v>EPA
United States
Environmental  Protection
Agency
                                               INNOVATIVE
                                TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
                        Electrochemical Remediation Technologies (ECRTs)
Technology Deseription:The Electrochemical Remediation
Technologies (ECRTs) process was developed  by P2-Soil
Remediation, Inc. P-2 Soil Remediation, Inc. formed a part-
nership with Weiss Associates and ElectroPetroleum, Inc.
to apply the technology to contaminated sites. The ECRTs
process was evaluated for the treatment of marine  sedi-
ments contaminated with mercury, PAHs, and phenolic
compounds. The  demonstration of the ECRTs was con-
ducted at the Georgia Pacific, Inc.  (G-P) Log Pond located
along the Whatcom Waterway in Bellingham Bay, Belling-
ham, Washington.The G-P Log Pond pilot project consisted
of a demonstration of ECRTs, which utilizes a DC/AC cur-
rent passed between an  electrode pair (anode and  cath-
ode) placed in sediment. Remediation of the sediment was
to be accomplished by either the mineralization of organic
contaminants through  the ElectroChemicalGeoOxidation
(ECGO) process, or by use of the Induced  Complexation
(1C) process to complex, mobilize,  and  remove metal con-
taminants plated to the  electrodes. The  pilot study was
designed  to assess and evaluate the ability of  the ECRTs
process to reduce concentrations of  mercury, polyaro-
matic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and phenolic compounds in a
marine sediment.

The following information has been provided by the tech-
nology developer as descriptions of  the ECGO  and 1C
processes. The SITE program  has not substantiated any
claims made in these descriptions.
ElectroChemicalGeoOxidation—Using a low voltage, low
amperage proprietary coupled DC/AC current, an induced
polarization field is created within  the sediment.The sedi-
ment acts as a capacitor, discharging and charging electric-
ity resulting in redox reactions, which cause desorption of
the contaminants from the sediments  and mineralization
of the organics in the matrix. Empirical  evidence indicates
that reaction rates are inversely proportional to grain size,
such  that ECRTs remediate faster  in finer-grained materi-
als typically found at contaminated sediment  sites. The
sediment-pore water system can  be considered  an  elec-
trochemical cell. In an electrochemical cell, reactions only
occur at the electrodes and comprise anodic oxidation or
cathodic reduction. However, in sediment, in addition to
the local electrode reactions, redox reactions occur simul-
taneously  at any and all  interfaces within the sediment-
water-contaminant system at the pore  scale. The reaction
partners for oxidations and reductions are simultaneously
generated by water hydrolysis.

Empirical ECRTs field remediation data of rapid mineral-
ization of organic  contaminants including phenolic com-
pounds and PAHs (and enhanced mobilization rates for
metals) suggest that the secondary current released via
                      sediment electrical discharges provides the activation and
                      dissociation energy for the ensuing redox reactions. Ad-
                      ditionally, it is suspected that trace metals in the sediment
                      may act as catalysts,  reducing the activation energy re-
                      quired for the redox reactions. The quantification of these
                      energy releases remains to be completed. Since the redox
                      reactions are  occurring at the pore scale, the ECRTs system
                      pH is stabilized in the neutral  range.

                      Induced Complexation—Metals  remediation is achieved
                      when  redox reactions, created by the same low voltage/
                      amperage  current described  above, desorb the contami-
                      nants from the sediment and create ionic metal complexes
                      that are mobile. These mobile ions move readily to the
                      electrodes, are electrically contained by the induced direct
                      current, and are migrated to the electrodes where they are
                      chemically deposited.  Following  treatment, the electrodes
                      are removed  and disposed, or the metals deposited onto
                      the electrodes are recycled.

                      For this demonstration  project, Weiss Associates, (Em-
                      eryville, CA) installed, operated, and maintained the ECRTs
                      pilottest equipment at the Log Pond site.  Installation of the
                      pilot study infrastructure involved placing 9 anode (graph-
                      ite) and 9 cathode (8 steel and 1 graphite plate) electrodes,
                      in two rows, into the sediments.  Each electrode row (e.g.,
                      anode sheet  electrode line)  was approximately  30  feet
                      long. The distance between the anode and cathode sheet
                      electrode lines was approximately 30 feet.  Electricity was
                      supplied, in parallel, to each individual electrode plate.

                      Demonstration  Site Description: The G-P Log Pond  is a
                      marine embayment that served  as a former log  storage
                      and handling area and  receiving water for facility efflu-
                      ent and  stormwater runoff. The ECRTs project area  was
                      designated as an approximately 50-feet (ft) by 50-ft area
                      within a pre-characterized area of the G-P Log Pond known
                      to contain elevated concentrations of mercury, phenolics,
                      and PAHs.  However, based on results from a preliminary
                      survey, mercury was identified as the most ubiquitous and
                      consistently elevated contaminant relative to Washington
                      State Sediment Management Standards (SMS) Sediment
                      Quality Standards  (SQS) and Cleanup Screening  Levels
                      (CSL) which are used in Puget Sound  to assess contami-
                      nated sediments underWashington State law.

