United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(OS-110W)
EPA/542/N-93/007
August 1993
&EPA
The Applied Technologies Journal for Superfund Removals and Remedial Actions and
RCRA Corrective Actions
SITE
EPA's SITE Program (Saperfom! In
n<»vative Technology Evaluation P
gram) is Searcferagibr appropriate
sites *o evatvate i y Hiftovaijve tech
notogies, Check page 2 of this issue
of T£CH r«fN»5to see if yoac site
may fee a match lor one of these
technologies,
A Cost-Effective Alternative
to Drilling in Arid Soil
by Bruce Cassem, Westinghouse Hanford Company
Flash
r a special mailing from
Technology ln»ovaH0n Office
on recent updates anrf plans for Hie
ne*t round of Additions fc» V1$ITT
(Vendor Information System for in-
ri
See the graph on this page for a
breakdown, by major technology
category, of &@ 231 technologies in
I he U.S. Department of Energy,
through the Argonne National Labora-
tory, has demonstrated a cone pen-
etrometer technology (CPT) for arid
soils at the Hanford Site in Richland,
Washington. The CPT is faster than
drilling and is a cost-effective alterna-
tive. The CPT, which is a 1.75-inch (out-
side diameter) hollow steel rod, can be
pushed hydraulically into the subsur-
face soils, using the static weight of a
CPT truck. Probes such as a soil charac-
terization probe, a volatile organic com-
pound (VOC) monitor, and a radiation
scintillator can be used with the cone to
collect samples in the hollow rod (1-inch
inside diameter). As the probe passes
VOCs
diesel
Cone
Technologies in VISIT!
by Major Technology Category
Soil Vapor or Dual-Phase Extraction
7%
Acid or Solvent Extraction
14% \
Bioremediation Ex Situ
39%
Vitrification_
12% ~~
Chemical Treatment"
18%
X
Soil Washing
21%
In Situ Thermally Enhanced Recovery
/ 8%
Bioremediation In Situ
40%
Thermal Desorption
28%
through the soils, data can be sent back
to a computer from the characterization
and radiation scintillor probes or to
VOC monitoring equipment from the
VOC probe, which can measure VOC
concentrations in relation to depth.
Thus, the CPT provides continuous, de-
tailed in situ characterization data with
real-time data processing. Soil samples
can be collected with a specialized CPT
soil sampler. Minimal waste is gener-
ated from this process. Additionally,
permanent monitoring points can be
installed.
At Hanford, the CPT has reached
depths up to 146 feet, with an overall
site average of approximately 65 feet. At
Hanford, soil consists of pebbles, boul-
ders, gravel, and fine coarse-grained
sand and silt. During the Hanford dem-
onstration, VOC monitoring probes
measured a maximum of 1,500 parts per
million VOCs and collected a diesel fuel
contaminated soil sample. A portion of
the diesel fuel plume was delineated. A
radiation spectrum was recorded at 18
feet, thus demonstrating the ability of
the CPT to. record this type of data. A
permanent soil gas monitoring well was
installed at a depth of 39 feet.
Although the CPT is being further re-
fined, it may be applicable now for en-
vironmental characterization work at
many sites. For more information, call
Bruce Cassem at 509-376-1007.
Source: U.S. EPA,VISITT Database, May 1993
at l« , *rU S°y/Canola ink °" paper that contains
at least !>0% post-consumer recycled fiber
-------
SITE Search
EPA SITE Technologies Available for Demonstration
SITE program currently is
searching for appropriate sites to evalu-
ate specific innovative technologies. The
information below lists the 17 technolo-
gies, their application, and appropriate
contacts whom you can contact for
more information. The page numbers
listed in the application description refer
to the pages in The Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation Program: Technol-
ogy Profiles Fifth Edition (Document No.
EPA/540/R-92/077, November 1992),
which gives a more complete summary
of each of the technologies below, in ad-
dition to other SITE program informa-
tion. If you do not already have this
document, it can be ordered from CERI
at 513-569-7562.
