United States Environmental Protection Agency Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OS-1 10W) EPA/542/N-93/005 May 1993 The Applied Technologies Journal for Superfund Removals and Remedial Actions and RCRA Corrective Actions Border Crossing Sites Both Jfee tf & H*A a«J Environ- men* Canada hav«pre^rairB that: sttppcutt emerging; innovative tecfe- nology d«ve!0f»ae'tf and technkal evaltagon demonstrations. BPA's Superfend Innovative Technology Thermal Desorption System Treats Wide Variety of Solid Wastes by Paul R. dePercin, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory Organic) M«rcury -« ] Thermal ^(J physical Solid wastes *nem aria ttemoftstralkxxof Site #>i8Rf} Program am described tte Speck! Insert to thia issue trf _ ^ the SITE and . DBSRt programs |oi» K^efter froa* &»£ toting in evaluating in- novative technologies. Don't miss the artieleoi* the Ecft t£g*C system tive effort belweentw SITE awi DESRI pst^iens. The X*TRAX™ Model 200 Thermal Desorption System developed by Chemical Waste Management, Inc., is a low-temperature process de- signed to separate organic contami- nants from soils, sludges and other solid media. The system is a ther- mal and physical separation process that does not involve incineration. It is fully transportable and requires an area of about 125 feet by 145 feet. The XTRAX™ system was evaluated under the EPA s Super- fund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program at the Re-Solve Superfund Site in North Dartmouth, Massachusetts. Approxi- mately 35,000 tons of soils and sedi- ments at the site are contaminated with PCBs in concentrations SITE Program Technologies in ATTIC Bioremediation 14% Solidification/ Stabilization 13% Mixed Waste 3% Thermal Treatment 23% Physical Treatment 28% Of 177 technologies reported, source documents include Demonstrations Bulletins, Technology Profiles, Technology Evaluation Reports and Applications Analysis Reports. ranging from 181 to 515 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The XTRAX successfully removed PCBs at an average removal effi- ciency of 99.9%. PCB concentrations in all treated soil samples were less than 1.0 mg/kg; and, the average concentration was 0.25 mg/kg. Tetrachloroethene, total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons and oil and grease, present in concentra- tions of 365 micrograms per kilo- gram (ng/kg), 893 mg/kg and 913 mg/kg, respectively, were all reduced to below detectable levels in treated soil. During the SITE demonstration, about 215 tons of soil were treated at an average feed rate of 4.9 tons per hour for 2 hours with an average treated soil temperature of 732 de- grees Fahrenheit First, contaminated solids were fed into an externally heated rotary dryer where tempera- tures ranged from 750 to 950 degrees. Evaporated contaminants were re- moved by a recirculating nitrogen carrier gas that was maintained at less than 4% oxygen to prevent com- bustion. Solids leaving the dryer were sprayed with treated cooling water to help reduce dust when the treated soilids were returned to their original location to be compacted in place. The nitrogen carrier gas was treated to remove and recover dust particles, organic vapors and water vapors. (see X*TRAX™ page 2) Printed with Soy/Canofa ink on paper that contains at least 50% post-consumer recycled fiber ------- ATTIC Canadians in the ATTIC Not all Alternative Treatment Technology Information Center (ATTIC) users are from the United States. Of the more than 2,900 regis- tered users to the ATTIC online in- formation retrieval system, 5% are Canadians. Canadians share a need to easily access accurate, up-to-date, hazardous waste cleanup informa- tion. Richard Glue, Regional Coord- inator for Environment Canada s National Contaminated Sites Remediation Program (NCSRP) in the Pacific and Yukon Region in North Vancouver, British Columbia, is a frequent user of ATTIC. He manages remediation projects in the region and works with contractors and local governments to evaluate appropriate actions for hazardous waste sites. Mr. Glue, like many ATTIC users, has limited time and resources to re- search data on new technologies. He uses ATTIC to quickly identify sites where new technologies have been demonstrated. For example, he is able to search the ATTIC database using the keywords PCBs, soil, and SITE Program to find 24 re- ports describing Superfund Innova- tive Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program projects that involved soil contaminated by polychlorinated biphenyls. The case studies and reports found in ATTIC are helpful in evaluating the technologies recommended by contractors for remediation of various Canadian sites. Mr. Glue explained that Ca- nadians use ATTIC because it is a well established system with a large amount of cleanup data that can be easily searched. The U.S. EPA has been involved in site clean up for a long time; and, the NCSRP is willing to take advantage of the knowledge and expertise gained from EPA s ex- periences. The international