xvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste
Emergency Response
(5102W)
EPA 542-N-d4-<}<}8
November1994
The Applied Technologies Journal for Superfund Removals & Remedial Actions & RCRA Corrective Actions
THE COMPOSTING ALTERNATIVE TO
INCINERATION OF EXPLOSIVES
CONTAMINATED SOILS
By Harry Craig, EPA Region 10 and Wayne Sisk, U.S. Army Environmental Center
EPA's Region 10 has evaluated solid waste, but not hazardous
composting as an ex-situ solid phase wastes.
Explosives
Sioremediation
Soils
degrade nitroaromatic and nitramine
compounds in soils. Treatability
studies at two National priority List
sites -- the Umatilla Army Depot
Activity site in Hermiston, Oregon
and the U.S. Naval Submarine Base
site in Bangor, Washington — dem-
onstrate that composting is a treat-
ment alternative to incineration for
remediating these compounds.
Composting has been selected as the
Record of Decision treatment for
14,800 tons of TNT (2,4,6-trinitro-
toluene), RDX (hexahydro-1,3,5-
trinitro-l,3,5-triazine) and HMX
(octahydro-1, 3, 5, 7-tetranitro-l, 3,
5, 7-tetrazocine) contaminated soils
at Umatilla and for 2,200 tons of
TNT contaminated soils at Bangor.
Previously, composting has been
used primarily to treat municipal
IT'S TIME
It's time for us to know If you
want to remain on the mailing list
for our Technology Innovation
Gffke pttblkadoiiif. One. of the
two special inserts in this issue of
TECH TRENDS is a. convenient
for to foe 700 ta indicate whether
or not you. wish to continue
receiving out publications*
hejp us fry taking a moment to
complete rhe Form and eotrecr
yam address label if needed. EPA
personael please disregard, the mall
opiate request; we wilt automati-
cally send you copies.
The second special Insert
describes new technology informa-
tion chat yon may want to
"^ "CompostingTriixes natural" '~~ "
organic amendments, such as
manure, wood chips, alfalfa and
vegetable processing wastes with
30% contaminated soil and adds
water to 50% of moisture holding
capacity. The process utilizes native
aerobic thermophilic microorganisms
and requires no inoculation. Com-
posting operates under mesophilic
[30-35 degrees Centigrade (C)] and
thermophilic (50-55 degrees C)
conditions, with thermophilic
conditions being optimum.
Amendments serve as a source of
carbon and nitrogen for thermo-
philes, which degrade explosives
under co-metabolic conditions.
Composting produces no chemical
air emissions and no leachate; and,
it does not require dewatering upon
completion of treatment.
Composting residues will support
the growth of vegetation after
'treatment', unlike'incineration ash
or soils treated by solidification/
stabilization. The final volume
increase in soil is approximately
50% to 100%, similar to stabiliza-
tion/solidification technologies.
At the Umatilla site, the soils were
contaminated from the discharge
of 85 million gallons of explosives'
wastewater into unlined lagoons from
1950 to 1965. During the pilot-
scale treatability study, 30 cubic
yards of soil were treated in each of
two windrow configurations, one
with forced aeration and the other
unaerated. After 40 days of treat-
ment, composting reduced initial
average contaminant concentrations
of 1,574 parts per million (ppm)
TNT to 4 ppm; 944 ppm RDX to
2 ppm; and 159 ppm HMX to
(continued on page 4)
Off -gas collection hood
ISV TREATMENT MELT
(Not to scale)
Off-gases to treatment
T ^Electrode
I I *'
Soil surface
Unaffected soil
Conductive Heating
Melt surface
•Dry zone
Molten soil region
(See Article on page 2 )
Recycled/Recyclable
' Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper
that contains at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
SITE Subjects
VACUUM EXTRACTION/AIR SPARGING
WITH BIOREMEDIATION FOR ORGANICS
By Paul dePercin, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Vacuum, Air Sp.,
Bioremediation
Soil/
Groundwater
The Subsurface Volatilization and
Ventilation System (SWS*) is an
in situ vacuum extraction/air
sparging and bioremediation tech-
nology ror the treatment of subsur-
face organic contamination in soil
and ground water. The primary
objective of the SITE (Superfund
Innovative Technology Evaluation)
Program evaluanpn pfjSVVSijit_ „.
the Electro-Voice, Incorporated
(EV) facility in Buchanan, Michi-
gan was to determine the effective-
ness of SWS1 in reducing volatile
organic contamination in the va-
dose zone. The demonstration met
the objective.
