toronto Harbour Commission {Soil Recycling) 158
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) . 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Texaco inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Other
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction
Process) 28
VOCs
Biological Degradation
AlliedSignal Environmental Systems and Services, Inc. (Biological Air Treatment
System) 184
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
COGNIS, Inc. (Biological/Chemical Treatment) 266
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/ENSR Consulting and
Engineering and Larsen Engineers (Ex Situ Biovault) 118
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/SBP Technologies,
Inc. (Vacuum-Vaporized Well System) 120
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230
Cone Penetrometers
Fugro Geosciences, Inc. (Rapid Optical Screening Tool) 386
Tri-Services (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS]) . . 428
Page 511
-------
I
Soil (continued) I
VOCs
Materials Handling m
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation •
and Washing Process) 248
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and •
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Excavation Techniques and Foam
Supression Methods) 162 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
Dehydro-Tech Corporation (Carver-Greenfield Process® for Solvent Extraction of
Wet, Oily Wastes) 52 _
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92 I
IIT Research Institute/Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) ... 94 ™
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104 •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 |
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212 •
Recycling Sciences International, Inc. (Desorption and Vapor Extraction System) . . 216 •
Smith Environmental Technologies Corporation (Low Temperature Thermal
Aeration [LTTA®]) 142
SoilTech ATP Systems, Inc. (Anaerobic Thermal Processor) 144 •
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System) 168
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Accutech Remedial Systems, Inc. (Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction31** and Catalytic |
Oxidation) 20
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air •
Stripping) 338 •
BioGenesis Enterprises, Inc. (BioGenesisSM Soil and Sediment Washing Process) ... 32
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Radian International LLC (Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum •
Stripping) 130 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
M.L. ENERGIA, Inc. (Reductive Photo-Dechlorination Treatment) 268 •
Hrubetz Environmental Services, Inc. (HRUBOUT® Process) 90 |
Institute of Gas Technology (Supercritical Extraction/Liquid Phase Oxidation) 352
Ionics/Resources Conservation Company (B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology) . 96 _
IT Corporation (Batch Steam Distillation and Metal Extraction) 286 I
IT Corporation (Mixed Waste Treatment Process) 288
National Risk Management Research Laboratory (Volume Reduction Unit) 110
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Organically Contaminated Soils) 364 •
Thermatrix, Inc. (Photolytic Oxidation Process) 318 •
RKK, Ltd. (CRYOCELL®) 218
SIVE Services (Steam Injection and Vacuum Extraction) 226 •
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center |
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
Terra-KIeen Response Group, Inc. (Solvent Extraction Treatment System) 152 _
Terra Vac (In Situ and Ex Situ Vacuum Extraction) 154 •
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
Page 512
I
I
-------
Soil (continued)
VOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) ..." 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCS Method) 430
Solidification/Stabilization
Geo-Con, Inc. (In Situ Solidification and Stabilization Process) 76
WASTECH, Inc. (Solidification and Stabilization) 166
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Thermal Destruction
American Combustion, Inc. (PYRETRON® Thermal Destruction) 22
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation (Hybrid Fluidized Bed System) . . . 270
Gruppo Italimpresse (Infrared Thermal Destruction) 84
Institute of Gas Technology (Fluidized-Bed/Cyclonic Agglomerating Combustor) . . . 284
Retech, M4 Environmental Management Inc. (Plasma Arc Vitrification) 134
Sonotech, Inc. (Frequency-Tunable Pulse Combustion System) 148
Svedala Industries, Inc. (PYROKILN THERMAL ENCAPSULATION Process) 316
Texaco Inc. (Texaco Gasification Process) 156
Vortec Corporation (Oxidation and Vitrification Process) 232
Other
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction
Process) 28
Other
Biological Degradation
ECOVA Corporation (Bioslurry Reactor) 58
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Cone Penetrometers
Geoprobe Systems (Geoprobe Soil Conductivity Sensor) 388
Tri-Services (Site Characterization and Analysis Penetrometer System [SCAPS]) . . 428
Materials Handling
Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology (Campbell Centrifugal Jig) . . . 300
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc. (Thermal Desorption System) 104
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Bergmann, A Division of Linatex, Inc. (Soil and Sediment Washing) 26
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Organics Destruction and Metals
Stabilization) 262
Solidification/Stabilization
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 1 50
Page 513
-------
I
Soil (continued) ™
Other
Thermal Destruction •
General Atomics (Circulating Bed Combustor) 72 |
Water mt
Aromatic VOCs I
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) -246 •
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System •
[SVVS®]) 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 •
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36 |
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (Oxygen Microbubble In Situ . •
Bioremediation) 358 •
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and |
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342 •
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 |
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102 •
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170 I
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 I
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) 176 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs |
