United States
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
             Office of
             Solid Waste and
             Emergency Response
Office of Program
Management and Technology
Washington DC 20460
             Superfund
             EPA/540/2-88/003
vvEPA
Assessment of
International
Technologies for
Superfund
Applications
September 1988

-------
                                      EPA/540/2-88/003
                                       September 1988
   Assessment of International

   Technologies  for Superfund

             Applications

Technology Review and Trip Report Results
                     by
                Thomas J. Nunno
                Jennifer A. Hyman
           Alliance Technologies Corporation
                Bedford MA 01730
                 Task Manager
               Thomas H. Pheiffer
      Office of Program Management and Technology
      Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Cincinnati, Ohio 45268

-------
                                     Disclaimer
This Final Report was furnished to the  Environmental Protection Agency by Alliance
Technologies Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts 01730, in fulfillment of  Contract No.
68-03-3243,  Work  Assignment No. 2-16.  The opinions, findings,  and conclusions
expressed are  those  of the authors and not  necessarily those  of the Environmental
Protection Agency or the cooperating  agencies.  Mention  of  company or product
names is not to be considered as  an endorsement by  the Environmental Protection
Agency.

-------
                                        Contents
Figures  	   iv
Tables  	   v
Acknowledgments  	   vi

    Introduction    	   1
       General  Approach	   1
       Overview of Site Remediation Programs in Holland, Belgium, and
           Federal Republic of Germany	   1
             Holland (The Netherlands)  	   1
             Belgium   	   2
             The Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany and West Berlin)   	   2
    Summary of Results  	   3
         Soil Washing Equipment Findings  	   3
         High Temperature Slagging Incineration (HTSI)   	   5
         Other Unique Applications of Site Remediation Technologies   	   5
    Conclusions and Recommendations	   7

Appendices

    A.  Research of Electrochemical Treatment of Organohalogens
           in Process Wastewater at TNO  	   9
    B.  Research on Decontamination of Polluted Soils and
           Dredging Sludges in Bioreactor Systems at TNO  	   11
    C.  In Situ Biorestoration of Contaminated Soil Research at RIVM  	   13
    D.  Heijmans Soil Washing Operation   	   17
    E.  In Situ Cadmium Removal and  Onsite Treatment by Ion Exchange  	   19
    F.  Rotating Biocontactor for Ground Water Pretreatment of Pesticide Contamination  	   21
    G.  HWZ Soil Washing Operation	   25
    H.  Heidemij Soil Washing Using Froth Flotation    	   29
    I.   High-Temperature Slagging Incineration  (HTSI)   	   33
    J.  In Situ Vacuum Extraction and Air  Stripping of Volatile Organic Compounds  	   37
    K.  Harbauer Soil Washing Using Low Frequency Vibration  	   41
    L.  Soil Washing Using the Oil CREP  System   	   45
    M.  Biological Remediation of Soil Using the ECO-PLUS Biosystem    	   49

-------
                                          Figures


Number                                                                                 Page
 1    The Assessment of international technologies for Superfund
         applications program structure	    1
A-1   Diagram of the apparatus for electrochemical treatment of
         organohalogens	    10
A-2   Mole fraction of the phenols during electrolysis of 2 L of
         50 ppm PCP solution (10A)	    10
C-1   Infiltration, withdrawal and treatment setup proposed by
         RIVM for the Asten site	    13
C-2   Biodegradation of gasoline  measured as CO2-production
         (mg C/kg)	    14
D-1   Process scheme of the installation of Heijmans Milieutechmek B.V	    18
E-1   Cross-section of the infiltration and withdrawal system
         installed by TAUW for Cd leaching	    20
E-2   Scheme of the TAUW water treatment plant for ion exchange of Cd  	    20
F-1   Sketch of the TAUW ground  water treatment installation near
         Utrecht	    22
F-2   Loading and efficiency over time of the TAUW rotating
         biocontactor installation	    23
G-1   HWZ  soil treatment scheme	    27
H-1   Two diagrams  showing the Heidemij method of in situ
         steam stripping	    30
H-2   An artist's rendering of a typical  Cum-Bac installation
         by Heidemij	    31
1-1    Schematic of HTSI incineration process	    34
I-2    Purification action of the molten film in the HTSI combustion
         chamber	    35
J-1   Vacuum extraction of volatile organics in the vadose zone by HUT	    38
J-2   Volatilization of organics in ground water by pulsing with compressed air	    39
J-3   Performance and range of  an HUT vacuum extraction installation	    40
J-4   Soil gas hydrocarbon concentration over time with HUT
         in situ vacuum extraction and air stripping	    40
K-1   Flow schematic of the Harbauer soil washing installation	    42
L-1   The Oil CREP  System SSC-20A	    46
L-2   An illustration of the residual  oil contents related to
         Oil-CREP I injection in  recent test trials	    47
                                              IV

