United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste and EPA/540/M-91/003 Emergency Response May 1991 Washington, DC 20460 Superfund SEPA Abstract Proceedings: Superfund Technical Support Project General Meeting December 1990 ------- EPA/540/M-91/003 May 1991 ABSTRACT PROCEEDINGS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROJECT GENERAL MEETING \ 8 ^hnical \ jupport . reject . Prepared for the Technology Innovation Office Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D., Director by Environmental Management Support, Inc. 1010 Wayne Avenue, Suite 200 Silver Spring, MD 20910 U.S. Environment^ Protection Agency Region b, Library (PL-'i'Y! 77 Wcs C h iSFj Printed on Recycled Paper ------- PREFACE This document contains abstracts of technical presentations given at the semiannual Technical Support Project meeting held at the Athens Environmental Research Laboratory on December 3-6,1990. The Technical Support Project, established by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response in 1987, provides technology-based assistance to Regional Remedial Project Managers and On-Scene Coordinators through Office of Research and Development laboratories. Walter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D. * Director, Technology Innovation Office ------- CONTENTS RCRA'S NEW GROUND-WATER MONITORING REGULATIONS 1 Vernon Myers and Jim Brown REMEDIAL RESPONSE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATING SYSTEM (RACES) 2 Gordon M. Evans THE DATA BASE ANALYZER AND PARAMETER ESTIMATOR (DBAPE) 3 Bob Carsel SUPERFUND TECHNICAL LIAISON PROGRAM 4 Jerry Carman CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF WELL TURBIDITY 5 Robert W. Puls CHARACTERIZING HETEROGENEOUS HAZARDOUS WASTES 7 Ken Brown SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION (SITE) PROGRAM 9 John F. Martin COMPUTER-AIDED ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SITES 11 Adrian A. Field, Elizabeth B. Spencer, Philip R. Cluxton, & Lawrence C. Murdoch REMEDY SCREENING 12 Eugene F. Harris NEW ENGINEERING FORUM ISSUE PAPERS 13 Ben Blaney ------- FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY (FT-IR) 14 Joe Arello METAL PARTITIONING FROM INCINERATION OF SOILS AND DEBRIS 15 J. Ivan Guzman TREATABILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM UPDATE 16 Ben Blaney DATA GAPS IN REMEDIAL DESIGN 17 John E. Moylan THE PRE-DESIGN TECHNICAL SUMMARY 18 Kenneth R. Skahn REMEDIAL DESIGN SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT 19 Thomas A. Whalen FATE CONSTANTS AND PATHWAY ANALYSIS 21 William T. Donaldson IDENTIFICATION OF NON-TARGET ANALYTES 22 William T. Donaldson DENSE NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUIDS 23 Scott Huling MINTEQA2 GEOCHEMICAL EQUILIBRIUM MODEL 24 David S. Brown, Jerry D. Allison and Kevin J. Novo-Gradac CORPS OF ENGINEERS LABORATORY SUPPORT TO EPA REGIONS 25 Richard L. Donovan SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION & MOBILIZATION PROCESSES (SCAMP) 26 Dick Scalf OVERVIEW OF ATHENS' MODELING CAPABILITIES 27 Bob Ambrose ------- PREDICTING CHEMICAL REACTIVITY BY COMPUTER 29 Sam Karickhoff RADIATION TECHNICALSUPPORTTO REGIONAL SUPERFUND PROGRAMS 30 Terence Grady DESIGN OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORKS 31 William Souza Alphabetical List of Presenters 32 ------- RCRA'S NEW GROUND-WATER MONITORING REGULATIONS Vernon Myers and Jim Brown This document revises the existing chapter on ground-water monitoring in "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846)." The revised chapter, which will be incorporated by reference into 40 CFR Part 264 (at §364.5) and 40 CFR Part 270 (at §270.6), specifies various requirements concerning the characterization of site hydrogeology, placement of detection monitoring wells, monitoring well design and construction, and sampling and analysis programs. The requirements are distinguished from the narrative body of the ground-water monitoring performance standards. These standards are expected to be proposed for public comment in the Federal Register in the Spring, 1991. ------- REMEDIAL RESPONSE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATING SYSTEM (RACES) Gordon M. Evans RACES (Version 1.43) is a personal computer-based cost estimation system currently under development by the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory. The goal of this project is to create a cost estimation tool to aid those engaged in remediation design work or involved with conducting cost comparisons of alternative treatment and control technology options. The system utilizes a series of independent technology modules which are tied together by a menu-driven shell. Users are first asked to select control and treatment technology options from a menu. Next, users are presented with a series of cost factors and are asked to assign appropriate levels for factors of concern. Finally, the user is asked to input design assumptions derived from the nature of their specific remediation problem. An underlying algorithm calculates the final cost of the system, offering the user a number of report options. After a brief overview of the system, the discussion focused on both the history and the future of this research effort. Forum members were told of a series of meetings held between EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Energy regarding cost estimation issues. The development of RACES during the past year has been heavily influenced by these discussions. The primary purpose of this presentation was to inform the members of the Engineering Forum of this project, and to invite their input into the development process. ------- THE DATA BASE ANALYZER AND PARAMETER ESTIMATOR (DBAPE) Bob Carsel The Data Base Analyzer and Parameter Estimator (DBAPE) is an interactive computer program that provides a link between two of EPA's development products—an environmental model and a data base. DBAPE was created to encourage and support the use of the RUSTIC model, a newly developed model that stimulates the transport of field-applied pesticides in the crop root zone, the unsaturated zone, and the saturated zone. DBAPE provides an efficient means to obtain soils and meteorologic data needed to run RUSTIC from a data base that contains information on over 8000 agricultural soils and 200 meteorologic stations located throughout the contiguous United States. Soils-related RUSTIC input that can be obtained by using DBAPE includes percent organic matter, wilting point, field capacity, residual water content, saturated hydraulic conductivity and values for the van Genuchten parameters for the