United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response
Washington, DC 20460
Off ice of
Research and Development
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Superfund
EPA/54Q/S-92/009
October 1992
Engineering Bulletin
4*EPA Technology Preselection
Data Requirements
Purpose
Section 121(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) mandates
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to select remedies
that "utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maxi-
mum extent practicable" and to prefer remedial actions in
which treatment "permanently and significantly reduces the
volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous substances, pollut-
ants, and contaminants as a principal element" The Engineer-
ing Bulletins are a series of documents that summarize the latest
information available on selected treatment and site remedia-
tion technologies and related issues. The summaries and refer-
ences are designed to help remedial project managers, on-
scene coordinators, contractors, and other site cleanup managers
understand and select technologies that may have potential
applicability to their Superfund or other hazardous waste sites.
This bulletin provides a listing of soil, water, and contami-
nant data elements needed to evaluate the potential applicabil-
ity of technologies for treating contaminated soils and water.
With this base set of data in hand, experts familiar with the
applicability of treatment technologies can better focus the
advice and assistance they give to those involved at Superfund
sites. The data compiled should permit preselection of appli-
cable treatment methods and the direct elimination of others.
This bulletin emphasizes the site physical and chemical soil
and water characteristics for which observations and measure-
ments should be compiled. However, several other kinds of
information may be equally helpful in assessing the potential
success of a treatment technology including the activity history
of the site, how and where wastes were disposed, topographic
and hydrologic detail, and site stratigraphy. Gathering and
analyzing the information called for in this bulletin prior to
extensive field investigations [i.e., the Remedial Investigation
and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)] will facilitate streamlining and
targeting of the sampling and analytical objectives of the over-
all program.
Additional information on site data requirements for the
selection of specific treatment technologies may be found in
several EPA publications [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].* These documents
form much of the basis for this Engineering Bulletin. The
bulletin may be updated by periodically-issued addenda.
Abstract
A base set of soil and water analytical (measured) data
requirements has been developed to enable prescreening of
technologies that may have potential applicability at Superfund
sites. Data requirements for soils include the traditional engi-
neering properties of soils and data on soil chemistry, including
contaminants and oxygen demand. Analytical data require-
ments for water (usually groundwater) include chemistry, oxy-
gen demand, and pH. Of particular importance in chemical
characterization of both soils and water are contaminating
metals and organic chemicals, whose presence or absence is
often suggested by historical site activities. Sampling and mea-
surements at this stage need not be in great detail, but should
be sufficient to preliminarily characterize the site variability in
three dimensions. Topography, groundwater flow, stratigra-
phy of the contaminated zone, and degree of consolidation will
also affect the choice of treatment technology.
The relationships between each of the data requirements
and specific treatment technologies are briefly summarized.
The detailed reasoning may be found in one or more of the
references.
The guidance presented in this bulletin is not exhaustive.
The data elements are those that have wide technological
applicability and those that can be collected in a straightfor-
ward manner. Data gaps are still likely to exist However, an
almost certain result is that the additional data needs will be
better focused.
Background Information
The background information collected during the Site
Screening Investigation and Preliminary Assessment identifies
the probable types and locations of contaminants present.
Study of the chemicals used or stored at the site and the
disposal methods used during the period(s) of operation is
essential. When chemical-use records are unavailable for an
industrial site, knowledge of the Standard Industrial Classification
may indicate the probability of the presence of metals, inorganics,
pesticides, dioxins/furans, or other organics. Information on
what classes and concentrations of chemicals contaminate the
site, where they are distributed, and in what media they appear
is essential in beginning the preselection of treatment
technologies [2, p. 7].
* [reference number, page number]
-------
The contaminant distribution, types, and concentrations
will affect the choice of treatment technology. Other consider-
ations in the selection of treatment options include the proxim-
ity of residential areas and the location of buildings and other
structures. These aspects should be determined early in the
investigation process. Much of the determination of the range
and diversity of contamination, as well as likely contaminant
sources, may be observational, rather than measurement-based.