-------
                                          Tables


Number                                                                                Page

 1    Dutch Reference Levels Used for the Judgement of Soil Contamination   	   2
 2    Soil Washing Installations Visited by the Alliance/EPA
          Field Team in March 1988 in the Netherlands and the
          Federal Republic of Germany	   4
 3    Incineration Installation Visited by the Alliance/EPA
          Field Team in March 1988 in Belgium  	   5
 4    Site Remediation Techniques (Other Than Soil Washing)
          Visited by the Alliance/EPA Field Team in March 1988
          in the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany    	   6
A-1   Results of Electrochemical Reduction of Three Organohalogens
          Tested at TNO    	   10
B-1   Some Results from  the TNO Bioreactor System (Batch Process)  	   11
D-1   Results of Soil Cleanings Performed by Heijmans
          Milieutechnick B.V	   18
F-1   Results of Water Treatment by the TAUW Biocontactor  	   21
G-1   Typical Removal Efficiencies for the HWZ Soil Cleaning
          Technique   	   26
H-1   Results of Laboratory and Pilot-Scale Studies Using the
          Heidemij Froth Flotation Soil Cleaning  Method 	   29
1-1    Experimental Test Results of PCB Incineration in the HTSI  	   35
K-1   Performance of  the  Harbauer Soil Washing System on Sandy Soil  	   43
K-2   Performance of  the  Harbauer Soil Washing System on Soils
          With High Clay  Content  	   43
L-1   Performance of  the  Oil CREP System SSC-20A   	   47
L-2   Performance of  the  Oil CREP System SSC-20A on Four Different Samples    	   47
M-1   Results of an EGO-PLUS Biosystem Open Bed Installation at a
          Mineral Oil-Contaminated Storage Tank Facility in Altlast    	   50
M-2   Results of an ECO-PLUS Biosystem Open Bed Installation
          at the Diesel Oil-Contaminated FEA Department Grounds in Wedelt    	   50

-------
                            Acknowledgments
This project was sponsored  by  Mr.  Thomas  Devine, Director  of  EPA's Office  of
Program Management and Technology. The authors wish to express their appreciation
for the efforts of  Mr. Thomas Pheiffer of that office, for his participation in the Phase II
field team and support throughout the project.

The authors  acknowledge  the  cooperation  of all  the  EPA research  laboratory,
enforcement, and regional personnel, who contributed to the Phase I document.  The
authors also wish to thank Ms. Margaret Brown Nels of Berlin, FRG, and all the foreign
researchers and cleanup firm contacts who contributed to the Phase II field efforts.
                                       VI

-------
                                           Introduction
The purpose of this  program was to identify  and
assess international  technologies  applicable to
hazardous waste  site  remediation  in  the  United
States.  As shown in  Figure 1,  the  program  was
conducted  in two phases: 1) Phase  I - Technology
Identification  and  Selection;  and  2)  Phase  II  -
Technology Review.  This  report  summarizes the
results  of  Phase  II  of this  program,  a  thorough
investigation  of  the  most  promising  technologies
identified by Phase I efforts.