soil-water characteristic function. Meteorologic data that can be obtained include precipitation, air temperature, pan evaporation, solar radiation, and wind speed. These meteorologic data are not distributed with DBAPE because of their volume. DBAPE, however, al lows the user to identify weather stations near his or her study sites. Meteorologic data for these stationsthen can be obtained from the EPA's Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, Georgia. DBAPE has utility not only as a support program to RUSTIC, but also as a stand-alone environment for (1) exploring the data base, (2) clarifying the impact of data on modeled processes, (3) screening geographically-based data to identify potential sites for model testing, and (4) developing initial guidance on alternative management strategies. To support these applications, DBAPE contains additional capabilities that are not exclusively related to supporting RUSTIC model usage. These include computation of functional relationships for soil water retention characteristics, and production of plots and maps. ------- SUPERFUND TECHNICAL LIAISON PROGRAM Jerry Carman An overview of the ORD-Superfund technical support effort and Regional relationship was provided. Currently, five major ORD laboratories are directly involved as Technical Support Centers. Most recently, the Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory (AREAL) in Research Triangle Park, NC, has become a subset of the EMSL-Las Vegas Center, to help provide support for air release monitoring and modeling needs. Regional staff can access AREAL through Ken Brown in Las Vegas. The existence of other "Forums", or cross-Regional networks that facilitate the distribution of technical information relevant to the Superfund program, wasdiscussed. These include the Toxics Integration Coordinators, who are tied in with the OERR Toxics Integrations Branch and Pei-Fung Hurst of ECAO-Cin and Bob Ambrose of Athens Lab, and the Air/Superfund Coord inators who are led by Joe Padgett of OAQPS. Ecology technical assistance is becoming more important and attempts are being made to formalize a similar network and cross-office coordination. The Superfund Technical Liaison Program now has three slots permanently filled, with anotherfourincumbents tentatively identified. Coordination between Forummembers and Technical Liaisons was discussed. The need for flexibility, since each Region is different, and of close cooperation, were highlighted. ------- CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF WELL TURBIDITY Robert W. Puls Causes of well turbidity include improper well development, poor well construction, aeration leading to oxidation and precipitation, and excessive pumping relative to local hydrogeological conditions. Research at three different metal-contaminated sites has addressed the latter cause of turbidity in numerous ground-water monitoring wells. Several different sampling devices were evaluated in wells (PVC) ranging in depths from 10 to 160 ft. Dissolved O2, pH, Eh, temperature, conductivity, and turbidity were monitored during well purging. Sampling was not initiated until all indicators had reached steady-state (usually 2-3 casing volumes). In all cases turbidity was slowest to reach steady-state values. Pumping rate was the single most important parameter affecting equilibrated turbidity values, although geology was also correlated to some extent. Samples were collected both unfiltered and using different filter pore sizes. Comparisons between the different sampling devices, which operated at different pumping rates or sample collection velocity, were based on particle concentrations and particle size, and differences in analytical concentrations of contaminants in the collected samples. Filtration was performed in the field using an in-line device and all samples were acidified to pH < 2 and analyzed using Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma (ICAP) and/or Atomic Absorption with Graphite Furnace (AAGF). In wells > 30 feet deep, a bladder pump (400-600 ml/min) was used most successfully, compared with two submersible pumps (3-4 L/min and 12-92 L/min). Greatest differences, both in terms of suspended particle size and concentration, were observed between the bladder pump and the high speed submersible pump. Greatest discrepancies in metal concentrations were also observed between these two devices. In the shallow wells (< 30 feet) a peristaltic pump was compared with dedicated bailers for sample collection. There were no significant differences in metal concentrations among the different filtered and unfiltered samples with the peristaltic pump (200-300 mL/min), whereas significant differences (< MCLs vs. > MCLs) were produced from the bailed samples. Equilibrated turbidity levels observed at thethree sites ranged from 1-58 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs), and in the case of one site turbidity differences were strongly ------- related to geology. Screened intervals with higher clay and silt contents had higher turbidity values. While many causes of well turbidity are artifaas of well construction and sample collection, there are indications that naturally high levels of turbidity may occur due to geology and geochemistry. ------- CHARACTERIZING HETEROGENEOUS HAZARDOUS WASTES Ken Brown A large proportion of the sites on the NPL contain one or more types of debris. These debrisdepositsposedifficultproblemsforthoseattemptingto characterize the site. The sampling problems include: • how to procure a representative sample from a mix of materials of various sizes and composition; • how to characterize the contamination of large items in a way that can be used for assessing risk; and • how to subsample from mixtures of large objects to produce small-volume samples required by analytical protocols The debris found on NPL sites may contain materials of many types and origins. These include municipal trash, demolition debris, waste construction materials, containers such as drums and paint cans, white goods, the solid wastes from manufacturing processes, the post-consumer wastes such as battery casings, transformers, and shredded automobiles. The materials present may be organic components like wood and food wastes; inert materials such as rock, glass, alluvium and concrete; metals; plastic, rubber and asbestos wastes. The NPL sites described in the ROD data base containing debris, solid waste, trash, or rubbish can be divided into four general types: • sites with diffuse contamination (5 sites were identified) • industrial plant sites (18 sites were identified) • waste