vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste
Emergency Response
(5102W)
EPA 542-N-94-006
August 1994
II
The Applied Technologies Journal for Superfund Removals & Remedial Actions & RCRA Corrective Actions
UNIQUE MULTI-VENDOR BIOREMEDIATION
DEMONSTRATION BEGINS
By James B. Harrington,
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
/fwri ^\
H voc's
^^O Bioremediation
Soil
Ground Water
Three pilot-scale bipremediation studies
are being conducted concurrently at the
same site, the Sweden 3 - Chapman
inactive hazardous waste site in the
Town of Sweden, Monroe County,
VI^ITT
I M M U NOCHEM ISTRY
1ISK5.ERT"
VlSJTT &Q
th
-------
SITE Subjects
EX-SITU BIOREMEDIATION OF TNT,
DINOSEB & OTHER PESTICIDES/
HERBICIDES
By Wendy Davis-Hoover, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Pesticides,
Herbicides, TNT
The J. R. Simplot Ex-situ Anaerobic
Bioremediation System is a technology
designed to destroy nitroaromaric com-
pounds without forming any toxic inter-
mediates. The process can successfully
operate with bioreactor temperatures as
low as 18 degrees Centigrade, much
below optimum. The EPA SITE
(Superfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation) Program has evaluated the
Simplot system's destruction of the
herbicide, dinoseb (2-sec-butyl-4,6
dinitrophenol), at Bowers Field, an air-
port in Ellensburg, Washington with a
site contaminated! by crop dusters. The
SITE program has also evaluated the
destruction of TNT (2,4,6-trinitro-
toluene) at the Weldon Spring site in
St. Louis, Missouri.
In the Bowers Field demonstration, the
Simplot process reduced the levels of
dinoseb by greater than 99.88%, to below
detection limits, from an average pre-
"
per kilogram (mg/kg) of feed soil. No
known toxic products were found in the
analysis of the post-treatment samples.
Other pesticides (nitroanaline,
malathion, atrizine and parathion)
were also reduced in the treated slurry.
In the Weldon Spring demonstration,
TNT was reduced by greater than 95%
to below 1 ppm for most soil samples,
from an average pretreatment soil
concentration of 1,500 ppm on a dry
weight basis. No known toxic metabolites
were seen; and, toxicity tests are ongoing.
Usually under aerobic conditions,
degradation of nitroaromatic compounds
form products that are toxic. However, the
Simplot system treats contaminated soils
(or liquids) using an anaerobic consortium
of soil microorganisms. Anaerobic
degradation of nitroaromatics takes place
without,the formation of these toxic
products.
The J. R. Simplot technology mixes a
carbon source with contaminated soil and
then adds water and a phosphate buffer to
create a buffered slurry. This prompts
aerobic microorganisms to consume the
carbon source and oxygen, thus lowering
the redox potential of the slurry and
creating anaerobic conditions. Anaerobic
microorganisms then consume the tar-
geted toxins present in the slurry.
The mechanics of the process begin with
=excavatedisoM>eing'senrdirough-ar-" ~=™~
vibrating screen to remove large rocks and
other debris. The rocks and debris are
washed to remove surface contamination.
For the dinoseb process, this rinse water is
combined with make-up water and added
to the bioreactor. (TNT is not very water
soluble; thus, these rocks are treated in a
different manner.)
For both dinoseb and TNT, soil which
has been seived is added to die bioreactor
with water to provide one liter of
water for each kg of soil to be treated. •.
A phosphate buffer is added to the
system to control the pH to around 7
pH. Batches of soil and potato starch
(2% by weight) are homogenized
together and added to the bioreactor
until the system is 75% full. According
to laboratory studies, optimum
conditions for dinoseb degradation are
temperatures of 30 and 35 degrees
Centigrade with a pH between 7 and
7.5- The optimum temperature range
for TNT is also 30 and 35 degrees
Centigrade with an optimum
pH of 6 to 7.
The technology is suitable for soils
and liquids contaminated with
nitroaromatic compounds. However,
the medium to be treated must be free
of toxic metals or any other com-
pounds that may be detrimental to the
appropriate microorganisms.
Report describing the complete dinoseb
demonstration and other pertinent
information will be available in the fall
of 1994. An Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report describing the TNT
demonstration will be available in the
winter of 1995-
For more information call Wendy
Davis-Hoover at EPA's Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory at 513-569-7206.
DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM INTEGRATES SOFTWARE
FOR SUPERFUND SITES
By Richard G. Eilers, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Managers of Superfund sites and
Resource Conservation and Recovery
(RCRA) facilities now have a new tool to
assist in the graphical characterization and
data management at contaminated soil
and ground water sites. The GIS\Key™
Environmental Data Management
System is a software system that integrates
proven software under a single shell. This
integration allows database management
activities that would otherwise be more
difficult or costly to perform because it
singly meets needs typically requiring
multiple, independently run pieces of
software. The SITE (Superfund Inno-
vative Technology Evaluation) Program
evaluated GIS\Key™ because of its
applicability to all Superfund sites. The
system can meet industry needs and
satisfy hazardous waste site reporting
requirements for soil and ground water
contaminants; but, it cannot manage
ecological assessment or air pollutant data.
The SITE evaluation assessed the
software performance and accuracy of
GIS\Key™ output. The GIS\Key™
procedures were reviewed to ensure the
data integrity, to evaluate general usability
and to compare GIS\Key™ features to
user requirements.
Here are the strong points. GIS\Key™
facilitates the collection, reporting and
analysis of site management data by
producing a variety of site-specific tables,
graphs and maps. The software can
successfully generate four types of contour
maps to assist in ground water mapping:
(1) hydrogeologic maps; (2) chemical
concentration isopleths; (3) geologic
structure maps; and (4) geologic structure
thickness isopach maps. With GIS\Key™ ,
menu commands can yield several
standard chemistry reports and con-
struction and borehole summary tables.
The system also can prepare well and
borehole logs based on the information in
the database. Among its capabilities are
geologic cross sections, boring logs,
potentiometric maps, isopleth maps,
structure maps, summary tables,
Software continued on page 4
-------
xvEPA
The Need
United States r " : " Environmental Monitoring January 1994
Environmental Protection Systems Laboratory I
Agency . P.O. Box 93478 f
Las Vegas NV 89193-3478
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT
Immunpchemical Analysis
Of Environmental j
Samples
Innovative
Technology
s , *v } g ^ » .' fa.ys">-jgjsjj
\ ?
-------
The Use
The Environmental
Monitoring Systems
Laboratory - Las Vegas
(EMSL-LV) is pioneer-
ing an investigation into
the usefulness of
immunochemical
techniques for monitor-
ing the extent of con-
tamination in environ-
mental and biological
matrices. EMSL-LV
has developed and
demonstrated several
of these techniques and
believes that they hold
great promise for the
quantitative analysis of
target analytes for use
in ground-water surveil-
lance, in situ hazardous
waste site monitoring,
and assessment of
human exposure.
Current work involves
the analysis of chemi-
cals like PCBs,
nitroaromatics, and
""certainpeBtrcides'that —
are difficult to analyze
by other analytical
methods. EMSL-LV
has sponsored two
national meetings that
focused on regulatory
issues and technologi-
cal advances in envi-
ronmental immuno-
chemistry. These
meetings brought
together government,
industry, and university
scientists to discuss
problems of mutual
interest in the field.
A 1993 Technology
Support Center project
at a Superfund site in
Region 5 demonstrated
the usefulness of
immunochemical
methods for screening
PCBs in soil and river
sediment. This project
was an example of
cooperation between
EPA, DOE, the state of
Michigan, and various
contractors. Two
immunoassays and a
chloride-ion specific
electrode were used on
site and the real-time
analytical results were
compared with stan-
dard GC results from
EPA method 8081.
Preliminary results
show good agreement ,
between the immuno-
assays and GC and
even stronger correla-
tion could be achieved
with tighter quality
control measures.
In addition, other EPA
offices have applied
immunochemistry for
screening and analysis
in their programs. The
Office pf Water has
" "usedlmmunoassays to
screen indirect discharges
of specific analytes for
permitting under the
Clean Water Act
(304h). Sample analy-
sis data may soon be
used for comparison
and compliance moni-
toring within selected
industries, such as
commercial laundries.
The Office of Pesticides
is looking at ways to
shorten the pesticide
registration process by"
using immunochemistry
as a cost-effective
technology.