Figure 1. Program structure - The assessment of international
        technologies for Superfund applications.
                     Phase I
         Technology Identification and Selection
        • 4 Months
        • 95 Technologies
        • 15 Selected for Phase II
        • Phase I - Final Report - March 30, 1988
                     Phase II
          Technology Review and Site Visits
        • 2 Weeks
        • 15 Technologies Reviewed
        • Phase II - Final Report - May 30, 1988
General Approach

The  in-depth investigation  of  the  most  promising
technologies was  accomplished  by interviewing
scientists and engineers who are researching or are
knowledgeable  of  each  technology.  Laboratories,
facilities and site installations  were toured.  These
meetings were scheduled by Alliance or organized by
the coordinators of treatment technology research in
each country. These prominent coordinators include
 Ms.  Esther Soczo,  Coordinator of  Soil Development
 at The  National  Institute  of  Public  Health and
 Environmental Hygiene (RIVM), the  major government
 research center in  Holland; Dr.  Ir. K.J.A. de  Waal,
 Deputy Director of TNO (Netherlands Organization for
 Applied Scientific Research); and Mr.  Christian Nels,
 Director of Research for  Umweltbundesamt,  (Federal
 Republic of  Germany's  equivalent  to  U.S.  EPA).
 During the Phase II investigation,  15 technologies in
 three European  countries were visited  by the field
 team,  which  included  Mr.  Thomas Nunno and Ms.
 Jennifer Hyman of Alliance Technologies Corporation,
 and  Mr. Thomas  Pheiffer of the U.S.  EPA, Office of
 Program  Management and Technology.

 Overview of Site Remediation Programs
 in Holland, Belgium and Federal
 Republic of Germany

 Holland (The Netherlands)
 The  field  team  began in  Holland, a very  densely
 populated country where  much  land is below sea
 level. Since  there is little  open space in  Holland,
 landfilling  of  wastes is restricted. Remediation  of
 abandoned sites  has  become a priority in  Holland.
 Holland's extensive experience  with  land and  water
 management  due to high  ground  water levels has
 brought  about developments  in   soil  and  water
 management techniques useful for site remediation.

 The  Dutch government has set three specific  levels
 for  hazardous contaminants  which  are  used  as
 guidelines for  prioritizing  site  remediation.  Examples
 of these levels designated A, B  and C, are shown in
 Table 1. Soils with contamination above the "C"  level,
 if treatable at a cost below  250 Dfl/tonne ($135/ton),
 must  be  cleaned  and  to  below  "B"  level
 concentrations. Soil below  the "B" level but above
 the "A" level may be used as fill, not as farmland.

 The  Dutch government supports the development  of
 innovative site  remediation techniques  by  partially
funding cleanup efforts and the research center  TNO,
and  through  the  full  support of the  research and
development center  RIVM (National  Institute of Public
 Health and Environmental Hygiene). Representatives
from  the Dutch  government and   industry are also
active in the NATO/CCMS Pilot Study  Demonstration

-------
Table I. Dutch Reference Levels Used for the Judgment of
       Soil Contamination
Concentration level
(mg/kg dry weight)
Component
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(total)
Mononuclear aromatics (total)
Mineral oil
Cyanide (total complex)
A
1

0.1
100
5
B
20

7
1,000
50
C
200

70
5,000
500
A   =  Background level uncontammated soil.
B   =  Level which necessitates further investigation.
C   =  Level which necessitates a sanitation investigation.
of Remedial  Action  Technologies  for Contaminated
Land and Ground Water.
Belgium
The Phase  I  report noted that although  the three
regions of Belgium  are  encouraging  development of
regional  treatment  facilities,  little information  was
available concerning site remediation efforts.  At  this
time, very  little  site  remediation work  is being
conducted in  Belgium  due apparently  to  a lack of
government  spending and regulation in this area.
However, a  highly useful high-temperature technique
for the treatment  of low-level  radioactive wastes was
investigated  for  possible  application to  difficult-to-
treat hazardous wastes.
The Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany
and Berlin)
Unlike  Holland,  the  Federal  Republic  of  Germany
(FRG) has  not yet set limits for the concentrations of
contaminants  in soil.  Using  the  Dutch  tn-level
system  as  a  guideline,  the  German  State
governments collaborate with responsible parties on
reasonable  goals for final concentrations on a  site-
by-site  basis.