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical
Platform) 378 _
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396 ™
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas I
Chromatograph) 414 I
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening •
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers _
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 •
Page 514
I
-------
Water (continued)
Aromatic VOCs
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. {Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) . 392
Cyanide
Biological Degradation
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Dioxins
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Explosives
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
Furans
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Halogenated VOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Anaerobic-Aerobic Sequential Bioremediation of
PCE) 336
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) . 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Methanotrophic Bioreactor System) 258
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (Oxygen Microbubble In Situ
Bioremediation) 358
Page 515
-------
I
Water (continued) •
Haloqenated VOCs
Biological Degradation •
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230 Jj
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling _
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and •
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 •
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198 I
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98 •
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment H
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338 •
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 |
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc. (In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic
Degradation of Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater) .... 64 M
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86 •
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306 •
Thermatrix, Inc. (Photolytic Oxidation Process) 318 •
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 •
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) ~ 164 |
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332 _
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170 •
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 ™
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) . . . 174
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Pervaporation System) . „ 176 I
Portable Gas Chromatographs • I
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical
Platform) >• 378 •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380 I
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414 _
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 I
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 ™
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Spectrometers |
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) . : 390 ,
Heavy Metals M
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Page 516
I
I
-------
Water (continued)
Heavy Metals
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Herbicides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
Physical/Chemical Treatment
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) . 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
Hydrocarbons
Biological Degradation
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) , 30
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Physical/Chemical Treatment
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Metals
Biological Degradation
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (Constructed Wetlands-
Based Treatment) 188
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Biomineralization of Metals) 362
Pintail Systems, Inc. (Spent Ore Bioremediation Process) 210
Resource Management & Recovery (AlgaSORB® Biological Sorption) 312
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400
Physical Chemical Treatment - Biological Degradation
Lasagna™ Public-Private Partnership (Lasagna™ In Situ Soil Remediation) 198
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74
Page 577
-------
I
Water (continued) |
Metals
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorptfon . mm
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136 —
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254 •
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment) 340 •
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, and Oberlin Filter Co. (Membrane
Microfiltration) 54 •
Dynaphore, Inc. (FORAGER® Sponge) 56 |
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) 66
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc./Hickson Corporation (Chromated Copper _
Arsenate Soil Leaching Process) 294 •
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base ™
Grouting Technology) 106
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308 •
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222 |
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 mm
University of Washington (Adsorptive Filtration) 326 I
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) • • 370
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
Solidification/Stabilization •
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization |
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) • • • • ^0
Thermal Destruction mm
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 •
PAHs ™
Biological Degradation
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360 I
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206 I
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorptfon
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 •
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234 |
Physical/Chemical Treatment
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124 _
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs •
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 •
Bs •
Biological Degradation
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360 •
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206 |
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) . 178
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
Metorex, Inc. (Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis) 400 •
Page 518
I
I
-------
Water (continued)
RGBs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) . 370