Basic Measurement Data Requirements
The discussion of data requirements is divided into two
sections, soil and water. For each of the two media, the vertical
and horizontal contaminant profiles should be defined as much
as possible. Information on the overall range and diversity of
contamination across the site is critical to treatment technology
selection. This generally means that samples will be taken and
their physical and chemical characteristics determined. The
following subsections present the characteristics and rationale
for collection of preselection data for each of the two media.
Other documents present similar data requirements, especially
for soils [6].
The minimum set of soil measurement data elements usu-
ally necessary for soil treatment technology preselection is pre-
sented in Table 1. Table 2 presents the basic set of data
necessary for contaminated water treatment technology
preselection. It is common for the two media at one site to be
contaminated with the same substances, thus many of the
required data elements are similar. The information contained
in Table 1 and Table 2 is based on professional judgement.
The ratings in Table 1 and Table 2 are related to measured
values of the parameters. The values are described as "higher"
and "lower" in defining their tendency toward preselecting a
technology group. In general, these descriptors are related to
the tendency of the parameter to enhance or to inhibit particu-
lar processes. Where no symbol is shown for a characteristic in
Table 1 and Table 2, the affect on the associated technology is
considered inconsequential.
Each characteristic is judged, or rated, as to its effect in
preselecting each of the treatment technology groups which
represent various treatment processes. A rating applies gener-
ally to a technology, but it does not ensure that the rating will
be applicable to each specific technology within a technology
group. Examples of specific treatments within the technology
groups are as follows:
Physical
Soil washing
Soil flushing
Steam extraction
Air stripping
Solvent extraction
Chemical
Oxidation
Hydrolysis
Polymerization
Vapor extraction
Carbon adsorption
Filtration
Gravity separation
Reduction
Precipitation
Thermal
Incineration
Plasma Arc
Biological
Aerobic
Slurry reactor
Solidification/Stabilization
Cement-based
Fly ash/lime
Kiln dust
Pyrolysis
Thermal desorption
Anaerobic
Land treatment
Vitrification
Asphalt
Soil
Site soil conditions are frequently process-limiting. Pro-
cess-limiting characteristics such as pH or moisture content [6]
may sometimes be adjusted. In other cases, a treatment tech-
nology may be eliminated based upon the soil classification
(e.g., particle-size distribution) or other soil characteristics.
Soils are inherently variable in their physical and chemical
characteristics. Frequently the variability is much greater verti-
cally than horizontally, resulting from the variability in the
sedimentation processes that originally formed the soils. The
soil variability, in turn, will result in variability in the distribution
of water and contaminants and in the ease with which they can
be transported within, and removed from, the soil at a particu-
lar site.
Many data elements are relatively easy to obtain, and in
some cases, more than one test method exists [6] [7] [8] [9]
[10] [11 ] [12]. Field procedures, usually visual inspection and/
or operation of simple hand-held devices (e.g., auger), are
performed by trained geologists or soils engineers to determine
the classification, moisture content, and permeability of soils
across a site. Due to the fact that zones of gross contamination
may be directly observed, field reports describing soil variability
may lessen the need for large numbers of samples and mea-
surements in describing site characteristics. Common field
information-gathering often includes descriptions of natural soil
exposures, weathering that may have taken place, trench cross-
sections, and subsurface cores. Such an effort can sometimes
identify probable areas of past disposal through observation of
soil type differences, subsidence, overfill, etc.
While field investigations are important, they cannot elimi-
nate the need for or lessen the importance of soil sampling and
measurements sufficient to define those characteristics that are
essential to the selection and design of soil treatment technolo-
gies.