border crossing is not a one way ticket. ATTIC pro- vides detailed information on a wide range of alternative treatment technologies, not only in the U.S. but abroad as well. For example, 30 of the 2,900 abstracts currently in the ATTIC database describe Cana- dian sites. ATTIC can help users to share information and encourage technology transfer between nations and among environmental profes- sionals. For information about ATTIC, contact the ATTIC Program Man- ager, Joyce Perdek at 908-321-4380. On-line access to ATTIC is available by dialing 301-670-3808. X*TRAX™ from page 1 An eductor scrubber removed dust particles and 10 to 30% of the organic contaminants from the carrier gas. Scrubber liquid collected in a phase separator from which sludge and organic liquid phases were pumped to a filter press, producing filter cake and filtrate. The filtrate was then separated into organic liquid and wa- ter phases. Most contaminants removed from the feed solids were transferred to the organic liquids or the fil- ter cake. The filter cake was blended with feed solids into batches and reprocessed in the system, while the concentrated organic liquids were treated or disposed of off site. Carrier gas exiting the scrubber passed through two condensers in series, where it was cooled to less than 40 degrees F. The condensers separated most of the remaining water and organic vapors from the gas stream. Organic vapors were recovered as organic liq- uids; water was treated by carbon adsorption. (The wa- ter could be used to cool and reduce dusting from treated solids, or either could be treated and dis- charged.) About 5 to 10% of the gas exited the system through a process vent, passing through a particle filter and carbon adsorption system before being discharged to the atmosphere. The volume of gas released by the X*TRAX™ system is about 100 to 200 times less than the amount released by an equivalent capacity incinerator. At Re-Solve, organic air emissions were negligible (0.4 grams per day); and, no PCBs were detected in vent gases. Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlo- rinated dibenzofurans were not formed within the sys- tem. Metals concentrations and soil physical properties were not altered by the XTRAX™ system. Bench, pilot and full-scale X*TRAX™ systems have been used to treat solids contaminated with the follow- ing wastes: PCBs; halogenated and nonhalogenated sol- vents; semivolatile organic compounds; polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; pesticides; herbicides; fuel oils; BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes); and mercury. The system has also treated Resource Conser- vation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous wastes to meet Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) treatment stan- dards. RCRA wastes treated include petroleum refinery wastes (K048 through KO52) and multisource leachate treatment residues (FO39). For more information, call Paul dePercin at EPA s Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory at 513-569-7797 (FAX: 513-569-7620). ------- Crossing the Border 1*1 Environment Canada Canada's DESRT Program Funds Innovative Technology from the Beaker into the Marketplace by Ginny Hardy and David Hutchinson, Technology Development Branch, Environment Canada I n 1989 the Canadian government established a five-year program to work with industry to stimulate the development and demonstration of new and innovative remediation technologies for sites containing soils, sediments, ground water or surface water and wastes contami- nated by hazardous substances. This program, known as DESRT (Devel- opment and Demonstration of Site Remediation Technology), has been funded at $50 million over five years, beginning in 1990. Objectives DESRT focuses primarily on tech- nologies, processes, methods and procedures in the areas of site char- acterization and assessment, reme- diation and compliance monitoring. A second objective of the program is to enhance the scientific knowledge base in Canada and the develop- ment of opportunities to market Canadian expertise and technology internationally. (Although prefer- ence is given to Canadian compa- rues, United States companies can apply to the program for support.) Priorities Similar to EPA s SITE program, the first priority of the program is to encourage the demonstration of promising new technologies that have been developed to the pilot plant stage. The second priority, similar to EPA s Emerging Tech- nologies program, is to encourage the advancement of technologies that are in the laboratory stage of development in order to offer alter- native technologies for site remedia- tion. DESRT also encourages technologies that are in the stages leading up to, but not including, commercialization. Demonstration The demonstration component of the DESRT program evaluates op- eration, cost and reliability of the in- novative technology under actual field conditions so that it can be as- sessed as an alternative to other remediation technologies. The