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Millipore Corporation (EnviroGard™ PCB Immunoassay Test Kit) 404
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
PCPs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
Test Kits
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (PENTA RISc Test System) 422
Strategic Diagnostics, Inc. (RaPID Assay®) 424
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Millipore Corporation (EnviroGard™ PCP Immunoassay Test Kit) 406
Pesticides
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Page 519
-------
I
I
Water (continued) H
Pesticides
Biological Degradation •
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360 |
Phytokinetics, Inc. {Phytoremediation Process) 206
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178 _
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorpiion •
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60 ™
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42 m»
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 •
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Magnum Water Technology (CAV-OX® Process) 100 •
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102 •
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314 _
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160 •
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) '. . 370
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172 •
Portable Gas Chromatographs m
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418 Bj
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420 |
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430 _
Spectrometers •
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) 390 ™
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic I
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392 •
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 •
Petroleum Hydrocarbons I
Biological Degradation
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (Oxygen Microbubble In Situ _
Bioremediation) 358 I
Materials Handling ™
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 •
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption |
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
Page 520
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Water (continued)
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
EG&G Environmental, Inc. (NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology) 192
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
Portable Gas Chromatographs
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
Test Kits
Idetek, Inc. (Equate® Immunoassay) 398
Radionuclides
Physical/Chemical Radioactive Waste Treatment
Filter Flow Technology, Inc. (Heavy Metals and Radionuclide Polishing Filter) 68
General Environmental Corporation (CURE®-Electrocoagulation Wastewater
Treatment System) 74
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Chemical Treatment and Ultrafiltration) 254
Atomic Energy of Canada, Limited (Ultrasonic-Aided Leachate Treatment) 340
Selentec Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Selentec MAG*SEPSM Technology) . . . 222
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24
SVOCs
Biological Degradation
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (Two-Zone, Plume Interception, In Situ
Treatment Technology) 246
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (Oxygen Microbubble In Situ
Bioremediation) 358
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
ELI Eco Logic International Inc. (Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process) 60
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) 212
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation
Technology) 42
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
University of Wisconsin - Madison (Photoelectrocatalytic Degradation and
Removal) 370
Roy F. Weston; Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
Page 521
-------
I
I
Water (continued) •
SVOCs
Portable Gas Chromatographs m
Analytical and Remedial Technology, Inc. (Automated Sampling and Analytical •
Platform) 378 ™
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening •
Program PCB Method) 430 •
Solidification/Stabilization
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
Thermal Destruction
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (Cyclone Furnace) 24 _
Other I
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction ™
Process) 28
VOCs •
Biological Degradation •
Billings and Associates, Inc. (Subsurface Volatilization and Ventilation System
[SVVS®]) 30 •
Bio-Rem, Inc. (Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation Process) 34 J
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280 _
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/R.E. Wright I
Environmental, Inc. (In Situ Bioventing Treatment System) 122 '
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation/SBP Technologies,
Inc. (Vacuum-Vaporized Well System) 120 •
OHM Remediation Services Corporation (Oxygen Microbubble In Situ |
Bioremediation) 358
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soils) 360 M
Phytokinetics, Inc. (Phytoremediation Process) 206 •
U.S. Air Force (Phytoremediation of TCE-Contaminated Shallow Groundwater) . . . 230
ZENON Environmental Inc. (ZenoGem™ Process) 178
Materials Handling •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and •
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc. (Steam Enhanced Recovery Process) 92 |
KAI Technologies, Inc./Brown and Root Environmental (Radio Frequency Heating) . . 98
New Jersey Institute of Technology (GHEA Associates Process) 302 •
NOVATERRA Associates (In Situ Soil Treatments [Steam and Air Stripping]) 126 •
Praxis Environmental Technologies, Inc. (In Situ Thermal Extraction Process) ..... 212
Rochem Separation Systems, Inc. (Rochem Disc Tube™ Module System) 136
Western Research Institute (Contained Recovery of Oily Wastes) 234 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment m
Arizona State University/Zentox Corporation (Photocatalytic Oxidation with Air
Stripping) 338 •
Calgon Carbon Oxidation Technologies (perox-pure™ Chemical Oxidation |
Technology) 42
CF Systems Corporation (Liquified Gas Solvent Extraction [LG-SX] Technology) .... 44 _
Radian International LLC (Integrated Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum I
Stripping) 130 *
Page 522
I
I
-------
Water (continued)