Technology
•-»——^——«—
AlgaSORB Process
Mobile Environmental
Treatment System (METS)
Maccito Treatment Process
Soil-Cement Mixing Wall (SMW)
Sevenson Extraction
Acid Extraction Treatment
System (AETS)
Batch Steam Distillation and
Metal Extraction
SITE
Project Manager
Removes heavy metal ions from aqueous solutions using
immobilized gels (pages 44-45)
Stabilizes/solidifies soils contaminated with organics,
heavy metals, and mixed wastes (pages 82-83)
Solidification/stabilization process that converts
leachable lead-contaminated wastes into
insoluble mineral crystals (pages 116-117)
In situ solidification/stabilization technology
(pages 156-157)
Solvent extraction process for removal of organic
contaminants from soil (pages 160-161)
A soil washing process that uses hydrochloric acid
to extract contaminants from soils (pages 224-225)
Batch steam distillation and metal extraction process
for soils contaminated with organics and inorganics
(pages 264-265)
Bio-Recovery Systems/
Tom Powers (505) 523-0405
Ensotech/lnderjit Sabherwal
(818)767-2222
Maecorp, Inc./Karl Yost
or Dhiraj Pai (312) 372-3300
S. M. W. Seiko/David Yang
(510)783-4105
Terra-Kleen/Alan Cash
(405) 728-0001
Center for Hazardous Materials
Research/Stephen Paff
(412)826-5320
IT Corporation/Robert Fox
(615)690-3211
AchorpUve Filtration
Chemical Treatment
and Ultrafiltration
VVES-Phix
ZenoPV'M
VaporSep Membrane Process
Fluid Extraction Biological
Degradation Process
Two-Zone Plume Interception In
Situ Treatment Strategy
Laser-Induced Photochemical
Oxidative Destruction
Methanotrophic Bioreactor System
GHEA Associates Process
Adsorptive filtration to remove inorganic
contaminants from liquids (pages 300-301)
Process uses chemical pretreatment and ultrafiltration to
remove trace concentrations of dissolved metals from
wastewater, ground water, and leachate (pages 214-215)
Heavy metal stablization process that involves adding
small quantities pfajiquid reagent to the wasternatenaL
being stabilized'(new process—not in Profiles as yet)
Bioreactor combined with ultrafiltration membrane
system (pages 196-197)
Synthetic polymer membrane separation system to
remove organics from gaseous waste streams
(pages 270-271)
Three-step process to remediate organic
contaminants in soil: fluid extraction, separation, and
biological treatment (pages 260-261)
In situ treatment for anaerobic and aerobic treatment
for chlorinated and nonchlorinated organic compounds
in saturated soils and ground water (pages 208-209)
Process photochemically oxidizes organic compounds
in wastewater using a chemical oxidant and ultraviolet
radiation from an Excimer laser (pages 246-247)
Ex situ remedial technology for methanotrophic
biotreatment of halogenated compounds (pages 222-223)
Process applies surfactants and additives to soil washing
and wastewater treatment to make treatment and metal
contaminants soluble (pages 276-277)
University of Washington/
Mark Benjamin (206) 543-7645
Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd./
Leo Buckley (613) 584-3311
Wheelabrator Technologies
Zenon Environmental Systems/
Tony Tonelli (416) 639-6320
Membrane Technology and
Research, Inc./Hans Wijams or
Vicki Simmons (415) 328-2228
Institute of Gas Technology/
Robert Kelley (312) 949-3809
ABB Environmental Services, Inc
Sam Fogel (617) 245-6606
Energy & Environmental
Engineering, Inc./James Porter
(617)666-5500
Biotrol, Inc./Durrel Dobbins
(612)448-6050
New Jersey Institute of
Technology/ltzhak Gottlieb
(201)596-5862
Naomi Barkley
(513)569-7854
Naomi Barkley
(513)569-7854
S. Jackson Hubbard
(513)569-7507
S. Jackson Hubbard
(513)569-7507
Mark Meckes
(513)569-7348
Kim Lisa Kreiton
(513)569-7328
Ron Lewis
(513)569-7856
Norma Lewis
(513)569-7665
John Martin
(513)569-7758
Paul de Percin
.__ (513) 5169-7797 _~
Dan Sullivan
(908)321-6677
Paul de Percin
(513)569-7797
Annette Gatchett
(513)569-7697
,/ Ron Lewis
(513)569-7856
Ron Lewis
(513)569-7856
David Smith
(303)293-1475
Annette Gatchett
(513)569-7697
-------
SITE Subjects
Low Temperature Thermal Process for Pesticides
and Other Organic Compounds
by Paul de Percin, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Pesticides ^
VOCs
SVOCs
Thermal
Desorption
Soils
I he Low Temperature Thermal Aera-
tion (LTTA™) process was developed by
Canonie Environmental Services, Inc.
