United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA/540/S5-89/005
May 1990
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
Technology Demonstration
Summary
SITE Program Demonstration
Test, Soliditech, Inc.
Morganville, New Jersey
The major objective of the
Soliditech, Inc., SITE demonstration
was to develop reliable performance
and cost information about the
Soliditech solidification, stabilization
technology. The Soliditech process
mixes hazardous waste materials with
Portland cement or pozzolanic
material (such as fly ash), a
proprietary reagent called Urrichem,
proprietary additives, and water to aid
in the physical and chemical
immobilization of the hazardous
waste constituents. The demon-
stration took place at the site of a
former chemical processing and oil
reclamation facility in Morganville,
New Jersey. Site contamination
included petroleum hydrocarbons,
PCBs, other organic chemicals, and
heavy metals.
The technical criteria used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the
Soliditech process were contaminant
mobility based upon extraction,
leaching, and permeability tests; and
structural integrity of the solidified
material, based upon measurements
of physical properties.
Extensive sampling and analyses
indicated (1) a reduction of heavy
metals in the extract or ieachates of
the solidified waste samples, (2) no
volatile organic compounds in the
TCLP extract of the solidified waste,
(3) detectable levels of phenols and
cresols in the TCLP extract of the
solidified waste samples, (4) the
process is capable of solidifying
wastes containing moderate levels of
oil and grease, and (5) structural
stability in the solidified waste with
moderate volume increase.
This Summary was developed by
EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to
announce the key findings of this SITE
demonstration. These findings are
fully documented in two separate
reports (see ordering information at
back).
Introduction
In response to the Superlund
Amendments and Reauthonzation Act of
1986 (SARA), the EPA's Offices of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) and Research and
Development (ORD) have established a
formal program to accelerate the
development, demonstration, and use of
new or innovative technologies that offer
permanent, long-term cleanup solutions
for hazardous wastes. This new program
-------
is called Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation, or SITE.
The SITE program has four primary
goals:
• To identify and remove impediments
to the development and commercial
use of alternate technologies.
• To conduct a demonstration of the
more promising innovative
technologies to establish reliable
performance and cost information for
site characterization and cleanup
decision-making.
• To develop procedures and policies
that encourage the selection of
available alternative treatment
remedies at Superfund sites as well as
other waste sites and commercial
facilities.
• To structure a development program
that nurtures emerging technologies.
Soliditech, Inc., of Houston, Texas,
developed one such technology. The
Soliditech process involves mixing
hazardous wastes with pozzolanic
material or cement, proprietary additives,
water, and a proprietary reagent called
Urnchem. Soliditech claims that its
process aids in the chemical and
physical immobilization of the hazardous
waste constituents. The solidified product
is intended to have excellent unconfined
compressive strength (UCS), high
stability, and a rigid consistency similar
to that of concrete.
The Imperial Oil Company/Champion
Chemical Company Superfund site in
Morganvilie, New Jersey, was chosen for
the demonstration. Past activities at the
site include chemical processing and oil
reclamation. The chemicals of concern at
this site include metals, such as arsenic,
chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc,
as well as various organic chemicals
including polychlormated biphenyls
(PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons.
Contamination is present at the site at
many locations in soil, a waste filter cake
pile, and an abandoned storage tank, as
well as in the ground water. Samples of
contaminated material from the soil at
Off-Site Area One, the waste filter cake
pile, and the abandoned storage tank
were treated during the demonstration.
This SITE demonstration was
conducted to determine the following:
• The effectiveness of the technology to
solidify and stabilize waste materials
found at the site.
• The ability of the solidified materials to
maintain physical properties and
structural stability over a 5-year
period.
• The change in volume and density of
the solidified material after adding
cement, water, reagent, and other
additives.
• Reliable capital and operating costs
for use in the Superfund decision-
making process.
A SITE Demonstration Plan detailed all
sampling and analysis to be performed
during the Soliditech demonstration.