Other government
agencies and universi-
ties are studying immu-
nochemical methods.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)
may use immunoas-
says to obtain data for
the calculation of safe
concentrations of
residues. A recent
university project used
immunoassays to track
contamination during
the 1993 Midwestern
flood. In applications
as diverse as organic
geochemistry and
military operations,
immunochemical
methods have been
used for volatile organic
compound measure-
ment. The U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture
(USDA) is integrating
immunoassays into
rapid test procedures
for detection of resi-
dues in meat and
poultry. Results from
these tests will be used
in regulatory and
compliance programs
- for veterinary "drugs; ~-^-
sanitation, and pest
control. The National
Institute for Occupa-
tional Safety and Health
(NIOSH) has applied
immunoassays to
herbicide research,
clinical analysis,
biomarkers, and im-
mune biomonitoring.
They use the methods
to detect morphine
factor, alachlor, atr-
azine, cyanazine,
metalachlor, and 2,4-D.
State laboratories have
analyzed soil samples
and water from private
wells using immuno-
chemical test systems
for triazine (atrazine)
samples.
The results of EPA's
Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation
-------
The Use
(continued)
The Limits
The Status
(SITE) studfes indicate
a strong correlation
between field immuno-
assays, laboratory
immunoassays, and
gas chromatography-
mass spectrpmetry.
I
Another field use of
immunochemistry that
is being explored at
EMSL-LV, the personal
exposure monitor
(PEM), may revolution-
ize safety and exposure
requirements for work-
ers who deal with
hazardous chemicals.
Immunochemical
dosimeter badges can
be used to detect
pentachlorophenol and
nitroaromatics, and are
being developed for
parathion and
chloropyrifos. These
badges are lightweight,
inexpensive, quick, and
provide a real time
indication of exposure.
The use of immuno-
chemical techniques is
gaining acceptance in
the environmental
sciences. One need
that is being addressed
is that of specificity.
Frequently, immunoas-
says are available for a
class of compounds,
IlkePCBs. Specific
quantitation for each
component Has been
difficult. !
I
The development of
PEMs, for exbrnple,
must address the
question of diffusion of
chemicals through a'
semipermeable mem-
brane, the optimum
concentration of the
antibody, detection
limits of the PEM and
quantitation by immu-
noassay, the efficiency
of the antibody in
capturing the analyte,
and the capacity of the
device. [
Validation studies of,
reproducibility, matrix
effects, field trials, false
negatives/positives,
and correlation with
other tests will assist
acceptance of immuno-
chemical methods at
Superfund and RCRA
sites. The legal defensi-
bility of immunochemi-
cal results is yet to be
determined.
Advantages and limita-
tions are summarized
below.
Advantages
• Field portable
• User frienjdly
Ji
• Quick and inexpensive
• Potential lor wide range of
analytes i
• Useful forjmany matrices
• Low detection limits
Limitations
• Separate immunoassay needed
for each analyte
• More cpmplex analysis required
for quantitation of specific
analytes
• Long development time for new
antibodies and methods
One new avenue of
investigation is the use
of antibody-cpated,
fiber-optic imrnuno-
sensors. Another
application is the
integration of1 robotics
capability for ihigh
sample throughput and
the development of a
tiered analytical ap- ',
proach, i.e., biological
and environmental
samples, biomarkers,
target analytes, and
degradation products.
This system of analyti-
cal procedures will
enable scientists to
measure contamina-
tion at the source,
follow the fate and
transport of residual
amounts, and assess
(continued on next page)
-------
The Status
(Continued)
References
human exposure.
Multianalyte immunoas-
says that can identify
several analytes are
expected to expand the
desirability of immuno-
assay technology for
environmental use.
Work in this area is
already underway at
EMSL-LV and else-
where. Other applica-
tions of immuno-
chemistry, such as
multianalyte optical
immunobiosensors and
biorefractometry, are
being developed.
Industry recently
formed the Analytical
Environmental Immuno-
chemistry Consortium
(AEIC), which is focus-
sing on performance-
based method guide-
lines, method valida-
tion, and formation of
consensus on regula-
tory and technological
issues. The National
Technology Transfer
Center (NTTC) offers a
vehicle for collaborative
studies. Cooperative
Research and Develop-
ment Agreements
(CRADAs) between
industry and the gov-
ernment can be used to
promote technology
development and
licensing of irnmuno- .
chemical applications.
The EMSL-LV has a
Technology Transfer
Office that is able to
coordinate CRADAs for
the development of
immunochemical
methods.