DESRT program will share costs of an approved demonstration project with industry, developers of tech- nology, owners of contaminated sites and other collaborators for the initial field application of a pilot or prototype. Allowable costs in dem- onstration projects include engineer- ing and consulting services, equipment, installation, start-up, monitoring and evaluation, equip- ment dismantling and clean-up, (see DESRT pjye 5-0 ------- May 1993 EPA's SITE Program Supports Emerging Innovative Technology Development and Technical Evaluation Demonstrations by John Martin, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory The Superfund Innovative Technol- ogy Evaluation (SITE) Program, now in its eighth year, is an integral part of EPA s development of alter- native cleanup methods for hazard- ous waste sites around the United States. The SITE program was au- thorized by the Superfund Amend- ments and Reauthorization act of 1986 with the goal of identifying technologies, other than land dis- posal, that are suitable for treating Superfund wastes. The program is administered by the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) in Cincinnati, Ohio. Objectives and Priorities The program provides an oppor- tunity for technology vendors to de- velop and demonstrate their innovative technologies capability to successfully process and remediate Super-fund waste. EPA evaluates the technology and pro- vides an assessment of potential for future use for Superfund cleanup actions. The SITE program consists of four related components: (1) the Demonstration Program, (2) the Emerging Technology Program, (3) the Monitoring and Measure- ment Technologies Program and (4) Technology Transfer activities that disseminate information from the other three programs and pro- vide technical support to EPA Regions, other Federal agencies, States and Superfund contractors. Demonstration Through field demonstrations of pilot or full-scale technologies, the SITE Demonstration Program de- velops reliable engineering, perfor- mance and cost data on innovative, alternative technologies so that po- tential users can evaluate a technology s applicability for a spe- cific waste site. EPA works with de- velopers to match the technologies with appropriate sites, based on several considerations: the developer s waste and location preferences, relevance of the tech- nology to the site cleanup and Re- gional needs. Cooperative agreements between EPA and the developer set forth responsibilities. Developers are responsible for op- erating their systems at the site, and are expected to pay the costs to transport the equipment to the site, operate the equipment on site dur- ing the demonstration and remove the equipment from the site. EPA is responsible for protect planning, sampling and analysis, quality as- surance and quality control, prepar- ing reports and disseminating information. Emerging Technology The Emerging Technology Pro- gram (ETP) provides a funding framework to encourage bench- and pilot-scale testing and evalua- tion of technologies that, at a mini- mum, have proven conceptual and bench-scale feasibility. Through a cooperative cost sharing agreement between EPA and the technology developer, EPA may fund up to $150,000 for one year, with an addi- tional year of funding ($300,000 maximum for the two years) for projects that show significant progress. After the second year or significant progress, emerging tech- nologies may be considered for the SITE Demonstration program. Fed- eral agencies, as well as private de- velopers, can participate in the ETP. Monitoring and Measurement Technologies Program The Monitoring and Measure- ment Technologies Program (MMTP) tests the ability of ad- vanced technologies to assess the nature and extent of contamination and evaluate cleanup levels. The MMTP is looking for new or modi- fied technologies that can detect, monitor and measure hazardous and toxic substances in the subsur- face (saturated and vadose zones); air, biological tissues, wastes, and surface waters, as well as technolo- gies that characterize the physical properties of sites. The MMTP is particularly interested in chemical sensors for in situ measurements, ground water sampling devices, soil and core sampling devices, soil gas sampling devices, fluid sampling devices for the vadose zone, in situ (see SITE Program pj^'e S-;' ------- » A Supplement to Tech Trends , '*,,V;'V IK .',,./' SITE Program from page 5-2 and field-portable analytical meth- ods and expert systems that support field sampling or data acquisition and analysis. Funding by EPA is generally not provided to develop- ers under this program. Solicitation Annual solicitations for the SITE Demonstration program are adver- tised in the Commerce Business Doily in January. Annual solicitations for the ETP are advertised in the Com- merce Business Doily in July. The identification of candidate technolo- gies for the MMTP is ongoing; therefore, technology developers are encouraged to submit unsolicited new and updated