Historical activities at the EV fa-
cility included painting, electroplat-
ing and assembling of components
associated with the manufacture of
audio equipment. In 1964 EV
implemented an automated paint-
ing system; and, a dry well was in-
stalled to handle some of the liquid
wastes generated from the paint
shop. A remedial investigation dis-
covered a sludge-like material be-
neath the dry well area contami-
nated with aromatic hydrocarbons
and halogenated and non-haloge-
nated volatile and semi-volatile
compounds. Some of these or-
ganic contaminants have migrated
to underlying strata. The SITE
chose seven of these contaminants
to demonstrate the effectiveness of
the SVVS* system. These con-
taminants and their initial average
concentrations were the BTEX
compounds -- benzene at 0.01 parts
per million (ppm), toluene at 92
ppm, ethylbenzene at 37.4 ppm
and xylenes at 205 ppm ~ and
tetrachloroethene at 5.4 ppm,
trichlorethene at 0.36 ppm and 1,1-
dichloroethene at 0.01 ppm. The
overall reductions in contaminants
ranged from 71% to over 99%,
which grgatly:exceed the deyeloperX
"" cfaim"bf a projected 30% reduction.
The SWS® technology, devel-
oped by Billings and Associates,
Inc., and operated under a licensing
agreement by Brown & Root Envi-
ronmental, utilizes vapor extraction
and biostimulation to remove and
destroy organic contaminants from
the subsurface. Vapor extraction
removes the easily strippable vola-
tile components from the soil and/
or ground water. This removal
mechanism is dominant during the
early phases of the remediation.
Biostimulation processes dominate
the later phases of the remediation
and are used to accelerate the in situ
destruction or organic compounds
in the soil and ground water. The
developer claims that remediation
using the combination of vapor ex-
traction and biostimulation is more
rapid than the use of biostimulation
alone. The_SITE-demonstratipn ._
tests indicate that the technology
stimulated biodegradative processes
at the site and that the early phase
of the remediation was character-
ized by higher concentrations of
volatile organics in the extracted va-
por stream. In addition, SWS® can
remediate contaminants that would
not be remediated by vapor extrac-
tion alone (chemicals with lower
volatilities and/or chemicals that are
tightly sorbed). These benefits
translate into lower costs and faster
remediations.
The technology consists of a net-
_work.oOnjection an^extracjjion_-^
"wells plumbea to orie'or more com-
pressors or vacuum pumps, respec-
tively. The vacuum pumps create
negative pressure to extract con-
taminant vapors. Air compressors
simultaneously create positive pres-
sures across the treatment area to
deliver oxygen for enhanced aerobic
biodegradation. The system is
maintained at a vapor control unit
that houses pumps, control valves,
gauges and other process control
hardware. The operation of SWS®
is custom designed to meet specific
site conditions. The number and
spacing of the wells depends upon
the results of a model, as well as the
physical, chemical and biological
characteristics of the site.
According to the developer, the
SWS® is applicable to sites con-
taminated with gasoline, diesel fuels
and other hydrocarbons, including
halogenated compounds.__The
developer claims that the SWS® is
very effective in treating soils con-
taminated with virtually any mate-
rial that exhibits some volatility or
is biodegradable. The technology
(continued on page 4)
IN SITU VITRIFICATION TREATS
ORGANICS AND INORGANICS
By Teri Richardson, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
VOC's
Inorganics
Vitrification
Soil/Sludge
The Geosafe Corporation's in situ
vitrification (ISV) technology is de-
signed to treat soils, sludges, sedi-
ments and mine tailings contami-
nated with organic, inorganic and
radioactive compounds. EPA's SITE
(Superfund Innovative Technology
Evaluation) Program evaluated the
technology at the Parsons Chemical
site in Grand Ledge, Michigan; soil at
the site was contaminated with low
levels of pesticides and mercury. The
SITE demonstration results con-
cluded that the cleanup levels were
met. The process uses electrical cur-
rent to heat (melt) and vitrify the soil
in place. Organic contaminants are
(continued on page 3 )
-------
SrEPA Technology Innovation Office
Please send me the innovative technology information I have indicated below:
Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment Technologies (VISITT) Version 3.0. VISIT!
is a diskette-based system containing information on 277 innovative remediation technologies offered by 177
vendors. The system captures current information on the availability, performance, and cost supplied to EPA by
technology companies. VISITT 3.0 is available on diskette, with a user manual, and requires a personal computer
with DOS Version 3.3 or higher, 640K of RAM, and 10MB hard disk space.
