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 ------- |