\
                         ORDER FORM
            DRINKING WATER PUBLICATIONS
DOCUMENT #
TITLE/DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
EPA816F02026
***NEW***
Consumer Confidence Report Rule: A
Quick Reference Guide - This is
another in a series of quick reference
guides we have prepared on our major
rules. This one is not contained in the
highly popular "Compilation of Quick
Reference Guides" below.
EPA816R03002
***NEW***
Cross-Connection Control Manual -
This manual has updated technical
corrections to the original 1998
Manual
EPA816H03001
***NEW***
Source Water Protection - It's In Our
Hands Poster -
EPA816F03008
***NEW***
Source Water Protection - It's In Our
Hands Brochure to accompany poster
above.
EPA816K03003
***NEW***
MCL Pocket Guide - Consumer
Confidence Reports: Building Public
Trust - This is the 2003 edition of the
popular small pocket guide that
contains all the MCLs
EPA816H03002
***NEW***
MCL Wall Chart - This is the 2003
edition of the wall chart listing all the
MCL. This year's version shows them
in alphabetical order with color codes
for the contaminant groups.

-------
EPA816H02003
EPA816F02015
EPA816B02001

11x17 inch version of the poster Safe
Drinking Water Act - Protecting
America's Public Health - This
version has information on the flip
side further explaining the multiple
risks and barriers
(great as a handout for board meetings,
plant tours, classroom visits)
Lesson Plan - Water: is It Safe To
Drink? - Lesson plan for poster above
Compilation of Quick Reference
Guides
Packet with one each of : Arsenic,
Radionuclides, Long Term 1, Interim
Enhanced Surface Water Treatment,
Filter Backwash, Stage 1 DBPs





Name:  	
Affiliation:
Address:
                               Send form to: Charlene Shaw
                               EPA/OGWDW/4606M
                               1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
                               Washington, DC 20460
                               Or FAX: 202/564-3757
Email:
Office of Water
EPA816-F-03-021
July 2003
www. epa. gov/safewater

-------
           &      Technology
           I   News and Trends
 United States
 Environmental Protection Agency
 National Service Center for Environmental Publications
 P.O. Box 42419
 Cincinnati, OH 45242

 Official Business
 Penalty for Private Use $300
       Solid Waste and
       Emergency Response
       (5102G)
EPA 542-N-03-003
May 2003
Issue No. 6
First Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
  [continued from page 5]
 electrode array during system startup. Placing a
 chain-link mesh outside the array and grounding
 it to a distant monitoring well remedied this
 problem. In addition a pre-pilot resistivity survey
 would have helped to assess the potential for
 undesired stray voltage during treatment.

 A significant setback was encountered during
 the second month of operation when cracks in
 the CPVC piping (leading from the electrodes
 to the vapor header) resulted in an atmospheric
 release of steam and vapor. Operations were
 shut down for several days but resumed after
 the degraded CPVC was replaced with flexible
 chemical-resistant hose. This unexpected
 condition  appeared   to  result from  a
 combination of excessive heat, pressure, and
 chemical attack from a variety of contaminants.

 Post-test analysis showed  that shallow
 ground-water contamination (<24 feet bgs) in
 the treatment zone decreased more than 99%,
 and deeper ground-water contamination (24-
40 feet bgs) decreased more than 76%.
Analytical results also indicated a 95%
reduction in contaminated soil mass.

Additional analysis of the pilot results will
determine whether ERH technology could be
used to achieve project cleanup goals that were
not met through 1997-1998 implementation of a
soil vapor extraction (SVE) system. Although
SVE treatment resulted in the removal of
approximately 12 tons of subsurface VOCs over
a 14-month period, concentrations in the vadose
and saturated zones remained  significantly
higher than their maximun contaminant levels.
Results of the ERH pilot suggest that this
technology can  increase mass  removal
efficiencies in both the vadose and saturated
zones more effectivaly than traditional SVE.