Soil particle-size distribution is an important factor in
many soil treatment technologies. In general, sands and fine
gravels are easiest to deal with. Soil washing may not be
effective where the soil is composed of large percentages of silt
and clay because of the difficulty of separating fine particles
from each other and from wash fluids [13, p. 1]. Fine particles
also can result in high particulate loading in flue gases due to
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
-------
TABLE 1. SOIL CHARACTERISTICS THAT ASSIST IN
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY PRESELECTION
TABLE 2. WATER CHARACTERISTICS THAT ASSIST IN TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGY PRESELECTION
CHARACTERISTIC
Particle size
Bulk density
Particle density
Permeability
Moisture content
pH and Eh
Humic content
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Oil and grease
Organic Contaminants
Halogenated volatiles
Halogenated semivolatiles
Nonhalogenated volatiles
Nonhalogenated semivolatiles
PCBs
Pesticides
Dioxins/Furans
Organic cyanides
Organic corrosives
Light Nonaqueous-Phase Liquid
Dense Nonaqueous-Phase Liquid
Heating value (Btu content)
Inorganic Contaminants
Volatile metals
Nonvolatile metals
Asbestos
Radioactive materials
Inorgank cyanides
Inorganic corrosives
Reactive Contaminants
Oxidizers
Reducers
TREATMENT TECHNOLOC Y CROUP
PHYSICAL
V
•
•
T
O
T
T
T
T
V
T
V
V
T
T
T
T
•
T
CHEMICAL
V
o
T
•
a
T
T
V
T
T
V
T
V
V
T
V
T
T
T
T
V
BIOLOGICAL
m
m
V
a
•
•
•
a
a
T
T
T
V
T
V
V
V
V
a
a
THERMAL
m
a
T
T
•
0
•
T
•
o
a
a
a
T
a
S
a
a
T
3
O
O
a
a
a
a
a
C1
a
a
o
•
•
V
T
V
• = higher values support preselection of technology group.
O = lower values support preselection of technology group.
T = Effect is variable among options within a technology
group.
Where no symbol is shown, the effect of that characteristic is
considered inconsequential
CHARACTERISTIC
pH, Eh
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Oil and grease
Suspended solids
Nitrogen & phosphorus
Organic Contaminants
Halogenated volatiles
Halogenated semivolatiles
Nonhalogenated volatiles
Nonhalogenated semivolatiles
PCBs
Pesticides
Dioxins/Furans
Organic cyanides
Organic corrosives
Light Nonaqueous-Phase Liquid
Dense Nonaqueous-Phase Liquid
Inorganic Contaminants
Asbestos
Radioactive materials
Metals (Drinking Water Stds.)
TREATMENT TECHNOLOC Y CROUP
g
1
V
T
T
T
T
T
T
V
T
T
T
V
T
T
V
8
1
T
T
•
a
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
•
OCKAL
•M
§
T
•
•
•
T
T
a
a
T
T
T
T
a
T
T
T
T
a
a
|
1
T
•
a
•
T
a
a
a
• = higher values support preselection of technology group.
O = lower values support preselection of technology group.
V = Effect is variable among options within a technology group.
Where no symbol is shown, the effect of that characteristic is considered
inconsequential
turbulence in rotary kilns. Heterogeneities in soil and waste
composition may produce non-uniform, feed streams for incin-
eration that result in inconsistent removal rates [1][14]. Fine
particles may delay setting and curing times and can surround
larger particles causing weakened bonds in solidification/stabili-
zation processes. Clays may cause poor performance of the
thermal desorption technology due to caking [15, p. 2]. High
silt and clay content can cause soil malleability and low perme-
ability during steam extraction, thus lowering the efficiency of
the process [16, p. 2]. Bioremediation processes, such as in
slurry reactors, are generally facilitated by finer particles that
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
-------
increase the contact area between the waste and microorgan-
isms [14] [17, p. 1].
In situ technologies dependent on the subsurface flowability
of fluids, such as soil flushing, steam extraction, vacuum extrac-
tion, and in situ biodegradation, will be negatively influenced
by the impeding effects of clay layers [15, p. 2] [18, p. 4].
Undesirable channeling may be created in alternating layers of
clay and sand, resulting in inconsistent treatment [2, p. 79].
Larger particles, such as coarse gravel or cobbles, are undesir-
able for vitrification and chemical extraction processes and also
may not be suitable for the stabilization/solidification technol-
ogy [2, p. 93].