Immunochemical
Methods for Environ-
mental Analysis,
J. M. Van Emon and
Mumma, R. O., eds.
ACS Symposium
Series 442, Washing-
ton, DC, 1990, 229pp.
Immunochemistry
Summit Meeting II,
C. L. Gerlach and
D. A. Fuccillo, report-
ers. September 1-2,
1993, Las Vegas, NV.
Internal Report to
EMSL-LV.
Immunochemical
Methods for Environ-
mental Analysis,
J. M. Van Emon and
V. Lopez-Avila, Anal.
Chem., Vol. 64, No. 2,
1992.
For further Information about the immunochemistry program at the EMSL-LV,
contact:
• Dr. Jeanette Van Emon-„,„«,—,— —— —-- -*-•
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ^
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
(702)798-2154
For information about using immunochemical methods at a Superfund or
RCRA site through the EMSL-LV Technology Support Center, contact:
Mr. Ken Brown, Director
Technology Support Center
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
(702) 798-2270
For information about the Technology Transfer Office at the EMSL-LV,
contact:
Mr. Eric Koglin
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
P.O. Box 93478
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
(702) 798-2432
The Technology Support Center fact sheet series 14 developed by
Clare L. Gerlach, Lockheed Environmental Systems & Technologies Company, Las Vegas
-------
Partners
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON
INNOVATIVE MIXED RADIOACTIVE AND
HAZARDOUS WASTE TECHNOLOGIES
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the Departments of
Energy (DOE), Interior and Defense, in
conjunction with the Western Governors
Association (WGA), are interested in
information about innovative mixed
radioactive and hazardous waste reme-
diation technologies. The DOE is the lead
Federal agency for the request for
information. Below is a description of the
specific information diat is requested,
followed by a description of die activities
of the Federal government/WGA
partnership.
DOE's Office of Environmental
Management has been soliciting infor-
mation from commercial companies and
technology developers interested in dem-
onstrating new and innovative technologies
to accelerate die identification, treatment,
remediation, storage or disposal of mixed
radioactive and hazardous waste at Federal
facilities in the western United States. The
date set for interested parties to submit de-
scriptions of specific cleanup technologies
was September 30, 1994.
Submissions are to describe technologies
which aid in die cleanup of high-level,
transuranic or low-level mixed waste and
facilitate the environmental restoration of
contaminated soils, buried waste drums
and/or ground water. The technology
description, limited to five pages, addresses
the following issues: (1) ability to alleviate
risks to public health and safety and to the
environment; (2) capacity for public
acceptance; (3) potential permitting and
regulatory barriers; (4) extent of private
sector and multi-agency involvement;
(5) potential for technology transfer or
commercialization; (6) likelihood of
successful demonstration, including an
assessment of technical risks; (7) capacity
for volume reduction of hazardous and
radioactive components; (8) viability of
final waste forms and treated secondary
waste forms to gain public acceptance, be
relatively stable and meet regulatory
criteria; (9) magnitude of recycling and
material recovery potential; and
(10) ease of implementation to full scale
initiative.
Information was to be submitted to
Dr. George Coyle, Office of Technology
Development, EM-50, U.S .Department
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue
S.W., Room 5B-104, Washington, DC
20585 or faxed to 202-586-6773.
Based on the technology descriptions
received by DOE, a formal Request for
Proposal may be issued to focus on specific
needs and site characteristics. DOE's
formal notice of request for information,
published in the FEDERAL REGISTER
on June 2,1994, is pursuant with the
activities of the Federal Advisory
Committee to Develop On-site Innovative
Technologies (DOIT) Committee. The
formation of the DOIT Committee, a
fact-finding advisory group, is the result of
the signing of a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) among the
Secretaries of the Departments of Defense,
Energy and the Interior; the Administrator
of EPA; and the Western Governors
Association. The purpose of the MOU is
to est£iblish a more cooperative approach to
the development of technical solutions to
environmental restoration and waste
management problems shared by states,
commercial entities and the Federal
. Government. It is hoped that the regional
approach will serve as a demonstration of
principles and practices which may be
adopted nationally.
In addition to identifying improved
and innovative cleanup technologies,
- the DOIT Committee attempts to address
all die issues needed for successful
technology development and transfer,
including: regulatory and institutional
barriers; worker training and education;
technical and financial needs and
requirements; commercialization issues,
procurement; and public and stakeholder
participation.