The ERH pilot cost approximately $1.6 million,
including $50,000 for electrical power and $50,000
for vapor treatment. Modeling based on total
VOC concentrations exceeding 10 mg/kg
        indicates that 1.02 million tons of soil require
        additional treatment

        Contributed by Sharon Hayes,
        U.S. EPA/Region 1 (617-918-1328 or
        haves.sharon@epa.gov) and John
        Scaramuzzo, Tetra Tech FW, Inc.
        (617-457-8297 or jscaramu7zp@ttfwi.com)
       In the March 2003 Technology News and
       Trends  article,  "DNAPL  Treatment
       Demonstration  Completed  at  Cape
       Canaveral," the contributors believe use of
       the terms  "treatment efficiencies" and
       "cleanup efficiencies" may be misleading due
       to uncertainties in mass removal estimates for
       the SPH demonstration.  The  appropriate
       language is "apparent mass reduction." The
       SPH cost of "$164" for each  kg of TCE
       removed or destroyed should read "$64."
EPA is publishing this newsletter as a means of disseminating useful information regarding innovative and alternative treatment techniques and
technologies. The Agency does not endorse specific technology vendors.

-------
 [continued from page 2]
80% lower dissolved PCE concentrations
than before treatment, with an average PCE
concentration of approximately 15 mg/L.
NRMRL  and SERDP are preparing a
comprehensive  summary   of   these
demonstration results, as well as the results
of other innovative DNAPL remediation
technologies recently tested at the DNTS.

Contributed by A. Lynn  Wood,
U.S. EPA/ORD/NRMRL (580-436-8552 or
wood.lynn@.epa.gov) and
Ronald Falta,  Clemson University
(864-656-0125 or faltar@clemson.edu}
                               Cumulative Amounts
                                                                                                             90,000

                                                                                                             80,000
                                                                    70,000   c
                                                                            .o
                                                                  - - 60,000   1
                                                                            o
                                                                            CO
                                                                  - - 50,000   o
                               >-Cumulative PCE

                               >- Cumulative n-propanoi
                                                                  - - 40,000

                                                                  - - 30,000
                         - - 20,000   IS
                                                                  - -10,000
        0.00        10.00       20.00       30.00
                                  Time (days)
                                                     40.00
                                                                    0
                                                                 50.00
                                           Figure 1. Cumulative profiles of PCE removal and n-propanol solution
                                           injection during cosolvenf flooding indicate that about 80% of the
                                           initial 92.3 kg of PCE in the test cell \vcts removed.
         Biosparging Used to Remove Chlorinated Solvents at the SRS Sanitary landfill
As part of a comprehensive effort to address
ground-water contamination at the U.S.
DerrartmentofEnergy SavannahRiverSite(SRS)
near Aiken, SC, a biosparging system began
operating in 1999 at the site's sanitary landfill
(SLF>- Biosparging was selected to address (he
trichloroethene (TCE), vinyl chloride, and TCE
breakdown products in the ground water
underlying the landfill. By 2002, biosparging
treatment  had reduced  ground-water
concentrations of vinyl chloride and TCE within
the treatment  zone by 99% and 75%,
respectively.

Large amounts of wastes were generated at the
SRS during construction and operation of,the
facility. Cafeteria and office wastes, sewage
sludge, miscellaneous construction materials,
and debris routinely were disposed at the 70-
acreunlinedSLF from the early 1970stothe mid
1990s. After the discovery  of ground-water
contamination beneath the landfill, the main
section and the southern expansion area of the
landfill were covered wilh an engineered cap.
Maximum concentrations of vinyl chloride and
TCE at interior landfill wells were 480 ug/L and
31 ug/L, respectively, prior to biosparging
treatment
Three significant hydrogeologic units underlie
the landfill: an uppermost unconfined aquifer, a
confining unit, and a lower aquifer. The depth to
the water table ranges from 30 ft to 60 ft bgs.
Ground-water flow in the area of me landfill is
primarily horizontal, with an upward flow
component where it discharges to a large
wetland adjacent to the landfill. Beneath the
landfill, contaminantswere identifiedority in.lhe
upperportionsofthe shallow aquifer. Numerical
modeling estimates  that the advective
transport time from the main section of the
landfill to a downgradient biosparging well
between the landfill and wetland is 11 years,
with another three years for discharge 'to the
wetland (Figure 2).