recycling/reprocessing facilities (16 sites were identified) • dumps or landfills (92 sites were identified) A workshop titled "Characterizing Heterogeneous Hazardous Wastes" will be held to: • identify definitive state-of-the-science methods for characterizing heterogeneous materials contaminated with mixed wastes; and • set forth research recommendations for improving characterization techniques. ------- Groups addressing the following topics will be convened. • Defining applicable terms • Data needs and data quality objectives • Sampling and analysis approaches • Methods for sample acquisition and handling • Analytical laboratory requirements The workshop is sponsored by the U.S. EPA and the U.S. DOE. It will be held in Las Vegas, Nevada, in March 1991 and will result in a publication titled "Characterizing Heterogeneous Hazardous Wastes, Methods and Recommendations". ------- SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION (SITE) PROGRAM John F. Martin The SITE Program was initiated in response to the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) which added an "Alternative or Innovative Treatment Technology Research and Demonstration Program" to Title III of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The SITE Program is intended to accelerate the use of new and innovative treatment processes as well as evaluate innovative measurement and monitoring techniques. Within the SITE Program, the Demonstration Program and the Emerging Technology Program are responsible for innovative/alternative waste treatment technology development. Separate and parallel activities are progressing for development and evaluation of measuring and monitoring technologies as well as technology transfer operations. The goal of the SITE Program is to ensure, to the extent possible, that innovative and alternative technologies aredeveloped,demonstrated, and made commercially avail able for the permanent cleanup of Superfund sites. Through the Program, the Agency provides accurate and reliable performance, engineering, and cost data on these technologies to potential users. Fifty-six projects are now part of the Demonstration Program in which technology developers and EPA participate in joint ventures to operate and evaluate cleanup processes. Primary benefits to developers include: experience gained from operating a commercial, field-scale process at a Superfund site; acquisition of valuable regu latory background; increased public awareness of the technology and its capabilities; and documentation of the applicability of the process to cleanup of hazardous waste sites. In general, the Developer is required to operate the technology at a selected location while EPA is primarily responsible for development of a demonstration plan, for all sampling and analytical operations, and for all reporting and technology transfer activities. Demonstrations at Federal or State Superfund sites (remedial or removal action sites), EPA test facilities, or at Federal ly owned sites are encouraged. However, if such sites are not available or not applicable, a developer's facility or a private site ------- may be utilized. EPA is becoming increasingly flexible in the designation of appropriate sites as the Demonstration Program continues to evolve. The Emergi ngTechnologies Program, encompassing 31 projects, provides a framework for encouraging and testing pilot-scale technologies that have been proven at bench- scale but are not ready for field evaluation. Under this Program, EPA is able to provide funding to developers through a competitive cooperative agreement process to help support pilot-scale equipment development and testing. Cost sharing bythe technology developer is an important aspect of the cooperative agreement which is intended to foster the commercialization of additional technologies having application to the cleanup of hazardous waste sites. 10 ------- COMPUTER-AIDED ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SITES Adrian A. Field, Elizabeth B. Spencer, Philip R. Cluxton, and Lawrence C. Murdoch A computer workstation dedicated to characterizing and assessing remedial actions at uncontrolled hazardous waste sites has been developed. The IBM-PC compatible system is composed of several off-the-shelf software and hardware modules, with software development limited to the creation of utility programs used to transfer data from one software module to another. The component modules include a Geographic Information System, a Database Management System, a Computer-Aided Design and Drafting System, a Contouring System, a Volume and Mass Calculation System, and a Ground Water Modeling System. The computer system is intended to produce maps and cross-sections of the geology, hydrology, and distribution of contaminants from data obtained at boreholes. It is capable of calculating volumes or masses of contaminated material, as well as modeling ground-water flow and contaminant transport. These capabilities have been implemented and tested during case studiesof contaminated sites. The case studies include several Superfund sites and emergency response sites throughout the United States. 11 ------- REMEDY SCREENING Eugene F. Harris The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory in Cincinnati is preparing a remedy screening capability to assist the Regions in making adecision as to the appropriateness of the selection of a particular treatment technology for remedy selection studies. Remedy screening studies would be performed following site characterization. The purpose would be to determine whether a technology is potentially viable for a particular site. The results of the study would aid in the decision whether to proceed with a more definitive evaluation of a treatment technology. The data produced would identify major problems and provide a qualitative performance estimate. Remedy screening studies cannot be used as the sole basis for selecting a technology. Screening studies do not provide information on process design or cost; therefore, it is expected that a favorable report would result in a remedy selection study. The remedy selection study would determine whether a technology can meet clean-up goals, aid in the decision as to the inclusion of the technology in the ROD, provide a quantitative performance estimate, and rough cost data. The technologies for which a remedy screening capability is anticipated are: vacuum extraction, incineration, in situ vitrification, solvent extraction, biological, thermal desorption, APEC, stabilization, soil washing, soil flushing, and in situ steam extraction. Remedy screening would include preliminary evaluation of the site characteristics and sample analysis by the appropriate RREL Technology Teams, testing of the sample, and a report and recommendations to the RPM prepared by a contractor, the RRELTechnology Teams, and an RREL coordinator. An RREL coordinator would be assigned to work with the RPM to arrange for the remedy screening study. The remedy screening is expected to cost a fraction of that for remedy selection and would require two to three months. 