                      The actual  area for sample collection to evaluate the tech-
                      nology's effectiveness  was a 20-ft by 30-ft zone within the
                      electrode arrays. With the exception of the Port of Belling-
                      ham's  Shipping Terminal dock on the Whatcom Waterway
                      adjacent to the test plot, there were no structures within
                      the project area. The mudline elevations within the test plot
                      ranged from  approximately -4 to -8 feet Mean  Lower Low

-------
Water (MLLW).  Log Pond sediments with elevated chemi-
cal concentrations and woody debris measured approxi-
mately 5 to 6 ft thick between  underlying native material
and a cap of clean sand from regional maintenance dredg-
ing projects. The area was capped in late 2000 and early
2001  with clean capping material as part of a ModelToxics
Control Act (MTCA) interim  cleanup action. Cap thickness
within the sediment treatment demonstration area ranged
from 0.5 to 1 foot in thickness.
Demonstration  Results: The SITE demonstration of  the
ECRTs system was conducted from August 2002 (Baseline
Survey prior to installation) until March 2003 (Post-Demon-
stration Survey) in cooperation with the Washington State
Department of Ecology (Ecology). The performance of the
ECRTs process was evaluated by collecting sediment cores
from within and adjacent to the electrode array and from
'reference' stations located within the log pond but beyond
the influence of the ECRTs electrical field.  Intermediate
monitoring events were conducted in November 2002 and
December 2002  during the active  ECRTs demonstration
period.  A third monitoring event  scheduled for February
2003 was canceled due to system operational concerns.
The primary technical objective of  the demonstration was
to determine whether there was a  significant trend in  the
reduction of sediment mercury concentrations over the pe-
riod of the demonstration.  Reference area samples were
collected for comparison to determine whether treatment
differed from natural attenuation. The experimental design
was based upon the presence of a significant mercury re-
duction from the baseline sampling event relative to  the
post-treatment sampling event. The primary objective is
not  associated with a percent reduction but instead  the
primary objective is to determine a statistically significant
negative trend over time.  Samples of the cap material and
the underlying native material  were used  to evaluate  po-
tential migration of contaminants.
Sediment samples were collected from ten locations with-
in the test plot, five from the extended zone of influence
(adjacent to the test plot), and five remote reference loca-
tions. Samples were collected on four occasions including
a baseline survey prior to the demonstration, two interme-
diate monitoring events, and the final post-demonstration
event.  Six samples were collected from each sediment
core  including  three separate vertical composite samples
from the contaminated horizon (i.e. top, mid, and bottom
third of material between the cap and native material); one
                        composite over the length of the contaminated  horizon
                        (i.e. equivalent to compositing the three vertical samples
                        together); one cap sample; and one native material sam-
                        ple.  Select samples were either submitted for analysis of
                        mercury, PAHs, phenolic, and sediment conventionals (or-
                        ganic carbon, total solids, and grain size distribution), or
                        archived (frozen).
                        A statistical analysis  of the sediment chemistry results
                        indicate no significant trend in the reduction of sediment
                        mercury concentrations  over the period of the demon-
                        stration.  In addition, there was no trend in the reduction
                        of PAHs and  phenolic compounds. Performance  issues
                        may be  partially attributed to system operational  prob-
                        lems encountered during the course of the demonstration.
                        Electrical readings collected by the technology's sponsor
                        indicated a steady degradation  of system  performance
                        throughout the duration of the demonstration, resulting in
                        an early shutdown of the system prior to completion of the
                        planned test period. In addition, when the electrodes were
                        removed from the test plot, it was evident that the connec-
                        tions between the electrical supply  and anode plates had
                        completely corroded to the point that a viable contact had
                        not been maintained.   A more detailed discussion of the
                        technology and results are presented  in two companion
                        SITE documents: theTechnology Capsule and the Innova-
                        tive Technology Evaluation Report (ITER).
                        For Further Information:
                        EPA Project Manager
                        Randy Parker
                        U.S. EPA National Risk Management Research Laboratory
                        26W. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr.
                        Cincinnati, OH 45268
                        (513) 569-7271
                        E-mail: parker.randy@epa.gov
                        Technology Developer Contact
                        Kenneth Whittle
                        Electro-Petroleum, Inc.
                        996 Old Eagle School Road, Suite 1118
                        Wayne, PA 19087
                        Phone: (610) 687-9070
                        E-mail: Kwhittle@electropetroleum.com
                        Falk Doering
                        51, Burghaldenweg, D-70469
                        Stuttgart, Germany
                        Phone: 01149-711-859146
                        E-mail: stqt@ecp-int.com
        ssjj suuoiip psssaoojd
  jusjuoo jsqij jaij,snsuo3-;.sod %og
 j.o uinujiu[uj e suie^uoo )®m jaded
uo >jui pss'eq-8[qe:;sBsA LIJ.IAS peiuud
                                                                                  8Sfj
                                                     Z.QS/t'Q-yiAI/Qt'S/Vdi

                                                                 ooe$
                                                                }
                                                       ssauisng |

                                                  89Z9f HO 'li
                                                Ajoiejoqei ipj
                                            juaiua6eue[/\| >|siy |euoije[\|
    9C-O 'ON lll/\IH3d
          Vd3
  QIVdS33dS3OVlSOd
 QHVQNV1S Q31HOS3Hd
                        M9I4400 pi4EiH(9| 49ddn
  91)1 Uj SS94PPE 91)1 01 Uin\Si pUE '49AOO Sjl|l AdOO 40 'l|OEl9p
'• []3H3H XO3HO si.4od94 9S9U.I. 9W9094 01 usm lou op noA n


                            M9I4400 PI4EIHJ9|
     49ddn 91)1 14! SS94PPE 91)1 01 14411194 pUE 'AdOO 40 IJ.OEl.9p
    '|9qE| M0|9q 91)1 UO S96UEl|0 A4ESS909U ||E 9>|EU4 9SE9|d
Vd3'cx

-------