(Canonie), as a high-capacity thermal
treatment system for soils. The LTTA™
process has remediated contaminated
soils at six sites, including three Super-
fund sites. The Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE) program
evaluated the technology in September
1992 as part of ongoing remediation of a
pesticide-contaminated site in western
Arizona. The LTTA™ process can re-
move organochlorine pesticides (OCP),
organophosphorous pesticides (OPP),
volatile organic compounds (VOC),
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC)
and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
from soils, sediments and sludges. Full-
scale operations have been used to re-
move OCPs such as toxaphene and
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT)
and its metabolites; OPPs such as ethyl
parathion and methyl parathion; VOCs
such as benzene, toluene, tetrachloroe-
thene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), and
dichloroethene (DCE); and SVOCs such
as acenaphthene, chrysene, naphthalene,
and pyrene.
The LTTA™ process thermally desorbs
organic contaminants from soils by heat-
ing the soils up to 800° F in a materials
dryer. The main components of the pro-
cess are: (1) a materials dryer, (2) a pug
mill, (3) two cyclonic separators, (4) a
baghouse, (5) a wet Venturi scrubber,
(6) a liquid-phase granular activated car-
bon (GAC) column, and (7) two vapor-
phase GAC beds. When required, the
LTTA™ system includes a particulate
filter for the scrubber liquor.
At the SITE evaluation in Arizona, the
LTTA™ process met the specified clean-
up criteria for the site. The maximum
allowable pesticide concentrations in the
treated soil were 3.52 milligrams per ki-
logram (mg/kg) of DDT family com-
pounds and 1.09 mg/kg of toxaphene.
Prior to treatment, the soil contaminant
concentrations were: toxaphene—1540
parts per million (ppm); DDT—321 ppm;
dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
(DDD)—206 ppm; dichlorodiphenyl-
dichloroethene (DDE)—48 ppm; as well
as other pesticides, such as endrin, en-
drin aldehyde, dieldrin, endosulfan I,
and endosulfan II. Removal efficiencies
were: >99.83% for toxaphene; 99.97% for
4,4'-DDT; >99.97% for 4,4'-DDD; 90.26%
for 4.4'-DDE; >99.85% for endrin; 97.43%
for endrin aldehyde; 99.27% for dieldrin;
>99.98% for endosulfan I; and >99.34%
for endosulfan H. The LTTA™ process
does, not appear to have generated diox-
ins or furans as products of incomplete
combustion or thermal transformation.
Trie LTTA™ process is best suited for
dry granular soils. However, soils con-
taining silt and clay also have been
successfully treated, and sludges are po-
tentially treatable by the LTTA™ process.
For more information, call Paul de
Percin at EPA's Risk Reduction Engi-
neering Laboratory at 513-569-7797.
±^ New for the Bookshelf
Hot Water Oil Recovery
The EPA's Robert S. Kerr Environ-
mental Research Laboratory has con-
ducted laboratory experiments that
demonstrate that the use of hot water
will increase the recovery of oils from
sands over that which can be recovered
using a waterflood at ambient tempera-
tures. The experiments showed that en-
hanced oil recovery can be achieved
under conditions which resemble field
conditions. Although there are still
many areas where further research is
needed, the use of hot water displace-
ments can be extended to field demon-
stration trials or, as an intermediate
step, to the test-ing of contaminated
field cores in the laboratory.