12 ------- NEW ENGINEERING FORUM ISSUE PAPERS Ben Blaney The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) proposed that the following issue papers and major workshops be funded by the Technical Support Project in FY91: 1. "Workshop on Control of Dust and Vapor Emissions During Superfund Site Remediation" 2. "Soil Vapor Modeling Selection" 3. "Durability Testing and Specification for Stabilized Wastes" 4. "Workshop on Status and Applicability of In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Soils" 5. "Advantages and Disadvantages of In Situ (Non-Bio) Soils Treatment" 6. "Construction Quality Management Guidance" 13 ------- FOURIER TRANSFORM INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY (FT-IR) Joe Arello One of the major environmental concerns is the identification, location, and extent of volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination in the air and underground at hazardous waste sites. For years this has been accomplished by means of file searches, extensive soil sampling and analysis, and whole air sampling. However, with the development of open path (or long path) Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT- IR) technology, an alternate approach to VOC identification is now in use. The FT-IR spectrometer developed by Kansas State University though a cooperative agreement with EPA uses a Bomem DA02 system equipped with a KBr/Ge beam splitter, a mercury-cadmium-telluride detector and a collection telescope (10 inch Cassegrainian). The source of infrared energy is aquartz shielded Nernst glower which is located at the focal point of a 20 inch Newtonian telescope and generates a collimated beam of radiation. The source is located up to 1000 meters from the detector. The FT-IR determines the path average concentration of the VOCs in the measurement beam. The FT-IR system has been used to determine the ambient air concentration of VOCs atseveral locations includingtwoSuperfund sites. These included Hastings, Nebraska, where the objective was to identify those areas of greatest underground contamination. The other Superfund site was in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Here the objective was to monitor the downwind VOC concentration and concentrations exceeding action limits during remediation. 14 ------- METAL PARTITIONING FROM INCINERATION OF SOILS AND DEBRIS J. Ivan Guzman In an effort to help the Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) deal more effectively with the problem of metal partitioning relative to the incineration of contaminated soils and debris, a series of six case histories is being assembled that document the success and failures occurring from the thermal treatment of metal-contaminated soils. A review ofthe environmental problems associated with the incineration of metals-contaminated soils is being completed. Following that review, the task will continue with a review ofthe Record of Decision (ROD) data base in which sites proposing incineration for a metal-bearing soil are identified. The rationale for selecting incineration is being studied as well as any data available on laboratory or pilot scale experiments. Where relevant, a follow-up with the application of incineration to the full scale cleanup efforts is being conducted and the operation results compared with the expected results. As part ofthe scope of work for this project, a method for measuring the success of metals partitioning is being developed and used in all six case histories. Soil composition, metal concentration, TCLP measurements, and combustion conditions are factors used to elevate both the potential and actual success or failure ofthe thermal treatment. A detailed report of these case studies is being prepared and will be available soon. 15 ------- TREATABILITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM UPDATE Ben Blaney The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) provides both site-specific and technology transfer assistance to the Regional Superfund site remediation programs through the Technical Support Branch (TSB). In FY90 RREL expanded the assistance it provided in these areas. The Superfund Technical Assistance Response Team (START), which provides long term, site-specific engineering assistance on sites with complex remediation problems was handling 32 sites by the end of the fiscal year. The Laboratory's Technical Support Center, part of the OSWER Technical Support Project, provided short- term assistance to over 50 sites. In both programs, assistance included screening of treatment technologies, evaluation of treatability study needs and results, evaluation of remediation designs, and consultations on other engineering issues. Technology transfer is provided by the Laboratory in several ways. TSB produces technical documents on treatment technologies and other engineering problems. During FY90, the following types of documents were being produced. (The number in parentheses is the number of documents published or under production.) • Inventory of Treatability Study Vendors (1) • Guides for Conducting Treatability Studies (6) • Resource Documents on Remediation of Site Categories (2) • Engineering Bulletins (11) • Engineering Issue Papers (5) The Laboratory expanded its treatability data base to include data on treatment of soil and debris, as well as aqueous waste streams. The Laboratory provided training to mid-level RPMs on treatment technology selection through the Superfund University Training Institute (SUTI). In FY90, RREL presented the course for the first time. Finally, the Laboratory conducted or oversaw treatability screening, selection and design treatability studies for the Regional Offices. It was involved in approximately a dozen such efforts in FY90 and is setting up a screening-level treatability study laboratory to provide additional support in the future. 