Analytical tests were performed on
samples of untreated as well as solidified
waste material collected during the
demonstration. The results were used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the
treatment process and the structural
properties of the resulting solidified
material. Soliditech personnel maintained
operating logs to determine the capital
and operating expenses associated with
the demonstration. Both Soliditech and
EPA personnel maintained field logs of
the volume and weight of all ingredients
for each test run, as well as the volume
and weight of all treated material.
Project documentation consists of two
reports. A Technology Evaluation Report
describes the field activities and
laboratory results. An Applications
Analysis Report interprets the data,
conclusions, and potential applications of
the technology.
Approach
During the demonstration, three types
of waste material - contaminated soil,
waste filter cake material, and oily
sludge - were collected and screened,
when necessary, prior to treatment.
Untreated waste samples were
collected for each test parameter from
each of these three waste materials.
These samples were analyzed for total
chemical constituents, physical
characteristics, and the amount of
solubles removed by non-destructive
leaching and destructive extraction
procedures. The results allow a direct
comparison of physical and chemical
properties between the treated and
untreated waste, and a determination of
effectiveness of the treatment process.
Each waste material, as well as a
control mix using clean sand, was treated
by a batch-mixing process after adding
the chemical reagents and additives,
water, and cement. Once thoroughly
mixed, the treated waste was discharged
from the mixer into large 1-cubic ya
plywood forms. Figure 1 depicts ;
overview of the Soliditech processii
equipment, and Figure 2 is an overvU
of the Soliditech demonstration
progress.
Numerous cylindrical samp
containers or forms, as required f
chemical and physical testing, were filli
with treated waste, sampled from tl
large forms, and allowed to cure for .
days. The final product was a monolith
material with measurable structur
strength. After curing, the small samp
cylinders were shipped to tf
laboratories for analysis. The plywo>
sides of the large 1-cubic yard forr
were removed and the resulting treat
waste monoliths were placed in
enclosed on-site storage area for Ion
term monitoring. Long-term studi
include a 6-month leaching te:
extraction procedures at various times
to 5 years after treatment, ai
petrographic observation and analys
These tests will help to assess the lor
term stability of the treated material
The control run, using clean sand, w
performed to ensure that the Solidite
reagents and additives were n
contributing to the contamination of ti
other samples, and to provide baseli
values for some of the physic
properties. These samples were analyz<
for chemical constituents, physic
characteristics, and the ability
withstand leaching/extraction.
The Soliditech Demonstration PL
included a Quality Assurance Proje
Plan that detailed quality assurance a
quality control procedures for tl
demonstration sampling and analy;
activities. U S. EPA performed both
field audit during the demonstration anc
laboratory audit to ensure that all qual
assurance and quality control procedur
were followed. The audits found that t
sampling activities and analytical di
met the goals prescribed in the qual
assurance plan.
Result
The analyses of the samples collect
before, during, and after the Solidite
demonstration are summarized in Tabl
1 and 2, and discussed below:
Untreated Waste - Untreated wa:
from the site consisted of contaminat
soil, filter cake, and a filter cake/c
sludge mixture. These wast
contained 2.8 to 17 percent oil a
grease, with relatively low levels
other organic compounds. PC
-------
Internal View of Mixer
Pozzolan Storage
Front End Loader
(Loading Contaminated Soil)
Urrichem
-e^a— ,-.
Figure 1. Overview of Solid/tech processing equipment.
(Aroclors 1242 and 1260) concen-
trations ranged from 28 to 43 mg/Kg;
arsenic concentrations from 14 to 94
mg/Kg; lead concentrations ranged
from 650 to 2,500 mg/Kg; and zinc
concentrations from 26 to 150 mg/Kg.
Treated Waste - The Soliditech
stabilization process produced
solidified waste with high structural
stability and low permeability. DCS
values ranged from 390 to 860 psi.