VOCs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EG&G Environmental, Inc. (NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology) 192
Electrokinetics, Inc. (In Situ Bioremediation by Electrokinetic Injection) 342
EnviroMetal Technologies Inc. (In Situ and Ex Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic,
Degradation of Dissolved Halogenated Organic Compounds in Groundwater) .... 64
High Voltage Environmental Applications, Inc. (High-Energy Electron Irradiation) ... 86
Matrix Photocatalytic Inc. (Photocatalytic Water Treatment) 102
Morrison Knudsen Corporation/Spetstamponazhgeologia Enterprises (Clay-Base
Grouting Technology) 106
North American Technologies Group, Inc. (Oleophilic Amine-Coated Ceramic Chip) . 124
Pulse Sciences, Inc. (X-Ray Treatment of Aqueous Solutions) 306
Thermatrix, Inc. (Photolytic Oxidation Process) 318
SBP Technologies, Inc. (Membrane Filtration and Bioremediation) 138
State University of New York at Oswego, Environmental Research Center
(Electrochemical Peroxidation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments and Waters) .... 314
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (Ultraviolet Radiation and Oxidation) 160
University of Nebraska - Lincoln (Center Pivot Spray Irrigation System) 164
UV Technologies, Inc. (PhotoCAT™ Process) 328
Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Ambersorb® 563 Adsorbent) 332
Roy F. Weston, Inc./IEG Technologies (UVB - Vacuum Vaporizing Well) 170
Wheelabrator Clean Air Systems, Inc. (PO*WW*ER™ Technology) 172
Xerox Corporation (2-PHASE™ EXTRACTION Process) 174
ZENON Environmental Inc. (Cross-Flow Peryaporation System) 176
Portable Gas Chromatographs
Bruker Analytical Systems, Inc. (Mobile Environmental Monitor) 380
HNU Systems, Inc. (HNU GC 311D Portable Gas Chromatograph) 396
MTI Analytical Instruments (Portable Gas Analyzer) 408
Photovac Monitoring Instruments (PE Photovac Voyager Portable Gas
Chromatograph) 414
Sentex Systems, Inc. (Scentograph Plus II Portable Gas Chromatograph) 418
SRI Instruments (Compact Gas Chromatograph) 420
United States Environmental Protection Agency (Field Analytical Screening
Program PCB Method) 430
Spectrometers
Graseby Ionics, Ltd., and PCP, Inc. (Ion Mobility Spectrometry) . 390
Test Kits
Hanby Environmental Laboratory Procedures, Inc. (Test Kits for Organic
Contaminants in Soil and Water) 392
Other
Berkeley Environmental Restoration Center (In Situ Steam Enhanced Extraction
Process) „ 28
Other
Biological Degradation
BioTrol®, Inc. (Biological Aqueous Treatment System) 36
Institute of Gas Technology (Chemical and Biological Treatment) 280
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence
HNU Systems, Inc. {HNU Source Excited Fluorescence Analyzer-Portable [SEFA-P]
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) 394
Page 523
-------
I
I
Other
Materials Handling _
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, University of Cincinnati, and •
FRX, Inc. (Hydraulic Fracturing) 116 •
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EG&G Environmental, Inc. (NoVOCs™ In-Well Stripping Technology) 192 •
EPOC Water, Inc. (Precipitation, Microfiltration, and Sludge Dewatering) 66 |
RECRA Environmental, Inc. (Alternating Current Electrocoagulation Technology) . . 308
Solidification/Stabilization m
STC Remediation, A Division of Omega Environmental, Inc. (Organic Stabilization •
and Chemical Fixation/Solidification) 150
Other
Aromatic VOCs
Solidification/Stabilization
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and •
Adsorption Process) . . , 330 |
Dioxins
Physical/Chemical Treatment _
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190 •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris ™
Washing System) 114
Solidification/Stabilization I
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 I
Furans
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190 |
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris
Washing System) 114 _
Solidification/Stabilization I
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 W
Haloqenated VOCs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption •
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214 |
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78 H
Test Kits J
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Herbicides
Physical/Chemical Treatment •
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris •
Washing System) 114
Metals •
Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence |
NITON Corporation (XL Spectrum Analyzer) 412
TN Spectrace (TN 9000 and TN Pb X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzers) 426 •
Materials Handling •
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
University of South Carolina (In Situ Mitigation of Acid Water) 324 •
Page 524
I
I
-------
Other (continued)
Metals
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris
Washing System) 114
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
SOLUCORP Industries (Molecular Bonding System®) 228
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Thermal Destruction
Center for Hazardous Materials Research (Smelting Lead-Containing Waste) 264
PAHs
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
PCBs
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris
Washing System) 114
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Pesticides
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris
Washing System) 114
Solidification/Stabilization
Geosafe Corporation (In Situ Vitrification) 78
Test Kits
Dexsil Corporation (Environmental Test Kits) 382
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Materials Handling
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation
and Washing Process) 248
Radionuclides
Physical/Chemical Treatment
EET, Inc. (TECHXTRACT® Process) 190
SVOCs
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214
Physical/Chemical Treatment
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and IT Corporation (Debris
Washing System) 114
Solidification/Stabilization
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Page 525
-------
I
VOCs
Materials Handling m
AEA Technology PLC, National Environmental Technology Centre (Soil Separation •
and Washing Process) 248
Physical/Chemical Thermal Desorption
Process Technologies, Inc. (Photolytic Destruction of Vapor-Phase Halogens) .... 214 W
Solidification/Stabilization "
Western Product Recovery Group, Inc. (Coordinate, Chemical Bonding, and
Adsorption Process) 330
Page 526
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
------- |