16 ------- DATA GAPS IN REMEDIAL DESIGN John E. Moylan In many instances, incomplete site characterization has been an impediment to the selection, design, and implementation of effective remediation of hazardous waste sites. The lack of adequate site data is probably the cause of more design delays and construction problems than are problems associated with the more high-tech remediation processes. Too often, our concept of site characterization is confined to definition of the nature and extent of chemical contamination and the basic characteristics of the groundwater flow system. Many other important site characteristics are ignored or are not defined soon enough to be of maximum benefit. This issue paper identifies common data deficiencies, types of data required for specific remediation features, examples of the consequences of having insufficient data, and suggestions as to when specifictypes of data are best obtained for particular remediation features. Large amounts of money and technical resources are being committed to data collection and site characterization. We must work toward optimizing site characterization in a cost effective manner. The paper also suggests how to recognize design data needs, means of evaluating the potential risks of data gaps, the importance of clear communication between all investigation and design specialists, and development of site characterization specialists capable of gathering the needed data and clearly reporting the information. Pre-ROD investigations should not be viewed as separate from post-ROD investigations if timely and cost effective remedy selection, RD, and RA are to be accomplished. 17 ------- THE PRE-DESIGN TECHNICAL SUMMARY Kenneth R. Skahn The Pre-Design Technical Summary (PDTS) is a compilation of available site information prepared by the Remedial Project Manager (RPM) to provide the designer with a clear understanding of the technical objectives of the remedial action. Guidance is being developed by the Design and Construction Branch on preparation of the PDTS. This paper will provide a summary of that guidance. The objective of developing a PDTS is to provide a smooth transition from the Record of Decision (ROD) into the design process. The preparation and use of the PDTS should ensure that the designer will understand the technical objectives of the design as well as provide the designer with an up-to-date inventory of all available information that may be pertinent to the design. The PDTS will serve the RPM as the initial building block for developing a comprehensive statement of work for the remedial design. At a minimum the PDTS should accomplish the following: • define initial site conditions • describe the selected remedy • identify applicable regulatory requirements • summarize available data and identify possible additional data needs • state all known unresolved issues The Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and ROD will be the sources for most of the information to be summarized or referenced in the PDTS. However, the guidance will identify a great deal of additional site-specific information that may be known to the RPM and is not included in the RI/FS or ROD. 18 ------- REMEDIAL DESIGN SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT Thomas A. Whalen Successful management of a remedial design dependson the performance of responsible and qualified architectural or engineering firms, the maintenance of schedules and budgets, and the rapid resolution of problems. Techniques for establishing good design management include requirements that a schedule be agreed to between the contracting party and the designer, that the schedule be reviewed and updated monthly, and that enforcement of the schedule by the contracting party be maintained. Of course, the schedule must be reasonable, must establish obtainable goals, must contain sufficient detail to permit task control, and must be based upon a complete scope of work. There are many reasons for maintenance of a schedule. The schedule is a tool used to discuss the design contract between the contracting parties and is also the principal tool for exacting control of contract progress. The schedule also is the basic documentary and analytical tool for negotiation and settlement of requests for equitable adjustments, claims and disputes, as well as for contract termination and closeout. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development of generic Remedial Design Schedules. The schedules are to be used as tools to assist all parties involved in the development of Remedial Design Schedules. Initially, a schedule methodology and computer software package were selected that were appropriate to Remedial Design scheduling. The critical-path-method (CPM) of scheduling was selected because of the ability to track and display the numerous interrelated activities which comprise the Remedial Design. Using the draft Standard Remedial Design tasks, an activity list was developed in sufficient detail to estimate activity durations and define activity interrelationships. Then, using the computer software, a single, time-phased logic was produced which served as a template for the development of the remedy-specificgenericRD schedules. 19 ------- In parallel with the development of the template, data and other information were reviewed to determine the universe of technologies being considered for remediation of NPL sites. Further brainstorming resulted in the selection of nine remediation categories which encompass the universe of technologies and which were used to develop the remedy-specific RD schedules. A remedy-specific generic RD schedule was developed for each of the nine categories by using a team of experts to estimate the individual activity durations and their interrelationships. Task activity durations are sensitive to individual site characteristics, the design complexity, and the needs of the owner. Therefore, it is important that site specific RD schedules be developed that reflect these sensitivities and emphasize the need for communication throughout the progress of the design. The remedy-specific schedules are generic in nature and have been developed with the objective of demonstrating management approaches to reducing the overall remedial design duration. They present reasonable approximations of the interrelationships of those activities required to successfully complete a remedial design. The schedules and level of effort (LOE) estimates are intended for training purposes only and should not be used to develop site-specific schedules. The schedules and LOE estimates used by the party contracting for design must reflect their own experience with similar projects. 