Permeability values ranged from 8.9 x
10-9 to 4.5 x 10-7 cm/sec. Because of
the cementitious additives in the
Soliditech process, pH values of the
solidified wastes ranged from 11.8 to
12.0. Arsenic concentrations ranged
from 28 to 92 mg/Kg; lead
concentrations from 480 to 850 mg/Kg;
zinc concentrations from 23 to 95
mg/Kg; and PCB (Aroclors 1242 and
1260) concentrations from
approximately 15 to 40 mg/Kg. Low
concentrations of phenol and p-cresol
were found in solidified filter cake and
filter cake/oily waste samples. These
compounds were not detected in the
untreated wastes.
Control Mixture - The control mixture
contained 20 mg/Kg lead. PCBs,
phenols, and cresols were not detected
in the control mixture. The reagents
used for the solidification could not be
analyzed for phenol, o-cresol, and p-
cresol because of the high alkalinity in
the control samples. Low levels (0.06
ng/L, total) of volatile organic
compounds were detected in the TCLP
extract of the control mixture.
Extract of Untreated Waste -
Arsenic, lead, and zinc were found in
EP, TCLP, and BET extracts of the
untreated wastes. No PCBs were
detected in any extracts of the
untreated wastes. Total concentrations
of up to 1.3 mg/L of volatile organic
compounds and up to 0.38 mg/L of
semivolatile organic compounds were
detected in the TCLP extract of the
untreated waste. Oil and grease
concentrations of 1.4 to 1.9 mg/L were
detected in the TCLP extract of the
untreated waste. Untreated wastes
could not be tested by ANS 16.1.
Extract of Treated Waste -
Significantly reduced amounts of
metals were detected in the TCLP, EP,
BET, ANS 16.1, and WILT extracts and
leachates of the treated waste. No
PCBs or volatile organic compounds
were detected in any extract of the
treated waste. Phenol, p-cresol, o-
cresol, and 2,4-dimethylphenol were
detected in the post-treatment TCLP
waste extracts. Oil and grease
concentrations of 2.4 to 12.0 mg/L were
detected in the TCLP extracts.
Summary
The SITE demonstration for the
Soliditech technology was performed on
three hazardous waste feedstocks as well
-------
Figure 2. Overview of the Soliditech demonstration in progress
Table 1. Physical Properties
Filter Cake
Filter Cake/Oily Sludge Mixture
Off-Site Area One
Bulk Density
(g/cm3)
Permeability
(cm/sec)
Unconfined
Compressive
Strength (psi)
Loss on Ignition (%)
Water Content
Untreated
1 14
NAb
NA
54
28.7
Treated3
1.43
453 x 10-?
390
41
21.0
Untreated
1.19
NA
NA
70
58 1
Treated3
1.68
8.93 x 10-9
860
34
147
Untreated
1.26
NA
NA
36
23.5
Treated3
59
3.41 x 10'8
680
34
12.6
aTreated waste sampled after a 28-day curing period.
bNA = Not analyzed.
as one control run of clean sand. The test approximately 3- to 7-cubic yards of
runs using hazardous waste produced solidified material from each of the three
waste types. Nearly 400 mold
cylindrical samples were collected foi
-------
Table 2. Chemical Properties
Filter Cake
Filter Cake/Oily Sludge Mixture
Off-Site Area One
Chemical
Parameter3
pH
VOCsd
SVOCs9
PCBsh
Oil and grease
Arsenic
Lead
Zinc
Untreated
Waste
3.4
NDe
ND
28
170,000
26
2,200
26
Treated
Wasteb
11.8
ND
36'
16
77,000
28
680
23
Leachate
from
Untreated
Waste0
46
0.27'
ND
ND
1.4
0.005
4.3
0.28
Leachate
from
Treated
Wastec
10.8
ND
1.2
ND
4.4
ND
0.002
ND
Untreated
Waste
3.6
50'
63'
43
130,000
14
2,500
150
Treated
Waste"
120
ND
17'
15
60,000
40
850
54
Leachate
from
Untreated
Wastec
4.8
1.3'
0.38
ND
1.6
0.014
5.4
1.3
Leachate
from
Treated
Wastec
11.6
ND
0.97'
ND
2.4
ND
0.014
ND
Untreated
Waste
7.9
10
79'
43
28,000
94
650
120
Treated
Wasteb
120
ND
16'
40
46,000
92
480
95
Leachate
from
Untreated
Wastec
5.1
087'
0.121
ND
1.9
0.19
0.55
0.63
Leachate
from
Treated
Wastec
11.5
ND
0.32'
ND
12
ND
0.012
ND
aAnalyte concentration units for the untreated and treated waste are mg/Kg. Analyte concentration units for the leachate from untreated and treated waste are mg/L.