Treatment  technology  development  is  promoted by
Umweltbundesamt, the  West German  equivalent  of
the U.S. EPA, through a 50 percent funding  program.
Technologies that qualify can receive a 50 percent
loan  on capital  costs  for pilot-plant  construction.  If
the pilot project is successful, the technology must be
employed  and the loan must be repaid. If  the plant
fails to reach preset performance goals,  the  company
does not have to repay the loan.  West German site
remediation experts  are also active in the NATO/
CCMS Pilot Study Demonstration of Remedial Action
Technologies  for Contaminated  Land  and  Ground
Water.

One activity  that  has  helped  to  stimulate  site
remediation in the Federal Republic of Germany was
a mandatory insurance  requirement  beginning in the
late  1960s for  companies  with oil  and  gasoline
storage tanks. These policies have  been broadened
to include most hydrocarbon contaminations  and have
encouraged development and  application  of  inex-
pensive and effective oil treatment techniques.

-------
                                      Summary of Results
The field  team  visited  with  12  research  groups,
consultants, and  manufacturers at 15 locations during
visits to three countries in Europe. The  site  visits,
conducted  from  March  21 through April 2,  1988,
during the Phase II effort, are listed below by country:

1.  THE NETHERLANDS

    A. TNO

        i.  Electrochemical   treatment   of
           organohalogens
        ii.  Bioreactors

    B. RIVM

        i.  Overview of soil treatment research in the
           Netherlands
        ii.  In situ biorestoration

    C. Heijmans  Milieutechniek BV -  soil washing
       by extraction

    D. TAUW Infra Consult BV

        i.  In situ  washing of Cd-polluted soil
        ii.  Rotating Biological  Contactors  for
           treatment of pesticides in ground water

    E. HWZ   Bodemsanering  - soil  washer
       especially for cyanides

    F.  Heidemij  Uitvoering BV.

        i.  Mobile soil washer using froth flotation
        ii.  Steam stripping in situ
       iii.  Cum-Bac   on-site   composting
         technique

2.  BELGIUM

    A.  SCK/CEN  High   Temperature  Slagging
       Incinerator

3.  FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

    A.  Hannover  Umwelttechnik  GmbH  - Vacuum
       extraction of organics in soil
    B. Umweltbundesamt  -  overview  of  soil
       treatment research in the FRG

    C. Harbauer GmbH  -  soil washing using low
       frequency vibration

    D. TBSG Industnevertratungen  GmbH  - soil
       cleaning  on-site  using  the surfactant "Oil
       CREP"

    E. Umweltschutz Nord GmbH

         i.  On-site  composting using  bioreactors,
           special substrate and reed beds
        ii.  In situ biorestoration

The  results of the  individual  site  visits are
summarized below.  Capsule summaries  of each site
visit, presented in Appendices  A through  M, include a
brief  process description, discussion  of  process
limitations,  performance data,  costs,  and  status of
process development.

In general, the  Phase  II  efforts were successful at
identifying  site  cleanup technologies  not  currently
used  in  the United States,   as  well  as  unique
applications of techniques used  in  the  United States.
Among the most important Phase II findings were five
different soil washing techniques in  Holland and the
FRG.  Another key finding was the High Temperature
Slagging  Incinerator  (HTSI) technology  reviewed in
Belgium.  In addition, the field  team  reviewed unique
applications of  in  situ  biological  treatment  and
composting techniques, vacuum  extraction and in situ
air stripping, in situ extraction of cadmium from  soils,
application of rotating  biological  contactors,  and
electrochemical  dehalogenation techniques. All of
these  unique  applications and  research  should
contribute significantly to our knowledge  base of site
cleanup technologies in  the United States.


Soil Washing Equipment Findings
The field  team   reviewed five  high  throughput soil
washing  technologies  in  Holland  and the  FRG.
Characteristics of these technologies are  summarized
in Table  2, including throughput,  unit  operations,
reject  particle size and costs.

-------
Table 2. Soil Washing Installations Visited by Alliance/EPA Field Team in March 1988 in the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany.
Installation
Heijmans Miheutechmek
b.v. Rosmalen, the Neths.



HWZ Bodemsan-enng
Amersfoort, the Neths.