*Specify VIS ITT diskette size: 3-1/2" 5-1/4"
Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report (Sixth Edition) (EPA-542-R-94-005).
This report documents and analyzes the selection and use of innovative treatment technologies in the U.S.EPA
Superfund Program and at some non-Superfund sites under the Departments of Defense and Energy. The report
contains site-specific information on 350 projects, including soil vapor extraction, soil washing, bioremediation,
solvent extraction, and other innovative technologies for treating ground water in place and soil.
_ * I also would like to get updates of this report annually. i
Innovative Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies: A Developer's Guide to Support Services
(Third Edition) (EPA-542-B-94-012). This booklet provides information on sources of assistance and support in
bringing technologies from the proof-of-concept stage to the commercialization stage. It includes information on
sources of grant funding and technical assistance, and identifies incubators, test "and evaluation facilities, and
university-affiliated research centers that can provide a range of technology development and evaluation services.
Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix and Reference Guide (EPA-542-B-93-005). This
document is designed to help Federal site managers identify potentially applicable technologies for more detailed
evaluation prior to remedy selection. It summarizes the strengths and limitations of 48 innovative and conventional
technologies for remediation of soils, sediments, and sludges; groundwater; and air emissions/off-gases.
Technologies covered include treatment, containment, waste separation and enhanced recovery.
Technology Resource Guides. Each of these guides contains information on resource documents, databases,
hotlines, and dockets pertaining to the subject technology. They also identify regulatory mechanisms that have the
potential to ease implementation of the technology at hazardous waste sites. iEach guide contains a Resource
Matrix, which identifies the technology, media, and contaminants covered in each abstracted document.
Bioremediation Resource Guide (EPA-542-B-93-004)
Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA-542-B-94-007)
Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA-542-B-94-008)
Ground Water Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA-542-B-94-009)
To order one or more of these documents, check the appropriate boxes, and leave at TIO exhibit or:
i
Mail to: U.S. EPA/NCEPI Fax to: U.S. EPA/NCEPI
P.O. Box 42419 or (513)489-8695
Cicinnati, OH 45242-0419 (Verification: (513)489-8190)
Please type or print legibly. Allow 3-4 weeks for delivery.
Name: ;Date:
Organization:
Address:
Internet Address
City/State/Zip: Telephone:
-------
-------
NOTICE
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Technology Innovation Office (TIO) produces numerous
one-time and periodic publications on technologies and markets for soil and ground water remedia-
tion. We strive to provide information that is relevant to technology developers, academics, consult-
ing engineers, technology end users and state and federal regulators. Periodically we seek to update
our mailing lists to ensure that our products are getting to our customers who desire them and that the
government is not wasting funds due to publications being improperly addressed. To help us update
our mailing lists, please complete and return this form. To remain on TIO's mailing lists you must
return this form by February 28th. 1995. either by fax to: 513-489-8695 or mail to: EPA/NCEPI;
11305 Reed Hartman Highway, Suite 219; Cincinnati, OH 45241. Please make any corrections to the
address label on this newsletter and place it in the box below. If, by chance, you receive more than
one form, please return only one form.
OCCUPATION/AFFILIATION: Please assist us with our distribution management by checking off
your occupation or affiliation (Please check the one block that best describes your circumstances).
Q U.S. EPA
Q Other Federal Agency
Q State/Local Agency
Q Indian Tribes
C3 Interest Group/Lobbyists
Q Professional/Trade Association
Q Media
Q Banking/Investment
Q Industry
Q Consultants/Contractors
Q Attorneys/Legal
Q University
Q Schools (K-12)
Q Library
Q Student
Q Private Citizen
GENERAL INTEREST AREAS: Please indicate your areas of interest
Q Technology Survey Reports/Guidance Q Treatability Studies Q Ground Water
O Thermal Treatment Q Reduction Technologies Q Bioremediation
Q Physical/Chemical Treatment Q Community Relations
Q Bulletin Board System/Databases Q Technology Newsletters
INTERNET ADDRESS: If you would like to receive electronic notices of new publications,
conferences, and training opportunities, please include your Internet address below.
INTERNET ADDRESS:
Insert
Please remove address label
from front of this newsletter
and place it in this box.
Make corrections if necessary.