information at any time. EPA Contacts and Additional Information More detailed information on the SITE program, with an extensive list of EPA contacts is contained in The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program: Technology Pro- files Fifth Edition (Document No. EPA/540/R-92/077). This publica- tion further describes the program and profiles 156 demonstration, emerging and monitoring and mea- surement technologies being evalu- ated under the SITE program. Each profile describes the technology; discusses its applicability to various wastes; discusses its development or demonstration status and demon- strations results, if available; and provides demonstration and tech- nology contacts. This publication can be ordered from EPA s Center for Environmental Research Infor- mation (CERI) at 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; please refer to the document number noted above when placing an order. The SITE contacts in the EPA s Risk Reduction Engineering Labora- tory are John Martin (513-569-7758) for the Demonstration Program and Norma Lewis (513-569-7665) for the Emerging Technology Program; John and Norma s address is United States Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. The contact for the SITE Monitoring and Measurement Technologies Program is Lary Jack (702-798-2373); Lary s address is United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, P.O. Box 93478, Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478. The EPA Headquarters contact for innovative technology development is John Quander (703-308-8845); John s ad- dress is United States Environmen- tal Protection Agency, Technology Innovation Office (OS-HOW), 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460. DESRT from page S-/ data quality assurance and quality control, economic assessment and report preparation. Research & Development The research and development (R&D) component of the DESRT program supports the evolution of promising new or innovative tech- nologies through the laboratory and small pilot stages of development up to the point of field testing. The program provides financial assis- tance for a portion of the salary costs of scientific, engineering and technical personnel working on spe- cific processes or products for which accelerated development is warranted. Subcontracts to universi- ties, government and other research institutions collaborating in the project may be included as an eli- gible direct cost. In the case of gov- ernment research institutions, incremental costs only are eligible; salary and related overhead costs are not. The program may make a fi- nancial contribution toward the pur- chase of specialized equipment necessary for completion of a re- search project. Solicitation Two approaches are used to ini- tiate DESRT proposals: unsolicited proposals and requests for propos- als. Unsolicited proposals are those submitted by an organization on its own initiative, to satisfy the technol- ogy development and demonstra- tion objectives of the DESRT (see DESRT page 5-4) ------- DESRT from page 5-3 program. DESERT requests propos- als when development and demon- stration needs arise which are not otherwise being addressed. Eligibility Those eligible for the DESRT pro- gram are incorporated companies, universities, municipalities, trade and research organizations and con- sulting firms with demonstrated competance in the field of environ- mental technology. For individual projects, preference will be given to applicants that are, or are working in close collaboration with, the owners(s) of a contaminated site(s) or parties designated responsible for the remediation of contaminated sites. All projects must be directed toward new and improved tech- nologies that reduce or eliminate threats posed to the human health or the environment by contami- nated sites. The technology must be unique, or used uniquely, and must have the potential for wide applica- tion across Canada or must relate to a serious problem identified in an area within Canada. The project must involve considerable techno- logical risk in achieving commer- cialization of the technology and should be designed to lead, ulti- mately, to commercialization of the technology. Eligible proposals for either type of project are distributed for review and recommendation within the federal government and within the pertinent provincial or territorial government. As DESRT involves joint funding by both levels of government, both levels of gov- ernment must approve a project. Funding Arrangements DESRT funding must bring incre- mental value to the project; if it would otherwise proceed at the same level of effort without DESRT assistance, the project is ineligible. Decision on the DESRT share of funding is negotiated on a case-by- case basis. The level of financial as- sistance and the starting date for financial assistance are confirmed in a formal contract or other financial agreement between the applicant and the designated federal or pro- vincial agency representing the