Heidemij Uitvoenng b.v.'s-
Herto-genbosch, the
Neths



Harbauer GmbH Berlin,
FRG






TBSG Industnevertretungen
GmbH- Oil CREP System
Bremen, FRG

Rated
Throughput
1 1 tons/hr




22 tons/hr





30 tons/hr





16.5-22
tons/hr






44 gpm,
New 88
gpm plant
planned
Principal Operations
• Particle sizing
• Scrubbing with detergents
and oxidants
• Flocculation
• Precipitation
• Particle sizing
• Scrubbing with detergents
• Flocculation
• pH adjustment
• Carbon filters

• Particle sizing
• Froth flotation with
cleaning agents
• Washing


• Particle sizing
• Low-freq. vibration with
extrac-tants
• Washing
• Water treatment by
flotation, air stripping, ion
exch. and activated
carbon
• Particle sizing
• Washing with Oil CREP I
• Solid/liquid separation

Particle
Reject Fixed or
Size Transportable
< 63 um Transportable
but fixed



< 63 urn Transportable
but fixed




<50 urn Mobile, but
will be fixed in
the future



< 1 5 urn Fixed







< 100 urn Mobile



Pollutants
Treated
Cyanides
Heavy metals
PCAs
Mineral oil
Kerosine

Cyanides
Heavy metals
aromatics
Solvents
CI-HCs
Cyanides
Heavy metals
PCAs
Oils
CI-HCs
Pesticides
Organics
Phenol
PAH
Org-CI cmpds
PCBs



Extractables
HCs
PAHs
Extr. Hal-org.
Refractory
Pollutants
CI-HCs
Aromatics



Oily cmpds
Br cmpds




PAHs
PCBs
HCH
Some heavy
metals

Heavy metals







PCBs
FI-HCs
Cyanides
Heavy metals
Treatment Fee per
Ton
$73-91
$102 at max
30% < 63 urn


$53 plus
$2.50/ton for each
% < 63 urn, up to
20%


$90-155, 2200
tons is mm treated




$136 (excludes
residue disposal)






$82-109
excluding disposal
of residues, 3920
cu yds mm treated
Sludge
Disposal
Costs per
Ton
$136





$136




as high
as $182




Sludge
stored
to date





$6K/day
sludge
treatment

Capital
Costs
New 33
tons/hr plant
planned,
$4.5 million

$3 million





$3 million





$4.5-6
million






Not known
at this time



-------
A key similarity among all of the units was that they
operate on the principle that most of the contaminants
are sorbed  to  the  fine materials (< 63  nm)  and
segregation  of  these  materials  from the other  size
fraction "cleans" the soil. Some of the units (i.e., the
Heijmans unit),  employed  very   simple  particle
separation and wash  water treatment technologies,
while  others (Harbauer and  Oil CREP) employed
more sophisticated extractants and cleaning agents. A
major consideration  of all washing techniques is the
fact that  as  particle reject  size decreases,  so does
sludge residue  generation.  Cleaning efficiency tends
to decrease  with decreasing particle size.

Most of the  soil washing companies noted that their
practical upper limit of fines (< 63 pm) was 20 to 30
percent  in  the soil  to be  cleaned.  Because  the
proportion of fines present  increases the generation
of  sludge, treatment costs tend to increase for finer
grained  soils.  The  Harbauer technology shows  an
advantage  of potentially  generating less sludge;
however, the additional costs of wash water treatment
employed  for that technology make it slightly more
expensive than the  other  soil  washing technologies
reviewed.
High Temperature Slagging Incineration (HTSI)
The  Belgium HTSI technology shows  promise as a
transferable  technology  for  high hazard  waste
streams and fibrous asbestos wastes.  Details  of this
technology are summarized in  Table  3. Very  high
combustion  efficiency  and  off-gas  cleaning
efficiencies along with very stable slag residues make
this technology very attractive.  The high  treatment
costs $3.50/kg ($1.60/lb)  associated  with  the  low
throughput  60 kg/hr (133 Ib/hr) unit make  the
development of higher throughput units critical to its
successful importation to the United States'  market.


Other Unique Applications of Site Remediation
Technologies
During the trip, many other  successful applications of
conventional and novel treatment  technologies were
observed, on both  a research scale as  well as full-
scale. Table 4 outlines the important characteristics of
these technologies.