20 ------- FATE CONSTANTS AND PATHWAY ANALYSIS William T. Donaldson As many as fourteen environmental fate constants (such as second-order hydrolysis rate constants or Henry's Law constants) may be required in the application of mathematical models to predict potential exposure in making risk assessments. Unfortunately, many of the needed constants are sparse in the literature, and those found in the literature have been shown to be of questionable reliability. Laboratory measurement of fate constants is slow and prohibitively expensive. Few scientists are adept at making reliable measurements. Some constants can be computed, but traditional computation methods are of limited applicability and require extensive measured data for making empirical comparisons. The Transformation Pathway Analysis Team at the Athens Environmental Research Laboratory (AERL) will, on request, assemble the best available knowledge to postulate transformation products and provide transformation and equilibrium constants. The team applies expertise of the Laboratory's best scientists in postulating pathways. Available literature data for fate constants are screened for reliability. Applicable computation techniques are used to provide other constants. In some cases laboratory measurements can be made if warranted. AERL iseagerto help Superfund site managers who need fate constants or need to know the identities of transformation products. For more information call Heinz Kollig at AERL, FTS-250-3770 or 404-546-3770. 21 ------- IDENTIFICATION OF NON-TARGET ANALYTES William T. Donaldson Although there are over 10 million chemicals listed in the Chemical Abstracts Services Registry and about 70 thousand in EPA's Office of Toxic Substances Inventory of Manufactured Chemicals, only 234 chemicals are on the Superfund target analyte list. Typically, if 50 compounds are at high enough concentration to be detected in a Superfund site leachate, only two or three of them will be among the target analytes; the others may be any of a wide array of chemicals of unknown significance, until they are identified. Recent studies atthe Athens Environmental Research Laboratory (AERL) have shown that the contract laboratories' tentative identifications of non-target analytes electron impact mass spectra, may be less than 10% reliable, because the mass spectra are not unique. This is understandable when one considers the vast number of possible compounds present at detectable concentrations. As long as sufficient information is available to effect clean-up of a Superfund site, the identity of what was removed from the site may not be important. But in post closure monitoring and remediation, knowledge of the contaminants in leachates and groundwater could be essential. The Athens Laboratory identifies non-target analytes with a high degree of confidence by applying multispectral identification techniques. In addition to the low resolution electron impact mass spectra, the AERL multispectral identification team develops additional spectroscopic information, which is pieced togetherto identify the unknown compounds. High resolution chemical ionization mass spectra tell the analysts the precise number of atoms of each chemical in the compound types, such as aldehydes or ketones. For example in one recent study, the AERL team identified 63 of 70 non- target compounds in industrial wastewater samples. AERL is eager to help Superfund site managers who need to know the identities of potentially important compounds. For more information, call John McGuire at AERL on FTS-250-3185 or 404-546-3185. 22 ------- DENSE NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUIDS Scott Huling Dense non-aqueous phase I iquids (DN APL) are an issue that has been identified by the EPA Ground Water Forum Members as a significant concern to EPA Superfund decision-makers. Therefore, a comprehensive literature evaluation has been conducted to develop a state-of-the-science issue paper on this subject. Currently, the issue paper is in peer review. Initial peer review comments have been reviewed and the final issue paper is due out in January, 1991. In brief, DNAPL is a general term used to describe a hydrocarbon liquid with a specific gravity greater than 1.0. DNAPL's are responsible for both groundwater and soils contamination and also present complex site characterization and remediation problems when introduced into the subsurface. The literature evaluation mainly focuses on fate and transport of DNAPL from a conceptual point of view in both the unsaturated and saturated zones and on phase distribution of DNAPL in the subsurface. Important transport and fate parameters include: the DNAPL characteristics (density, viscosity, interfacial tension, wetting angle, solubility, vapor pressure, volatility); the subsurface media characteristics (capillary pressure, pore size distribution, initial moisture content, stratigraphic gradient, ground water flow velocity); the saturation dependent characteristics (residual saturation, relative permeability); site characterization (soil gas analysis, exploratory borings, geophysical techniques, well level measurements, sampling); and remediation (pumping, trench-drainline, vacuum extraction, biodegradation, soil flushing, physical barriers). For more information, contact Scott Huling at FTS 743-2313 or (405) 332-8800. 23 ------- MINTEQA2 GEOCHEMICAL EQUILIBRIUM MODEL David S. Brown, Jerry D. Allison and Kevin J. Novo-Gradac The geochemical equilibrium model MINTEQA2 was described and three applications of the model to contaminated soil and groundwater problems were discussed to illustrate its utility in addressing current environmental problems. Application examples included a generic approach for estimating transport of As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Hg, Se, Ni, Tl and Pb leachates from Subtitle D land disposal sites, use of MINTEQA2 in concert with a biokinetic model (UBK) for estimating the uptake/bioavailability of ingested lead in the human gastrointestinal tract, and the use of MINTEQA2 in concert with a multimedia transport code (MULTIMED) to calculate clean-up standards for soils. Elementary model theory and program flowcharts were presented to acquaint the attendees with the type of input data required by MINTEQA2 and with the integration of the model with field sampling activities at field sites. Several examples illustrating the use PRODEFA2 to set up problems and create input files for MINTEQA2 were demonstrated with hands-on participation by the attendees. Examples included the calculation of equilibrium pH in a system of known initial pH to which a measured amount of solid was added, the speciation of cadmium in a reducing groundwater system, and a pH titration of a soil system containing lead. MINTEQA2 distribution, support, and a bulletin board system based at the Athens Environmental Research Laboratory's Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling were discussed and attendees were given the opportunity to request copies of the code and join the user group. 