The bulk density of soil is the weight of the soil per unit
volume including water and voids. It is used in converting
weight to volume in materials handling calculations [19, p. 3-
3]. Soil bulk density and particle size distribution are interre-
lated in determining if proper mixing and heat transfer will
occur in fluidized bed reactors [2, p. 39].
Particle density is the specific gravity of a soil particle.
Differences in particle density are important in heavy mineral/
metal separation processes (heavy media separation). Particle
density is also important in soil washing and in determining the
settling velocity of suspended soil particles in flocculation and
sedimentation processes [13, p. 1].
Soil permeability is one of the controlling factors in the
effectiveness of in situ treatment technologies. The ability of
soil-flushing fluids (e.g., water, steam, solvents, etc.) to contact
and remove contaminants can be reduced by low soil perme-
ability or by variations in the permeability of different soil layers
[16, p. 2] [19, p. 4-9]. Low permeability also hinders the
movement of air and vapors through the soil matrix, lessening
the volatilization of VOCs in vapor extraction [17, p. 2]|. Simi-
larly, nutrient solutions, used to accelerate in situ bioremediation,
may not be able to penetrate low-permeability soils in a reason-
able time [1 ]. Low permeability may also limit the effectiveness
of in-situ vitrification by slowing vapor releases [2, p. 59].
Soil moisture may hinder the movement of air through
the soil in vacuum extraction systems [3, p. 90] [17, p. 1 ]. High
soil moisture may cause excavation and material transport
problems [20, p. 2] and may negatively impact material feed in
many processes [2] [15, p. 2] [19, p. 4] [21]. Moisture affects
the application of vitrification and other thermal treatments by
increasing energy requirements, thereby increasing costs. On
the other hand, increased soil moisture favors in situ biological
treatment [22, p. 40].
Many treatment technologies are affected by the pH of the
waste being treated. For example, low pH can interfere with
chemical oxidation and reduction processes. The solubility and
speciation of inorganic contaminants are affected by pH. Ion
exchange and flocculation processes, applied after various liq-
uid extraction processes, may be negatively influenced by pH
[1, p. 5, 16]. Microbial diversity and activity in bioremediation
processes can be reduced by extreme pH ranges. High pH in
soil normally improves the feasibility of applying chemical ex-
traction and alkaline dehalogenation processes [2, p. 67].
Eh is the oxidation-reduction (redox) potential of the ma-
terial being considered. For oxidation to occur in soil systems,
the Eh of the solid phase must be greater than that of the
organic chemical contaminant [22, p. 19]. Maintaining anaero-
biosis, and thus a low Eh, in the liquid phase, enhances decom-
position of certain halogenated organic compounds [23].
Humic content (humus) is the decomposing part of the
naturally occurring organic content of the soil. The effects of
high humic content upon treatment technologies are usually
negative. It can inhibit soil-vapor extraction, steam extraction,
soil washing, and soil flushing due to strong adsorption of the
contaminant by the organic material [2, p. 76] [17, p. 2].
Reaction times for chemical dehalogenation processes can be
increased by the presence of large amounts of humic materials.
High organic content may also exert an excessive oxygen
demand, adversely affecting bioremediation and chemical oxi-
dation [24, p. 2] [25, p. 1].
Total organic carbon (TOC) provides an indication of the
total organic material present. It is often used as an indicator
(but not a measure) of the amount of waste available for
biodegradation [2, p. 109]. TOC includes the carbon both
from naturally-occurring organic material and organic chemical
contaminants. Ordinarily, not all of the organic carbon is
contaminating, but all of it may compete in redox reactions,
leading to the need for larger amounts of chemical reduction/
oxidation reagents than would be required by the organic
chemical contaminants alone [2, p. 97].
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) provides an esti-
mate of the biological treatability of the soil contaminants by
measuring the oxygen consumption of the organic material
which is readily biodegraded [3, p. 89]. Chemical oxygen
demand (COD) is a measure of the oxygen equivalent of
organic content in a sample that can be oxidized by a strong
chemical oxidant. Sometimes COD and BOD can be corre-
lated, and COD can give another indication of biological
treatability or treatability by chemical oxidation [2, p. 97].