Low dissolved oxygen levels observed after
construction of the landfill cap suggested that
reductive dechlorination of chlorinated
compounds could occur beneath the landfill.
Following successful field-scale testing of
biosparging, a full-scale  system  was
constructed. The system consists of two
horizontal biosparging  wells  screened
immediately below the vertical center of the
contaminant plume: an 800-ft screened well
downgradient of the landfill for treating TCE,
and a 900-ft screened well side-gradientof the
landfill for .treating vinyl chloride. Each well
consists of a six-inch-diameter outer steel
casing, screen, and an inner four-inch, high-
densityvpolyelhylene liner. Botbwells rely on
a central air compressor unit (rated for a
maximum airflow of 540 cfm) but operate
independently to accommodate different
injection configurations.   .

Optimization testing prior to full-scale
operations, demonstrated that additional
nutrients were needed for the downgradient
well area, white air injection wasmfequate for
bioremediation in the side-gradient well area.
Methane (0.7%) was injected into the
downgradient well to stimulate growth of
mefeane-oxidizmg (mefeaiK*ropie)ofgamans.
These organisms produce the sfcongoxidizmg
agent (mpnooxygenase) needed for complete
mineralization  of  TCE.  As  expected,
methanotropic degradation of TCE was
constrained to the sparging operation's radius
of influence (approximately 60 feet) but vinyl
chloride degradation was found to occur
wherever oxygen was present

                 (continued on page 4]

-------
[continued'frontpage3] >           -•, '

Methane injection was terminated in January
2001 because TCE concentrations had
decreased substantially and numerical.
modeling predicted that the benefit of
additional injection was limited. -

Both wells currently treat vinyl chloride by
serving as aerobic biodegradation pathways
and by enhancing volatilization. Air is injected  f
into  the wells once every two weeks for 48
continuous hours "at a rate of 220 scfm in -the
downgradient weH and 250 scfm in the side-
gradient well. After 24 hours, nitrous" oxide
and  triethylphosphate'nutrients (0.048% and'
-0.005% of total air/month, respectively) are
injected in the downgradient well for 8 hours.
Vinyl chloride concentrations have continued
40 decrease over the past year, with maximum
 concentrations during the first quarter of 2003
reaching 80 yg/L in ah, interior landfill
 monitoring well and 11  ugC'in apoint-of-
 compliance well at the base of theJandfill,

XJroundrwater models predict that primary.
 contaminant concentrations, will not exceed
 ground-Water protection standards due'to
 ongoing physical and biologicat processes,
 6f natufa^attenuatioa Since concentrations^
 have decreased to-regulatory^ limits for this
 RC3SAfacility, plans are underway tok&pend
'operation'of the biospargmg'system^and.to
 continue grqund-watef monitoring for several
 years-. Nlaintenaace of the biosparging
 . system wiU continue-in the event monitoring
 results indicate th'at resumed operations are
 .warranted. Additional information regarding
 enhanced bioremediation and monitored
 natural attenuation at the,SRS SLF is available
 on-line at http://www.srs.gov/general/pubs/
                                                       capped sanitary
                                                       l^landfill   1
                                                                                                               North
Contributed by David O. Ndffsinger. -
We*stinghoiise*SdVannah River     • "-
"Compaq, LLC (803-952-7768 or    -
d.noffsiftser@srs.sov) and Karen M.'
Adams 'U.'S. Department ofEnergy/SRS
'(803-725-4648 or
kgr-en-m-adams @ srs.eov J
                                                                                                               creek
                                           water table aquifer
            horizontal treatment well
            south of landfill
                                              Legend
                                              *• Water Flow Direction
Figure 2. A conceptual model of factors
affecting ground-water flow and contaminant.
transport was developed for the SRS SLF   ;
                                                   Electrical Resistance Heating Pilot Conducted
                                                                      f or VOC  Removal
A pilot study was completed in January 2003
at the Silresim Superfund site in Lowell, MA,
to evaluate the effectiveness of electrical
resistance heating (ERH) technology in
treating contaminated soil and ground water.
The U.S. EPA/Region 1 and Army Corps of
Engineers will use the pilot results to determine
the feasibility and cost of implementing mis
technology on a full-scale basis for remediation
of the   vadose  and  saturated  zones.
Concentrations of vapor extracted over three
months  of treatment indicated that an
estimated 1,500 pounds of VOCs were removed
from approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil.