24 ------- CORPS OF ENGINEERS LABORATORY SUPPORT TO EPA REGIONS Richard L. Donovan The U.S. Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Laboratory system consists of R&D and production laboratories. The R&D laboratories are located in the Directorate of Research and Development, while the production laboratories are located within geographical USAGE Division boundaries. With respect to EPA regional boundaries, these laboratories are located in: Region I (Waltham, MA), Region IV (Marietta, GA), Region V (Cincinnati, OH), Region VI (Dallas, TX), Region VII (Omaha, NE), Region IX (Sausalito, CA), and Region X (Troutdale, OR). These laboratories currently provide environmental chemistry testing in support of Superfund and DERP activities. In addition, they offer full service capability for soils and construction materials, includingtestson samplescontaininghazardoussubstances. These laboratories provide consulting services in addition to laboratory testing programs, Quality Assurance reviews of laboratory data, and commercial laboratory inspections. These services are available to the EPA Regions through the existing EPA-USACE Memorandum of Understand ing for Superfund support. For questions about specifics, contact Rick Donovan, USAGE Missouri River Division Office, at (402) 221-7340. 25 ------- SUBSURFACE CHARACTERIZATION AND MOBILIZATION PROCESSES (SCAMP) Dick Scalf The successful application of pump-and-treat technology in site remediation requires an understanding of site characterization methods and the processes controlling contaminant transport and mobilization in the subsurface. Poor understanding of these processes and inadequate site characterization are the most common reasons that pump and treat does not perform as a cost-effective, permanent remedy. This does not mean that pump and treat should be abandoned, but that a research program should be carried out to significantly improve its efficacy, and current guidelines for the implementation of this technology should be reexamined with new recommendations for its use. The overall objective of the research is to acquire process and characterization information that will allow development of a decision-makingframework for predicting the appropriateness and potential efficacy of "pump and treat" for site remediation. This research will support the goals of the Superfund and RCRA programs by providing information necessary to improve remedial actions at hazardous waste sites. The effort will consist of seven phases or activities: (1) consolidation of existing information, and development of a 5-year plan for research and development projects and outputs; (2) development of improved methods for site characterization; (3) re- search on immiscible fluid flow and residual saturation, and their effects on pump and treat methods; (4) research on mass transport in heterogeneous media, and its effects on pump and treat methods; (5) research on contaminant sorption to geologic materials, and its effect on pump and treat methods; (6) research and development of accelerated remediation methods, such as combination of pump and treat with use of surfactants or microorganisms; and (7) technical assistance and technology transfer to Superfund personnel. 26 ------- OVERVIEW OF ATM ENS' MODELING CAPABILITIES Bob Ambrose The Exposure and Ecorisk Assessment Tech Support Center atthe Athens Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL-Athens) supports multimedia exposure and risk assessment modeling of remedial action alternatives at Superfund sites. Its duties are incorporated with those of the Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling (CEAM) to provide focused technical assistance to OSWER and Regional Superfund staff. Center Director, Bob Ambrose, directs technical assistance requests to Center staff, other scientists and engineers in the lab, and technical staff from two on-site contractors. Expertise includes: soil contaminant interactions; sediment and contaminant transport; exposure and physiologic effects; metals speciation; bioremediation; contaminant transport and fate modeling in surface water, soil, and ground water; environmental risk assessment; and software engineering. The Center provides technical tools (databases and computer models) for remedial assessments, technical support, and demonstrations. The Center maintains several si mu lation models for conducting multimedia exposure assessment related to remedial actions. Among the most familiar: • MINTEQA2, a metals speciation model • PRZM, a soil pollutant transport model • RUSTIC, a soil and ground water simulation model, with an associated soil and meteorological database (DBAPE) • MULTIMED, a simple multimedia screening model for air, soil, and ground water Models are distributed via disk, tape, or over the CEAM electronic bulletin board. Technical support activities help EPA Regional and Program Office staff and contractors to properly use and interpret the models. General guidance is offered to users by telephone, through guidance manuals, and in special Superfund workshops. Technical assistance includesdiscussion of applicable modelsand data bases, limitations inanalysis 27 ------- technology, and proper ways to use models given limitations and uncertainties. The Athens Center assists EPAstaff and their contractors in assessing chemical transport and fate in surface water, soils, and ground water; organic chemical transformation and metal speciation reactions; and human exposure and ecological risks associated with site remediation. Over the past three years, the Center has provided assistance at 47 sites in 9 Regions. Eight workshops focusing on exposure assessment models have been presented during the past three years at the ERL-Athens training facility. Technical demonstration projects supplement routine studies for particular sites and promote advanced analyses at similar sites. As such, they can be viewed as extended technical assistance projects. Five demonstration projects have been completed over the past three years, and three are currently in progress. 