COD is also useful in assessing the applicability of wet air
oxidation [2, p. 51].
Oil and grease, when present in a soil, will coat the soil
particles. The coating tends to weaken the bond between soil
and cement in cement-based solidification [14]. Similarly, oil
and grease can also interfere with reactant-to-waste contact in
chemical reduction/oxidation reactions thus reducing the effi-
ciency of those reactions [2, p. 97].
Identification of the site organk and inorganic contami-
nants is the most important information necessary for technol-
ogy prescreening. At this stage, it may not be necessary to
identify specific contaminants, but the presence or absence of
the groups shown in Table 1 should be known. These groups
have been presented in the other Engineering Bulletins in order
to describe the effectiveness of the particular treatment tech-
nology under consideration.
The soil may be contaminated with organic chemicals that
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
-------
are not miscible with water. Often, they will be lighter than
water and float on top of the water table. These are called light
nonaqueous-phase liquids (LNAPLs). Those heavier than water
are called dense nonaqueous-phase liquids (DNAPLs). Most of
these liquids can be physically separated from water within the
soil, especially if they are not adsorbed to soil particles.
Volatile, semivolatile, and other organics may be adsorbed
in the soil matrix. Volatiles may be in the form of vapors in the
pores of non-saturated soil, and may be amenable to soil-vapor
extraction. Fuel value, or Btu content, of the contaminated soil
is directly related to the organic chemical content. High Btu
content favors thermal treatment, or perhaps recovery for fuel
use.
High halogen concentrations, as in chlorinated organics,
lead to the formation of corrosive acids in incineration systems.
Volatile metals produce emissions that are difficult to remove,
and nonvolatile metals remain in the ash [14].
Metals may be found sometimes in the elemental form,
but more often they are found as salts mixed in the soil.
Radioactive materials are not ordinarily found at waste disposal
sites. However, where they are found, treatment options are
probably limited to volume reduction, and permanent contain-
ment is required. Asbestos fibers require special care to prevent
their escape during handling and disposal; permanent contain-
ment must be provided. Radioactive materials and asbestos
require special handling techniques to maintain worker safety.
Often, specific technologies may be ruled out, or the list of
potential technologies may be immediately narrowed, on the
basis of the presence or absence of one or more of the chemical
groups. The relative amounts of each may tend to favor certain
technologies. For example, significant amounts of dioxin/
furans, regardless of the concentrations of other organics, will
ordinarily lead to preselection of thermal treatment as an alter-
native.
Data available from the preliminary assessment, the site
inspection and the National Priorities List (NPL) activities may
provide most of the contaminant information needed at the
technology prescreening stage. If the data are not sufficient,
waste samples may be scanned for selected priority pollutants
or contaminants from the CERCLA Hazardous Substances List
During the ensuing RI/FS scoping phase, these data are evalu-
ated to identify additional data which must be gathered during
the site characterization. Guidance is available on the RI/FS
process and on field methods, sampling procedures, and data
quality objectives [4][5][6][12] and therefore is not discussed in
this bulletin.
Water
It is common for groundwater and surface water drainage
to be contaminated with the same substances found in soils
derived from previous activities. At Superfund sites, many of
the required data elements are similar, e.g., pH, TOC, BOD,
COD, oil and grease, and contaminant identification and quan-
tification. Frequently, many of the water data elements will be
available from existing analytical data. Some initial data re-
quirements may even be precluded by the collection of exist-
ing regional or local information on surface and groundwater
conditions. When data are not available, knowledge of the site
conditions and its history may contribute to arriving at a list of
contaminants and cost-effective analytical methods.