DESRT program. The process is competitive and subject to availabil- ity of funds. Ownership Rights Technology ownership rights are among the topics negotiated in reaching a contractual agreement under the DESRT program. Since the primary interest of the Canadian government is to provide new de- velopments to assist in remediation of high risk contaminated sites in Canada, the foremost consideration in negotiations of ownership rights will be the potential for successful commercialization and replication of the new technology. Additionally, the government considers factors such as funding history of the project, the capacity of the propo- nent to exploit the new technology and the contribution made by the proponent. Canadian Contacts For a more complete description of the DESRT program and for additional information on the guidelines for application, egligibil- ity and selection criteria, please contact either Ginny Hardy (telephone: 819-953-0962) or David J. Hutchison (telephone: 819-953- 5228) at Environment Canada s DESRT Office. Their Fax number is: 819-953-9029. Their address is: DESRT Office Technology Development Branch Conservation and Protection Environment Canada Fourth Floor, Place Cartier 425 St. Joseph Blvd. Hull, Quebec CANADA KIA OH3 For your information, the Cana- dian government also has a pro- gram that specifically promotes research on innovative ways to clean up ground water and soil con- taminated with petroleum hydro- carbons. The Groundwater and Soil Remediation Program (GASReP), established as a joint government/ industry venture focuses on basic/ applied research and /or technology development. For a fuller summary of GASReP, see the March 1993 is- sue of EPA s Ground Water Currents (EPA Document No. EPA/542/N- 93/003), which can be ordered from NCEPI by referring to the EPA Document Number by fax (513-891- 6685) or by mail addressed to NCEPI, 11029 Kenwood Road, Building 5, Cincinnati, OH 45242. For detailed information, contact Alex Lye, the CASReP Manager at: Environmental Technology Office ' Canada Centre for Inland Waters P.O. Box 5050 867 Lakeshore Road Burlington, Ontario CANADA L7R 4A6 Telephone: 416-336-6438 Fax: 416-336-4858 ------- SITE Subjects Chemical Reduction of PCBs by Gordon M. Evans, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory EPA s Superfund Innovative Tech- nology Evaluation (SITE) program and its Environment Canada equivalent, the Development and Demonstration of Site Remediation Technology (DESRT) program, have coordinated on a SITE evaluation of the patented Eco Logic system. The Eco Logic system is a gas-phase thermo-chemical process which em- ploys a reduction reaction of hydro- gen with organic and chlorinated organic compounds at elevated tem- peratures. The reduction reaction breaks the large-chain molecules into less problematic hydrocarbons. Approximately 95% of the reformed gaseous product is recirculated back to the reactor, with the remaining 5% used to co-fire a propane fired preheat boiler. The boiler stack emissions are not significant. The system, as tested, consists of a process reactor (6 ft. in diameter and 10 ft. tall, capable of handling 25 tons of material per day), a scrub- ber, a propane-fired pre-heater and a heat exchanger. The unit is housed on two flat bed hailers and is de- signed to handle aqueous and oily waste streams, as well as harbor sediments. The presence of water enhances the reduction reaction, thus eliminating the need for dewa- tering. The SITE demonstration took place last fail in Bay City, Michigan where the unit was used to destroy PCB contaminated water and oils drawn from beneath a landfill owned by the city. The polychlori- nated biphenyl (PCB) concentration in the oily waste was approximately 40%. A known quantity of perchlorethylene (PCE) was added to the waste stream as a control; PCE is known as a reliable surrogate measure for PCBs. The reactor test program consisted of two distinct test conditions; a nigh oil/low water feed and a low oil/high water feed. Three separate test runs were con- ducted for each test condition. In addition, the unit was put through a controlled 72-hour engineering per- formance run. Although a number of tests were conducted during the SITE demon- stration, the three primary objec- tives are summarized. The primary I V*VJ thermocheir test objective was to determine the destruction and re- moval efficiency (DRE) for PCBs at the propane boiler stack The system successfully achieved 99.9999% DRE for ail six runs conducted under both test conditions. The second test objective was to determine the de- struction efficiency (DE) for PCE the system successfully achieved 99.99% DE for all six runs con- ducted under both test conditions. The third test objective was to ex- amine the fate of dioxin and furan compounds which are fed into the system. The demonstration showed that for each run under both test conditions, the system was a net de- structor of dioxin and furan com- pounds. A SITE Application Analysis Re- port and the Technical Evaluation