Hot water displacements should be
considered where there is a free immis-
cible phase present that is viscous and
essentially nonvolatile. Hot water and
steam displacements have significant
advantages over some other remedia-
tion techniques which are being re-
searched currently in that they do not
require the addition of new potential
contaminants to the subsurface. Addi-
tional recovery from fine materials may
be possible by using hydrofracturing in
conjunction with the application of hot
water. Hot water displacements cannot
remove all the oily contaminants, and
the residual oil left behind will often re-
quire additional treatment. However,
using hot water displacement as a first
step in remediation can greatly reduce
the contamination level, leaving behind
a residual oil that may be amenable to
processes such as bioremediation.
A copy of the study, Laboratory Study
on the Use of Hot Water to Recover Light
Oily Wastes from Sands, by E. L. Davis
and B. K. Lien (Document No. EPA/
600/R-93/021), can be ordered from
EPA's Center for Research Information
(CERI) at 513-569-7562.
Remediation Technologies
Screening Matrix
To encourage further development
and use of innovative technologies for
site remediation, EPA and the U.S. Air
(see Bookshelf page 4)
-------
(Bookshelf from page 3)
Force have published a Remediation
TecJinologies Screening Matrix and Refer-
ence Guide (Document No. EPA/542/
B-93/005). This document is intended
to help Federal site managers identify
potentially applicable technologies
for more detailed assessment and
evaluation prior to remedy selection.
The publication summarizes the
strengths and limitations of 48 innova-
tive and conventional technologies for
the remediation of soils, sediments/ and
sludges; ground water; and air emis-
sions/off-gases. The listof-technologies
includes in situ and ex situ biological,
thermal, and physical/chemical pro-
cesses. It includes not only treatment
technologies, but also processes de-
signed to be used primarily for contain-
ment, waste separation, and enhanced
recovery.
The document contains: (1) a copy of
the matrix evaluating the 48 technolo-
gies; (2) definitions for each of the tech-
nologies and processes evaluated;
(3) definitions for each of the 13 factors—
i.e., cost, performance, technical, devel-
opmental, and institutional—used to
evaluate the technologies; (4) a technol-
ogy-by-technology discussion of the
contaminant groups treated, with
supplemental information as needed to
explain each rating on the matrix and
factors that could limit the suitability
and effectiveness of the technology;
(5) a list of reference materials, includ-
ing field demonstration reports and case
studies, that site project managers may
wish to consult for more detailed infor-
mation about various technologies; and
(6) examples of contaminants included
in each contaminant group used in the
matrix.
The document can be ordered
from U.S. EPA/NCEPI by fax at
-513-891-668F M V P.O. Box , _
42419, Cincii .42-0419.
Remember to . jcument No.
EPA/542/B-93/UUO.
Literature Survey
of Innovative Technologies
, As part of its effort to improve aware-
ness of the technical literature concern-
ing innovative technologies, EPA has
published the Literature Survey of Inno-
vative Techologiesfor Hazardous Waste
Site Remediation 1987-1991 (Document
No. EPA/542/B-92/004). The bibliogra-
phy was developed by searching the
extensive resources of commercial data-
bases and software. Each citation con-
tains the article or document title,
journal or publication title, author, cor-
porate source or publisher, conference
name, and ordering information, where
available.
The citations are organized into the
following categories: survey reports;
conference reports; in situ vitrification;
soil washing/soil flushing; solvent ex-
traction; thermal desorption; chemical
dechlorination; soil vapor extraction;
bioventing; biological slurry phase; bio-
logical solid phase; biological land treat-
ment; in situ biological treatment;
general biological treatment; general
biological Jreatment;^nd_/n^situgrouncL__.
water treatment.
Although the search was primarily
focused on remediation of sites with
contamination from hazardous waste,
references for petroleum contaminated
sites were also retained. The bibliogra-
phy does not include the following sub-
jects: waste streams or BOAT; fate and
transport, unless explicitly related to.
tratment; oil spill cleanup other than un-
derground storage tank sites; and above
ground water treatment.
The document can be ordered from
U.S. EPA/NCEPI by fax at 513-891-6685
or by mail at P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati,
OH 45242-0419. Remember to refer to
Document No. EPA/542/B-92/004.
To order additional copies of this or previous issues of Tech Trends, or to be included on the permanent mailing list, send a fax
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, Cincinnati, 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 for Environmental
Publications and Information
Cincinnati, OH 45242
BULK RATE
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/542/N-93/007
------- |