As with soils, the pH of groundwater and surface water is
important in determining the applicability of many treatment
processes. Often, the pH must be adjusted before or during a
treatment process. Low pH can interfere with chemical redox
processes. Extreme pH levels can limit microbial diversity and
hamper the application of both in situ and above-ground
applications of biological treatment [2, p. 97]. Contaminant
solubility and toxicity may be affected by changes in pH. The
species of metals and inorganics present are influenced by the
pH of the water, as are the type of phenolic, and nitrogen-
containing compounds present. Processes such as carbon
adsorption, ion exchange, and flocculation may be impacted
by pH changes [1, p. 5].
Eh helps to define, with pH, the state of oxidation-reduc-
tion equilibria in groundwater or aqueous waste streams. The
Eh must be below approximately 0.35 volts for significant
reductive chlorination to take place, but exact requirements
depend on the individual compounds being reduced. As
noted earlier in the soils section, maintaining anaerobiosis (low
Eh) enhances decomposition of certain halogenated compounds
[23].
BOD, COD, and TOC measurements in contaminated
water, as in soils, provide indications of the biodegradable,
chemically oxidizable, or combustible fractions of the organic
contamination, respectively. These measurements are not in-
terchangeable, although correlations may sometimes be made
in order to convert the more precise TOC and/or COD mea-
surements to estimates of BOD. Interpretation of these data
should be made by an expert in the technologies being consid-
ered.
Oil and grease may be present in water to the extent that
they are the primary site contaminants. In that case, oil-water
separation may be called for as the principal treatment Even in
lower concentrations, oil and grease may still require pretreat-
ment to prevent clogging of ion exchange resins, activated
carbon systems, or other treatment system components [3, p.
91].
Suspended solids can cause resin binding in ion exchange
systems and clogging of reverse osmosis membranes, filtration
systems and carbon adsorption units. Suspended solids above
5 percent indicate that analysis of total and soluble metals
should be made [1, p. 14].
Standard analytical methods are used to identify the spe-
cific organk and inorgank contaminants. Properties of or-
ganic chemical contaminants important in treatment processes
include solubility in water, specific gravity, boiling point, and
vapor pressure. For the identified contaminants, these proper-
ties can generally be found in standard references [26] or in
EPA/RREL's Treatability Database [27].
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
-------
Insoluble organic contaminants may be present as non-
aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs). DNAPLs will tend to sink to the
bottom of surface waters and groundwater aquifers. LNAPLs
will float on top of surface water and groundwater. In addition
LNAPLs may adhere to the soil through the capillary fringe and
may be found on top of water in temporary or perched aquifers
in the vadose zone.
As noted previously, volatile organics may be in the form of
vapors in the pores of non-saturated soil, or they may be
dissolved in water. Even low-solubility organics may be present
at low concentrations dissolved in water. Some organics (e.g.
certain halogenated compounds, pesticides, and dioxins/furans
in water) resist biological treatment, while others may be ame-
nable to several technologies.
Dissolved metals may be found at toxic levels or levels
exceeding drinking water standards. Often they will require
chemical treatment. The speciation of metals may be impor-
tant in determining the solubility, toxicity, and reactivity of
metal compounds.
Status of Data Requirements
The data requirements presented in Tables 1 and 2 are
based on currently available information. Preselection of new
and evolving technologies, or of currently used technologies
that have been modified, may require the collection of addi-
tional data. New analytical methods may be devised to replace
or supplement existing methods. Such improvements in ana-
lytical technology also could require additional data to be
collected. This bulletin may be updated if major changes occur
in data requirements for preselection of treatment technology
alternatives.
EPA Contact
Specific questions regarding technology preselection data
requirements may be directed to:
Eugene Harris
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
(513)569-7862
Acknowledgments
This engineering bulletin was prepared for the U S Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Develop-
ment (ORD), Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL)
Cincinnati, Ohio, by Science Applications International Corpo-
ration (SAIC) under EPA Contract No. 68-C8-0062. Mr Eugene
Hams served as the EPA Technical Project Monitor. Mr Gary
Baker was SAICs Work Assignment Manager. Mr. Jim Rawe
(SAIC) and Mr. Robert Hartley (SAIC) were the authors of the
bulletin.
The following other Agency and contractor personnel have
contnbuted their time and comments by participating in the
expert review meetings and/or peer reviewing the document:
Mr. Eric Saylor, SAIC
2.