Report will be available in the sum- mer of 1993. Additional information is available from Gordon M. Evans, Site Project Manager, at EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory at 513-569-7684. Gordon's fax is: 513-569-7620. Recycling Superfund Lead Waste Proves Cost-Effective Alternative to Treatment and Land Disposal by Mick Gilbert, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 You may want to consider sending lead contaminated drums and other lead bearing waste at your site to a recycling facility rather than to a Subtitle C landfill or an incinerator. EPA s Region II has discovered that recycling can be a viable and cost ef- fective alternative. In 1992, Pat Augustin of EPA s Emerging Tech- nology program worked with the Center for Hazardous Materials Re- search, Exide Corporation (a lead smelter and battery manufacturer) and EPA's Region II to assess the feasibility of lead recycling for the various lead bearing materials re- maining at the NL Industries, Inc. Superfund Site in Pedricktown, New Jersey. ^•WVMM ^^ The NL Industries site is a 42 acre former secondary lead smelting facility. The facility operated from 1972 to 1984. At the facility, used batteries were broken, drained of acid and processed through a rotary furnace to reclaim the lead. Other lend bearing materials were also processed through the furnace. (see Lead page 4) ------- Lead from page 3 When the company went bankrupt in 1984, the facility ceased opera- tions, leaving large amounts of lead bearing materials on the site. These materials included lead drosses, baghouse bags, broken battery cas- ings, lead-contaminated steel drums, pallets and debris. In assessing recycling for the site, a treatability study was conducted on the various lead bearing materi- als remaining on the site. The mate- nals were initially processed through the secondary lead smelter at Exide on a test bum basis to de- termine the feasibility and econom- ics of processing these types of materials. This test determined that much of the material could be pro- cessed through the furnace in an economically and environmentally sound manner. Next, the consortium developed plans to process larger amounts of the materials to further evaluate if the smelting industry would be able to handle and process various lead bearing materials from Superfund sites. Over the next several months, approximately 2.7 million pounds of lead bearing materials from the site were recycled at the Exide facility. Material was processed through the furnace at a ratio of approximately 40% of material from the NL Indus- tries site to 60% of Exide s regular feed stock. The study found that re- cycling can cost less than land dis- posal and alternative treatments. Initial cost estimates for processing various types of material are pre- sented below. (Note that the esti- mates assume that the refined lead from recycling would sell at the then prevailing market price of $0.35 per pound; lower lead prices imply a higher cost to recycle.) Incineration of debris containing lead (i.e., pallets, paper, personal protective equipment) runs from $250 to $500 per ton; by comparison, recycling costs less at $200 to $250 per ton. Land disposal of steel drums and debris costs approxi- mately $300 per ton compared to re- cycling which costs $200 per ton. Land disposal of rubber battery cases runs from $250 per cubic yard compared to recycling at $150 per cubic yard. Incineration of paint residues is $350 per ton compared to recycling at $200 to $225 per ton. Treatment and disposal of lead laden soil runs $300 per ton for soils containing more than 25% lead com- pared to $250 per ton through recy- cling. Land disposal of baghouse bags (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act listed waste KO69) is prohibited by land disposal restric- tions. Recycling of baghouse bags runs between $200 to $250 per cubic yard. Costs for lead drosses are: $300 per ton for land disposal of 50% or more lead content compared to recycling at $50 to $150 per ton; $300 per ton for land disposal of 25% to 50% lead compared to recy- cling at $150 to $200 per ton. For more information, call Mick Gilbert, Remedial Project Manager in EPA s Region 2 at 212-264-6418. To order additional copies of this or previous issues of Tech Trends, or to be included on the permanent mailing list, send a tax request to the National Center for Environmental Publications and Information (NCEPI) at 513-891-6685, or send a mail request to NCEPI, 11029 Kenwood Road, Building 5, Cincinnatti, OH 45242. Please refer to the document number on the cover of the issue if available. Tech Trends welcomes readers' comments and contributions. Address correspondence to: Managing Editor, Tech Trends (OS-110W) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M Street. S.W., Washington, DC 20460. United States Environmental Protection Agency National Center tor Environmental Publications and Information ; mcmnati, OH 4S242 ' liiicial Business Penalty tor Private Use $?()() EPA/542/N-92/001 ------- |