As a result of past industrial waste reclaiming
operations, the subsurface soil and ground
water at this  5-acre  site  contain  high
concentrations of VOCs, including TCE,PCE,
 1,1,1 -trichloroethane, methylene chloride, and
BTEX.  Pre-treatment sampling revealed
extensive contamination with total VOC
concentrations exceeding 800 mg/L in ground
 water and 1,000 mg/kg in soil. The  geology
 consists of fill and fine sand extending to
 approximately 10 ft bgs with an approximate
 hydraulic conductivity of 3.9 x 104cm/sec. A
 varved clayey  silt layer with an estimated
             hydraulic conductivity of 5.5xlO-5cm/sec exists
             at 10-30 feet bgs. Below the clayey silt is alayer
             of silty and very fine sand with an estimated
             hydraulic conductivity of 1.1 x 10^ cm/sec.

             The pilot was conducted in a 25-ft-diameter test
             cell with heating electrodes extending 40 ft bgs
             (Figure 3). The site was covered by a 40-by-40-ft
             cap consisting of a gravel vapor collection layer,
             a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane to protect
             thecap from chemical attack, 1.5-inch R-11 foam
             insulation to reduce heat loss to the surface,
             and a reinforced HOPE membrane for weather
             protection. Fourteen electrodes were used to
             deliver six-phase, 240-kW power into the
             subsurface. The electrodes were installed as
             six pairs in a hexagonal pattern. Each pan-
             consisted of a shallow electrode providing heat
             at 2-10 feet bgs and a deep electrode providing
             heat at 10-40 ft bgs. Two  neutral electrode
             were installed at similar depths in the center of
             the hexagon. All electrodes doubled as vapor
             extraction wells to capture the liberated
             subsurface contaminated vapors.

             The electrodes consisted of vertically slotted
             carbon steel piping with  graphite granules as
             conducting filter pack. Drop tubes were installed
                               [continued on page 5j

-------
 [continued from page 4]
 in the wells of each shallow electrode and
 connected to the vapor extraction system to
 "slurp" water and maintain a constant water
 level. In addition, electrolyte drip lines were
 installed in the filter pack to maintain adequate
 moisture for electrical conduction. Power was
 delivered to each deep electrode through a
 parallel connection from its paired shallow
 electrode. The shallow electrodes drew
 approximately 20 amps of current, while the deep
 ones drew approximately 250 amps.

 The vapor collection system consisted of 4-
 inch CPVC headers with 114-inch, high-
 temperature,  chemical-resistant  hose
 connections to each electrode. Emitted vapor
 was directed sequentially to an air-water
 separator, a plate-and-frame heat exchanger/
 condenser, a cyclone separator, three 8,000-lb
 vapor-phase carbon  vessels in series, and a
 regenerative vacuum blower. The total vapor
 flow rate was approximately 300 scfin; of this,
 approximately 70% was attributed to the
horizontal collection pipes located near the
perimeter of the hexagon, 20% to the shallow
 electrodes, and 10% to the deep electrodes (as
 apressure relief for the saturated zone). Treated
 vapors were discharged through a 15-ft stack.
 A total of approximately 48,000 pounds of
 granular activated carbon was used for vapor
 treatment during the pilot project.

 Fourthermocouple strings were installed inside
 and immediately outside the electrode array; the
 interior strings were placed equidistant from the
 electrodes, where heating was least effective.
 The thermocouples (nine  per string) were
 installed at 5-ft intervals to a depth of 45 feet
 Ground  temperatures  reached  steam
 temperatures at a depth of approximately 40 feet,
 and increased to 115°C at 35 feet After eight
 weeks of heating, temperatures in the target
 interval for the subsurface treatment zone
 achieved boiling temperatures. Measurements
 of ambient vapor concentrations using field
 instruments indicated no uncontrolled vapor
 emission from the electrode array throughout
 the pilot test operations.

 Overall, soil conducted electricity at levels
higher than anticipated, possibly due to the
presence of buried metal waste. Minor stray
electrical voltages  were observed  outside the

                 [continued on page 6]
                                                                                                  Contact Us
  Technology News and Trends
          is on the NET!

 View, download, subscribe, and
          unsubscribe at:

      http://www.epa. gov/tio
          httpy/cluin.org

    Technology News and Trends
   welcomes readers' comments
     and contributions. Address
        correspondence to:

            Ann Eleanor
    Technology Innovation Office
              (5102G)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Ariel Rios Building
     1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
       Washington, DC 20460
        Phone:703-603-7199
         Fax:703-603-9135

-------