Biorestoration research and  full-scale  applications of
bioremediation  technologies  have  advanced  in
European  countries much as it has  in  the United
States. During visits with two research organizations
(TNO and RIVM) and three consulting companies, the
field team  observed many  successful studies and
applications  of  biological  treatment  technologies,
(mostly aerobic systems).

In situ bioremediation  was  being researched and
tested at RIVM and applied  by Heidemij  in  Holland.
RIVM found that  hydrogen peroxide  was  a  suitable
oxygen  source  for  in   situ  bioremediation.
Biodegradation rates  of  10  mg  C/kg  day  were
obtained  by RIVM. At a  contaminated gasoline site,
bioremediation will be  used for cleanup to the  Dutch
A limit of 20 mg/kg.

Ex  situ  or on-site bioremediation  technologies  are
being researched and applied in both Holland and the
FRG. TNO showed successful results from laboratory
experiments for both wet slurry  biological treatment
systems  and dry compost-type  systems.  This
fundamental research  showed diffusion  of organics
from the soil particles to be the rate limiting step.
Full-scale  applications  of  compost-type systems
were being  applied by both  Heidemij  (Holland) and
Umweltschutz Nord (FRG).  Costs for full-scale ex
situ composting applications  were found to be  in the
range of $82 to $136/ton.

A Rotating  Biological  Contactor (RBC)  application
employed  by TAUW  in  Holland was  used  on
pesticide-contaminated  ground  water  containing
chlorinated organics.  TAUW found  that  the  RBC
system reduced activated carbon requirements  by 92
percent,  and decreased  remediation  costs by 30
percent.

Other physical/chemical treatment research reviewed
included  an in  situ cadmium extraction  project by
TAUW  and  an   electrochemical dehalogenation
research  project  by TNO.  The  cadmium  extraction
Table 3. Incineration Installation Visited

Company/
Institution
SCK/CEN
Mol, Belgium










Technology
High-
Temperature
Slagging
Incineration







Pollutants
Treated
All
(originally
for low-
level
radioactive
wastes)




by Alliance/EPA Field Team in March 1988 in Belgium

Medium
Treated Principal Operations
All • Waste shredding and
full mixing
• Combustion at 1400°C
into molten slag
• Slag granulation by
quenching
• Off-gas treatment by
teflon bag filters,
scrubber and HEPA
filters
Size and
Scale of Time of Treatment Capital
System Treatment Costs Costs
Full 133 Ib/hr $1 60/lb $6 million
(less if built
w/out
extensive
off-gas
treatments)





-------
Table 4. Other Site Remediation Technologies Visited by Alliance/EPA Field Team in March 1988 in the Netherlands and the
        Federal Republic of Germany
Company/
Institution
TNO-Dept. of
Environmental
Technology
Delft, the Neths.
Technology
Electrochemical
Dechlonnation
Treatment
Pollutants
Treated
Polar and
Ionic
Organo-
halogens
Medium
Treated
Dilute
Aqueous
Waste
Streams
Principal Operations
• Titanium anode
• Woven carbon fiber
cathode
• Membrane between
• Surface active additives
• About 10 A, 60 mins.
Scale
of
System
Bench
Size and
Time of
Treatment
Pilot tests will
be 26 gal/hr
Treatment
Costs
$0.02/gal
Capital
Costs
Not yet
determined
 TNO- Dept. of
 Process
 Technology
 Apeldoorn, the
 Neths.

 RIVM- Soil
 and Ground
 Water
 Research
 Laboratory
 Bilthoven, the
 Neths.

 TAUW Infra
 Consult bv
 Deventer, the
 Neths.