-------
Mail this flyer to:
National Center for Environmental
Publications and Information (NCEPI)
11305 Reed Hartman Highway, Suite 219
Cincinnati, OH 45241
-------
NEW FOR THE BOOKSHELF
1
NORTH OF THE BORDER
The "Proceedings of the Fourth
Annual Symposium on Groundwa-
ter and Soil Remediation" are now
available. The symposium was
sponsored by several Canadian
agencies (Environment Canada;
Alberta Environmental Protection;
the Biotechnology Research Insti-
tute -National Research Council
Canada; and the DESRT Program)
and the Members of GASReP, the
Canadian Association of Petroleum
Producers and the Canadian Petro-
rJeum-Products-Institute.—The.--^;"-
Symposium presented results and
fostered discussion on current re-
search, development and demon-
stration projects dealing with
ground water and soil remediation.
The cost, including shipping and
handling, is $35 Canadian cur-
rency.
You can order the "Proceedings"
by phone, mail or FAX. To order
by phone call Francoise Landry at
613-232-3709, ex. 210 or FAX her
at 613-232-4345. Ms. Landry will
bill you by invoice. To order by
mail, contact Ms. Landry, c/o Ca-
—nadian Petroleum Products Insti-
tute, 275 Slater Street, Suite 1000,
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P5H9.
THE STATES
EPA's Technology Innovation Of-
fice has several publications on in-
novative treatment technologies
and a vendor information system
database now available. For more
information on these publications,
as well a.s a handy order form, see
the special insert in this issue of
TECH TRENDS.
(continued from page 2)
decomposed by the extreme heat
into simple gases, which then rise
through and escape from the molten
soil. Inorganic contaminants are
trapped within the molten soil,
which cools and solidifies into a
glassy monolith. The ISV technol-
ogy operates by means of four graph-
ite electrodes, arranged in a square
and inserted into the soil to be
treated. A pattern of electrically
conductive graphite containing glass
frit is placed on the soil in paths be-
tween the electrodes. When power is
fed to the electrodes, the graphite
and glass frit conducts the current
through the soil, heating the sur-
rounding area and melting directly
adjacent soil. Molten soil is electri-
cally conductive and can continue to
carry the current which heats and
melts soil downward and outward.
The electrodes are allowed to
progress down into the soil as it be-
comes molten, continuing the melt-
ing process to the desired treatment
depth. As treatment progresses, a
"cold cap" of solidified material
forms at the surface. When all of
the soil in the treatment area be-
comes molten, the power to the elec-
trodes is discontinued and the mol-
ten mass begins to cool. The elec-
trodes are cut near the soil surface
and are allowed to settle into the
molten soil to become part of
the melt.
The organic contaminants in the
soil are pyrolyzed (heated to decompo-
sition without oxygen) and are gener-
ally reduced to simple gases. The
gases migrate through the molten soil
and/or the adjacent dry zone to the
surface, where they are collected in a
stainless steel hood placed over the
area being treated. Gases from the
hood are treated in an ofF-gas treat-
ment system. (See page 1 of this issue
for a graph of the system.)
Inorganic contaminants in the soil
are generally encapsulated in the mol-
ten soil which hardens to a vitrified
mass that is dense and hard, which sig-
nificantly reduces the possibility of
leaching from the mass over the long
term. Since the vitrification process
removes most of the void space in the
soil, as well as destroys the organic
contamination, there is a volume re-
duction of 20 to 50%.
Prior to the SITE evaluation
demonstration, treatment at the Par-
sons site had been ongoing for several
months in open concrete trenches de-
signed for nine treatment cell settings.
The SITE demonstration focused on
cell 8, which was the most contami-
nated cell. The ISV technology
treated the soil as expected, complet-
ing the melt in 10 days. The cleanup
levels specified by EPA Region V for
chlordane, 4,4-DDT; dieldrin; and
mercury were met. Pesticide concen-
trations were reduced to non-detect-
able levels in the vitrified soil, from
initial concentrations of 13,050 mi-
crograms per kilogram (|Jg/kg) for
4,4-DDT to less than 16 |Jg/kg and
from 4,620 |0g/kg dieldrin to less
than 16 Ug/kg. The solid vitrified
material collected was subjected to
TCLP for mercury and pesticides.
The test results indicated that leach-
able mercury was well below the
regulatory guidelines of 40 CFR Part
261.24; and, no target pesticides were
detected in die leachate. There were
no target: pesticides detected in the
stack gas samples; metal emissions
were below regulatory requirements;
and, total hydrocarbon and carbon
monoxide emissions were in compli-
ance with EPA Region V limits.