3.
4.
REFERENCES
1 - A Compendium of Technologies Used in the Treatment
of Hazardous Wastes. EPA/625/8-87/014, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Center for Environmental
Research Information, Cincinnati, OH, 1987.
Technology Screening Guide for Treatment of CERCLA
Soils and Sludges. EPA/540/2-88/004, U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emer-
gency Response, Washington, DC, 1988.
Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies Under CERCLA
Interim Final. EPA/540/2-89/0058, U.S. Environmental '
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington, D.C., 1989.
Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA, Interim Final. EPA/540/
G-89/004, OSWER Directive 9355.3-01, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, Washington, D.C., 1988.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods
EPA/540/P-87/001, OSWER Directive 9355.0-14, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C., 1987.
Breckenridge, R. P., j. R. Williams, and j. F. Keck. Ground
Water Issue: Characterizing Soils for Hazardous Waste Site
Assessments. EPA/540/4-91/003, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington, D.C, 1991.
American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Methods of Soil
Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties
Second Edition, 1982.
NIOSH. Manual of Analytical Methods, Third Edition
1984.
Methods for the Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes
EPA/600/4-79/020, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development Washina-
ton, D.C, 1983. y
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
'U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992— 648-080/60092
-------
10. American Society for Testing and Materials. Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, 1987.
11. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. Third Edition.
SW-846, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.
1986.
12. Data Quality Objective for Remedial Response Activities,
Example Scenario: RI/FS Activities at a Site with Contami-
nated Soils and Ground Water. EPA/540/G-87/004,
OSWER Directive 9355.0-7B, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Washington, D.C, 1987.
13. Engineering Bulletin: Soil Washing Treatment, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/540/2-90/017.
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washing-
ton, D.C. and Office of Research and Development,
Cincinnati, OH, 1990.
14. Summary of Treatment Technology Effectiveness for
Contaminated Soil. EPA/540/2-89/053, U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, D.C., 1991.
15. Engineering Bulletin: Thermal Desorption Treatment.
EPA/540/2-91/008, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Cincinnati, OH, 1991.
16. Engineering Bulletin: In-Situ Steam Extraction Treatment.
EPA/540/2-91/005, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Cincinnati, OH, 1991.
17. Engineering Bulletin: In-Situ Soil Vapor Extraction
Treatment. EPA/540/2-91/006, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH, 1991.
18. Engineering Bulletin: Slurry Biodegradation. EPA/540/2-
90/01 6, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.
and Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH,
1990.
19. Handbook for Stabilization/Solidification of Hazardous
Wastes. EPA/540/2-90/001, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Re-
sponse, Washington, D.C., 1986.
20. Engineering Bulletin: Mobile/Transportable incineration
Treatment. EPA/540/2-90/014, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH, 1990.
21. Superfund Engineering Issue: Issues affecting the
Applicability and Success of Remedial/Removal Incinera-
tion Projects. EPA/540/2-91/004, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response, Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and
Development, Cincinnati, OH, 1991.
22. Handbook on In-Situ Treatment of Hazardous Waste-
Contaminated Soils. EPA/540/2-90/002, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1990.
23. Koboyashi, H. and B. E. Rittman. Microbial Removal of
Hazardous Organic Com pounds. Environmental Science
and Technology, 16:170A-183A, 1982.
24. Engineering Bulletin: Chemical Dehalogenation Treat-
ment: APEG Treatment. EPA/540/2-90/015, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. and Office of
Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH, 1990.
25. Engineering Bulletins: Chemical Oxidation Treatment.
EPA/540/2-91/025, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response,
Washington, D.C. and Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Cincinnati, OH, 1991.
26. Budavari, S., ed. The Merck Index, 11th Edition. Merck
& Company, Inc., Rathway, Nj, 1989.
27. US Environmental Protection Agency RREL Treatability
Data Base. Computer disk available from Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1990.
Engineering Bulletin: Technology Preselection Data Requirements
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/540/S-92/009
------- |