 TAUW Infra
 Consult bv
 Deventer, the
 Neths.
 Bioreactors
   In Situ
Biorestoration
 Non-
 chlor-
 inated
 hydro-
 carbons

Gasoline
Slurried or
 dry soil
                          Soil
   In Situ
  Cadmium
  Removal
  Rotating
  Biological
 Contactors
Cadmium
              Pesticides
                          Soil
           Ground
           Water
Hannover
Umwelt-
technik GmbH
Waldorf, FRG
In Situ Vacuum
Extraction and
Air Stripping
Volatile
organics
Soil
vadose
zones and
ground
water
• Mixing and aeration       Bench   Pilot tests will   $45/ton
• Nutrients                          be 11
• Detergents                       tons/day
• Native microorganisms
          • Infiltration of nutrients      Full    1961 cu yds,   $171/cu
          • Water, and                      1 ? years       yd
          • H2C>2 as oxygen source
          • Iron extraction unit
          • Infiltration of acidic water   Full     39,200 cu    $63/cu
           to leach cadmium                yds, 1 year      yd
           (pH=3.5)
          • Ion exchange onsite

          • Metal honeycomb disks    Full      nOgpm     Data not
          • Compost air filter                             available
          • Sand filtration
          • Activated carbon
                                                 • PVC slotted wells         Full       About      < $5/ton
                                                  extract from vadose               10,000 cu
                                                 • Small pump                    yds, 1 year
                                                 • Activated carbon column
                                                 • Compressed air injected
                                                  into ground water
Not yet
determined
                                                     $336,000
                                                     $2.5
                                                     million
                                                     Data not
                                                     available-
                                                     total costs
                                                     reduced
                                                     30% with
                                                     RBC

                                                     $1500,
                                                     depending
                                                     on scale of
                                                     project
Umweltschutz
Nord GmbH
Ganderkesee,
FRG


On-site
Composting




Non-
chlor-
inated
hydro-
carbons

Soils "Unique substrate
• Nutrients, microbes
• PET liner with leachate
collection
• Aeration
• Greenhouse cover
Full 131 cu yds
per bed, 6
months with
greenhouse


$90/ton Varies





project employed in situ hydrochloric acid leaching  of
cadmium from over 30,000 m.3  of soil.  The  acid
leachate  was  purified by  ion exchange  and reused.
The treatment  cost was estimated  to  be $75/ton  of
soil. The electrochemical dechlorination research  is
currently  nearing the end of the bench-scale phase.
The potential application to  site remediation is in the
detoxification   of  complex  organohalogens  in  the
aqueous  phase.  Current  costs are  projected to  be
$0.023/gal.  Full-scale  research  will  begin June
1988.
                                          Numerous  full-scale  projects  involving  in   situ
                                          vacuum  extraction  and  air  stripping  of  volatile
                                          contamination were reviewed in the  FRG.  Hannover
                                          Umwelttecknick (HUT) has installed over 300 vacuum
                                          extraction   installations   for   vadose   zone
                                          decontamination. HUT has also developed a unique in
                                          situ air  stripping system  for removing  volatiles from
                                          ground water in  conjunction with vacuum  extraction.
                                          Treatment  costs for the  HUT system  are  less than
                                          10DM/tonne  ($5/ton).

-------
                              Conclusions and Recommendations
Soil washing  experience in the  Netherlands and  the
Federal  Republic of Germany (FRG) has shown that
soil washing  can  be conducted on  a  large-scale at
costs  substantially lower than those of incineration
(with notably less effectiveness). Although most of the
technologies generate 10 to 20 percent of the initial
volume  as  sludge, depending on  the  fines content,
work  is being conducted  in the  FRG  to  improve
effectiveness  of soil washing on fine materials and to
reduce  sludge  generation.  Typical  cleaning
efficiencies for soil washers ranged from  75 to 95
percent removal,   depending on  the  contaminant.
Although the authors  believe that  soil washing
technologies could be used  effectively in  the United
States to significantly reduce landfilling of CERCLA
site soils,  it  is unlikely that  domestic  or  foreign
companies  will invest in this market until a uniform set
of soil cleanup criteria is developed.

Biological treatment technologies have been shown to
be useful both for polishing to  lower concentrations
using  in situ  treatment, and for gross removals  of
organic  materials using  RBC  and  composting
systems. Efforts should be made to encourage  the
use of these types  of systems in the United States.

High temperature slagging  incineration  appears to be
a  viable technology  for  application  towards  high
hazard wastes  and asbestos  wastes in the United
States. The licensing and construction of units in the
United States  should  be tracked  to  encourage
evaluation of domestic installations.