28 ------- PREDICTING CHEMICAL REACTIVITY BY COMPUTER Sam Karickhoff Mathematical models for predicting the fate of pollutants in the environment require reactivity parameter values—that is, the physical and chemical constants that govern reactivity. Although empirical structure-activity relationships have been developed that allow estimation of some constants, such relationships generally hold only with limited families of chemicals. Computer programs are under development that predict chemical reactivity strictly from molecular structure for a broad range of molecular structures. A prototype computer system called SPARC (SPARC Performs Automated Reasoning in Chemistry) uses computational algorithms based on fundamental chemical structure theory to estimate a variety of reactivity parameters (e.g., equilibrium/rate constants, UV-Visible absorption spectra, etc.). This capability crosses chemical family boundaries to cover a broad range of organic compounds. SPARC does not do "first principles" computation, but seeks to analyze chemical structure relative to a specific reactivity question in much the same manner in which an expert chemist would do so. Molecular structures are broken into functional units with known intrinsic reactivity. This intrinsic behavior is modified for a specific molecule in question using mechanistic perturbation models. To date, computational procedures have been developed for UV-Visible light absorption spectra, ionization pKa, hydrolysis rate constant, and numerous physical properties. 29 ------- RADIATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO REGIONAL SUPERFUND PROGRAMS Terence Grady The Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division of the Environmental Monitoring System Laboratory in Las Vegas (EMSL-LV) has for the past 35 years operated an environmental radiation surveillance network in support of the nation's nuclear testing program. EMSL-LV'sexperience operating surveillance networks for air, milk, water, and human exposure has positioned it well to provide technical support to Regional Superfund programs through the EMSL-LV Technical Support Center. EMSL-LV has provided technical support to the Superfund Program in the area of sampling, analysis, exposure assessment, radiation quality assurance, and radiological emergency response. Consultation is also provided for analytical method selection, data review/validation, and laboratory performance. 30 ------- DESIGN OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORKS William Souza The Environmental Systems Monitoring Laboratory in Las Vegas started new research this fiscal year in the area of network design. Although the program is called network design, the scope of research goes beyond just the focus of network design and into areas of data analysisand interpretation, particularly inthefieldofscientificvisualization and the interpretation of complex data. In the sense that it is used here, network design isthe field of subsurface monitoringthatquantifies the processofselectingthe time and place to measure various properties of ground water. The basic approach in this program will be to develop advanced techniques, in some cases improve existing techniques, but use all available techniques, conceptual models, analytical models, as well as numerical models, and geostatistics, then combine them when appropriate, and package them as usable hydrologictools. The focus of the project is on quantifying the network design process. The basic goal is to develop a set of hydrologic tools for designing monitoring networks in a variety of geologic settings, particularly complex settings and heterogenous aquifers. EMSL-LV has initially funded three researchers through cooperative agreements: (1) Peter Kitanitis at Stamford University who is developing geostatistical computer programs to aid in the evaluation of data requirements and the design of hydrologic monitoring strategies. (2) Albert Valocci at the University of Illinois who is developing stochastic and optimization modes for siting monitoring wells, evaluating monitoring networks maximizing the probability of detection of a groundwater contaminant. (3) Stephen Wheatcraft of the Desert Research Institute who is working on descriptive models of complex hydrogeologic regimes using fractal analysis to better describe and understand natural phenomena such as the pattern of contaminant transport. 31 ------- PRESENTERS Bob Ambrose EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-250-3130 404-546-3130 Joe Arello EPA, Region VII FTS-757-2884 913-236-3881 Ben Blaney EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory FTS-684-7406 513-569-7406 David Brown EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-250-3546 404-546-3546 Ken Brown EPA, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory FTS-545-2270 702-798-2270 Jim Brown EPA, Off ice of Sol id Waste FTS-475-7240 202-475-7240 Bob Carsel EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-250-3476 404-546-3476 William Donaldson EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-250-3183 404-546-3183 32 ------- Richard Donovan U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FTS-864-7340 402-221-7340 Gordon Evans EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory FTS-684-7684 513-569-7684 Adrian Field University of Cincinnati 513-569-7865 Jerry Carman EPA, Office of Technology Transfer and Regulatory Support FTS-382-7667 202-382-7667 Terence Grady EPA, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory—Las Vegas FTS-545-2136 702-798-2136 J. Ivan Guzman EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory FTS-684-7642 513-569-7642 Eugene Harris EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory FTS-684-7862 513-569-7862 Scott Huling EPA, R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-743-2313 405-332-2313 Sam Karickhoff EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-250-0357 404-542-0357 John Martin EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory FTS-684-7758 513-569-7758 33 ------- John Moylan U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FTS-867-3455 816-426-3455 Vernon Myers EPA, Office of Sol id Waste FTS-382-4685 202-382-4685 Robert Puls EPA, R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-743-2262 405-332-2262 Dick Scalf EPA, R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory FTS-743-2212 405-332-2212 Kenneth Skahn EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response FTS-398-8352 703-308-8352 William Souza EPA, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory—Las Vegas FTS-545-3162 702-798-3162 Thomas Whalen EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response FTS-398-8345 703-308-8345 Abstracts are not included for presentations by: Alison Barry, EPA, Office of Remedial Response Terry Allison & Gerry Laniak, EPA, Athens Environmental Research Laboratory 34 ------- |