bTreated wastes were sampled after a 28-day curing period.
cLeachate values refer to results from TCLP test.
dVOCs = volatile organic compounds.
eND = not detected.
'These values contain low levels of acetone, methylene chloride, various phthalates, or other analytes which are commonly attributed to sampling or analytical contamination.
sSVOCs = semivolatile organic compounds.
hPCBs = polychlonnated biphenyls.
-------
wide range of laboratory tests and
analyses. These tests allowed
comparisons of both chemical and
physical properties and contaminant
mobilities of the waste materials before
and after treatment. The following
observations were made
• Due to the treatment process, the
solidified wastes increased in volume
by a range of 0 to 60 percent (average
of 22 percent) The bulk density of the
waste material increased by
approximately 30 percent due to
solidification.
• The UCS of the solidified wastes
ranged from 390 to 850 psi.
• Weight loss due to 12 cycles of
wet/dry weathering of the solidified
waste was less than one percent of the
original weight.
• There was no measurable weight loss
of the solidified waste after 12 cycles
of freeze/thaw weathering.
• Permeabilities of treated waste ranged
from 8 9 x 10-9 to 4.5 x 10'7 cm/sec.
• Water content of the untreated waste
ranged from 24 to 58 percent; treated
waste contained 13 to 21 percent
water.
• The pH of the solidified waste ranged
from 11.8 to 12.0. The pH of the
untreated waste ranged from 3.4 to
7.9.
Chemical analyses of extracts from
TCLP, EP Toxicity, and BET
procedures showed that heavy metals
present in the untreated wastes were
immobilized by treatment.
Chemical analyses of leachates from
intact cast cylinders subjected to ANS
16.1 and WILT procedures showed
that heavy metals present in the
untreated wastes were immobilized by
treatment.
Oil and grease content of the
untreated waste ranged from 2.8 to 17
percent. Oil and grease content of the
solidified waste ranged from 4.6 to 7 7
percent. Oil and grease content of the
TCLP, EP Toxicity, and BET extracts
of both the untreated and treated
waste ranged from not detected to 26
mg/L. Oil and grease content of the
ANS 16.1 leachate from intact cast
cylinders ranged from not detected to
3 mg/L. Oil and grease content of
WILT leachates from intact cast
cylinders decreased substantially over
the first 8 leaching cycles.
Phenol, o-cresol, p-cresol, and 2,4-
dimethylphenol were detected in
TCLP extracts from treated waste at
concentrations of up to 06 mg/L
higher than in the TCLP extract from
the untreated waste.
A total concentration of 300 ng/L of
ethylbenzene, toluene, tnchlorethene,
and total xylenes was detected in th
TCLP extract of the untreated wast
samples. No volatile organi
compounds were found in the TCL
extract from the treated wast
samples. A total concentration c
toluene and total xylenes of 0.06 ng/
was detected in the TCLP extract fror
one of three replicate reagent mi
samples.
• PCBs were not detected in an
untreated or treated extracts o
leachates.
• Microstructural studies are ongoinc
however, visual observation of th
broken pieces of the solidified wast
show numerous dark inclusion
approximately 1 mm in diametei
these are judged to be the oil ani
grease component of the waste.
• Measurement of the exact weight am
volume of wastes treated was difficul
Variations of as much as plus or minu:
34 percent of the quantity of untreatei
waste material were found.
• Based upon data obtained fron
Soliditech as well as data collectei
during the demonstration, a cost o
approximately S150/ton was estimate*
for the treatment of 60,000 cubic yard;
of contaminated soil using thi
Soliditech process.
------- |