Multi-Vendor continued from page 1
a negative pressure stripping reactor, an
in-situ bioreactor and an above-ground
vapor-phase bioreactor. This process
focuses on removing volatile contam-
inants out of the soil above the water table
as well as volatile contaminants in the
ground water. The contaminants are then
treated biologically. The second process
utilizes bioventing technology where
injection and extraction wells will allow the
vendor to regulate oxygen and nutrient
levels to stimulate the native bacteria in the
soil into biodegrading the contaminants of
concern. The third process is based upon
die construction of two identical biovaults.
Contaminated soils are placed in each
biovault where nutrient, moisture and
oxygen levels can be controlled. The first
biovault is operated under aerobic
conditions. The second biovault is
operated back and forth between aerobic
and anaerobic conditions.
These MVTD pilot-scale demonstrations
will not .interfere widi on-going remedi-
ation at the site, where approximately 2,500
drums of hazardous waste and grossly
contaminated soil have already been re-
moved. The Record of Decision, signed in
March 1994, specified excavation of
contaminated soil widi on-site treatment
via LowTemperature'Thermal Desorption;
limited ground water remediation is also
specified. If the MVTD project is suc-
cessful, diese technologies will be used to
remediate the remaining contamination at
die site.
The three vendors for the MVTD were
chosen through a competitive process.
Thirteen technical proposals were sub-
mitted in response to a formal Request for
Proposal. After a review of diose proposals,
nine technology vendors were invited to
submit bids. The three vendors selected
began field work in July 1994.
The I'JYS Center coordinated die
development of the protocol that was the
centerpiece of the Requests for Proposals
and wil] be on-site to document vendor
progress and provide sample collection
assistant. The SITE program will
provide sample collection and analytical
services, sampling protocol development
and project reports. The NYSDEC
developed the project and is leading it,
providing management and funding for
die treatment vendors and construction
support services necessary to implement
die study.
For more information, call Jim Harrington
at NYSDEC at 518-485-8792.
-------
hydrographs, chemical time series
graphs, tables and other maps and line
graphs that meet reporting require-
ments.
GIS\Key™ site maps typically start
with digitized basemaps, including
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute
quadrangle maps, to provide general
topography and features such as
streets, highways, schools and bodies
of water. Site-specific features such as
buildings and waste management units
are then added. Project maps for
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) hazardous waste facilities
and Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) sites are stored inside
the regional basemaps and act as the
visual starting points from which users
can obtain specific chemical, geologic
and hydrologic data for each map
point. Environmental data for a
project-chemical, geological and
hydrological-are stored in the
GIS\Key™ database. GIS\Key™
improves overall project data quality
\
module reviews chemical laboratory
quality control data and parameters,
checks site data against historical ranges
and generates exception reports.
Sample locations that provide values
which fail QC objectives are visually
indicated to the user and thus help to
avoid the use of suspect data in maps
and reports. The geology module
includes Ethology, user-defined
formations and blow counts. The
hydrology module includes derived
aquifer parameters such as verticle and
horizontal permeability. The database is
linked to the other component of the
geographical information system,
GIS\Graphics. Data can be entered
into the database either manually or
electronically.
GIS\Key™ provides several editable
reference lists, including a list of
regulatory thresholds, test methods,
chemical names, aliases and registry
numbers. GIS\Key™ produces
presentation quality graphics that are
designed to be included directly into
reports. The maps, sections and
to modify or enhance graphic output.
GIS\Key™ does not require
specialized computer skills, but some
specialized AutoCAD®, electronic data
transfer and database management
system skills are needed to make full use
of it. TheGIS\Key™ system is
compatible with 386 and 486 micro-
computers and runs oh standard DOS
and local area networks. The
GIS\Key™ database menu provides
commands for electronic database
import and export; and, data subsets
can be exported in a format compatible
with EPA GRITS/STAT to conduct
statistical routines that conform
to RCRA guidelines.
For more information, call Richard Eilers
at EPA s Risk Reduction Engineering ,
Laboratory at 513-569-7809. An •; ,
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
(Document No. EPA/540/R-94/505) and a
Site Technology Capsule (Document No.
EPA/540/SR-94/505) describing detailed
results of the evaluation can be ordered by
calling the Center for Research and
Environmental Information (CERI) at 513-
OH 45242-0419. 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 (5102W)
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
P.O. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419
Offical Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
EPA 542-N-94-006
------- |