For more information, call Ten
Richardson at EPA's Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory at 513-569-
7949. Key finding from the demon-
stration will be published in an Innova-
tive Technology Evaluation Report
which will be available February 1995.
Those involved in cleaning up similar
sites across the country will be able to
use this report to evaluate the Geosafe
ISV technology as a potential alterna-
tive technology for meir sites. A SITE
Technology Capsule and videotape will
also be available by January 1995. To
get on the mailing list for these reports,
contact Peggy Heimbrock at 513-569-
7472 by phone or by FAX at 513-569-
7566.
-------
(continued from page 1)
5 ppm. Destruction and removal
efficiencies (DRE) were: 99.7% for
TNT; 99.8% for RDX; and 96.9%
for HMX. The treatment process
also degraded key bio-degradation
intermediates of TNT — 2A-4.6-
DNT (2-amino, 4-6 dinitrotoluene)
and 4A-2,6-DNT (4-amino-2,6-
dinitrotoluene).
At Umatilla, toxicology and
leachability tests also were performed
to compare toxicity and mobility
effects of compost residues to those
in untreated soils. Toxicity results
showed 87% to 92% reduction of
leachate toxicity to Ceriodaphnk
dubia, and 99-3% to 99.6% reduc-
tion in mutagenicity for Ames assays :
using strains TA-98 and TA-100. A
brief oral rat feeding study did not
produce mortality from consump-
tion of compost residues. Leachable
concentrations were greater than
99.6% for TNT, 98.6% for RDX
and 97.3% for HMX, using the EPA
Synthetic Precipitation Leach
Procedure (SPLP)(SW-846 Method
1312).
At Bangor, soils have been
contaminated from open-burn/open-
detonation (OB/OD disposal of
munitions from 1946 to 1965.
Region 10 conducted bench scale
treatability studies to evaluate
composting treatment of TNT
contaminated soils from three areas of
the base — one wastewater disposal
lagoon and two ordnance OB/OD
sites. Composting reduced the
concentration of TNT in one
kilogram of soil from 822 ppm to 8
ppm after 60 days of treatment, with
a DRE of 99.5%. A pilot scale
treatability study of 60 cubic yards of
soil is currendy in progress. Results
will be available in March 1995.
For the treatability studies at both
sites, an asphalt liner in a temporary
building was used to house the
biotreatment system. Site specific
factors should determine what
containment system, if any, should be
used._;;_^Ct -..„„- *-- • ~^_,^;
The treatabUitj > Umatilla
and Bangor indicate uiat composting
is capable of achieving risk-based
cleanup levels of 30 to 33 ppm for
TNT and 9 ppm to 30 ppm RDX
after 40 days of treatment. The
Feasibility Study estimates treatment
costs of $206.to $766 per ton, which
is 40% to 50% less than on-site
incineration for quantities from 1,200
to 30,000 tons. Actual costs will be
refined during full-scale remediation,
which is scheduled to begin in 1995.
Composting is suitable for soils and
sludges. Composting does not appear
to be particularly sensitive to soil type.
Umatilla soils are sands/gravel; and,
Bangor soils are loams and glacial till.
A moderate amount of contaminated
wastewater can be treated with soil,
since the process consumes water at a
rate of approximately one gallon per
cubic yard per day of treatment.
3ntaminatecLr_ocks_andjdebrJs,,c
be crushed or shredded and treated
with soils.
For more information, call Harry
Craig at £PA's Region 10 Oregon
Operations Office at 503-326-3689.
(continued from page 2)
can be applied to contaminated
soil, sludges, free-phase hydrocar-
bon product and ground water.
A one-year time frame was cho-
sen for SITE testing purposes at the
EV site. However, other sites may
require longer or shorter remedial
cleanup time.
For more information, call Paul
dePercin atEPA's Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory at 513-569-
7797- An Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report describing the
complete demonstration mill be avail-
able in early 1995.
MAILING LIST/ORDER INFO
To get on the permanent mailing list or to order additional copies of this or previous issues of Tech Trends, send a fax request to the National Center for
Environmental Publications and Information (NCEPI) at 513-489'8<8)5, or send a mail request to
NCEPI, P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419. Please refer to the document number oil the cover of the issue if available.
Tech Trend* welcomes readers' comments and contributions. Address correspondence to: Tech Trends, NCEPI, P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH, 45242-2419,
United States ~~~ ~~
Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental
Publications and Information
P.O. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300
EPA 542-N-94-008
------- |