In situ  vacuum  extraction  of  volatile  organic
compounds is a well-known technology in  the United
States. Applications in the FRG include the use of in
situ air stripping of volatiles from  ground  water into
the vadose zone and their subsequent removal by the
extraction wells.  Such  vacuum extraction applications
and  other innovations such as  bioaugmentation
should be encouraged  in the United States.

The  apparent  success of  this  relatively short-
duration,  technology assessment program indicates
that despite the wealth of information available in the
United States,  there  is  much  to  be learned  from
ongoing  work  in  foreign countries. The  authors
recommend that further efforts be made to  encourage
the transfer of European site remediation technologies
through improved literature dissemination and seminar
presentations at symposia. It is also recommended
that results of research identified under this project
and the NATO/CCMS Pilot Demonstration program be
closely monitored over the next few years.

-------
                                           Appendix A
            Research on Electrochemical Treatment of Organohalogens in Process
                                       Wastewaterat TNO
 TNO Division of Technology for Society
 P.O. Box 217
 2600 AE Delft
 The Netherlands

 Dr. - Ir. D. Schmal
 Dept. of Environmental Technology
 Tel.:  011-31 (15) 69 60 87

 Process Description

 This research  project  focuses on the electrochemical
 dechlorination  of  organohalogens.  In the laboratory,
 simulated dilute wastewater was  passed between a
 platinized titanium anode and  a  woven  carbon fiber
 cathode (fiber  diameter = 10 pm). The applied voltage
 causes the chlorine atoms  of the organohalogens to
 be replaced by hydrogen atoms, thus reducing their
 toxicity  and  increasing  their  biodegradabihty.
 Electrochemical treatment is designed to treat ionic or
 polar organohalogens which are, in general, difficult to
 decontaminate  by adsorption  or  stripping. It is also
 more appropriate  for  dilute wastewaters or wash
 waters,  where  destruction   by incineration,   for
 example, would be too costly.

 A diagram of the apparatus used by Dr. Schmal in  the
 laboratory at  TNO is shown  in Figure A-1. The
 reactor  consists of two compartments separated by a
 Nafion 425 membrane. Each compartment is 10  cm
 long,  2 cm wide, and 0.5 cm deep.

 Process Limitations/Performance Data

 Electrochemical reduction is only practical for treating
 aqueous solutions ot polar  or  ionic  organohalogens.
 The  process  is  only amenable  to  operation   in
 solutions with  low filterable solids content.  Fouling
 problems may  result  from  solids in suspension  or
 from  polymerization  of organics.  The  process   is
 currently limited to solutions containing up to 1  g/L
 chlorinated  organics. Experiments have  proven  the
 technique using batch tests. Pilot-scale tests will  be
 initiated soon on synthetic wastewater at  a treatment
 rate of 100L/hr (26 gal/hr).

Another important factor necessary  for treatment  is
that  the  contaminant  be miscible  in  the solution.
 PCBs will not be  treated by  this  method until a
 suitable solvent has been found.

 Electrolytic reduction has been successfully applied at
 TNO to  pentachlorophenol  (PCP),  p-chloronitro-
 benzene  (CNB), and dichlorvos (DDVP). Results of
 electrochemical  reduction of these  three  con-
 taminants are provided  in Table A-1.  While it  takes
 only 30 minutes to reduce PCP  to below its  detection
 limit,  it  takes  considerably  longer  before  all
 chlorinated secondary products are reduced to  the
 non-chlorinated phenol.  A graph of  the  formation
 and decay of by-products during PCP  reduction is
 shown in Figure A-2.

 The addition of small quantities  of  surface active
 agents  improves  efficiency,  decreasing  energy
 consumption  by 45  percent.  These  micelle-forming
 compounds  are patented  by van  Erkel,  et  al.  (U.S.
 No.4,443,309).

 Cost

 In comparison with  electrolysis of metals, which  costs
 2-5  Dfl/m3  (<$0.01/gal),  electrolysis  of
 organohalogens is  expected  to  be  more  or  less
 comparable in cost, about 10 Dfl/m3 ($0.02/gal). The
 basis for these costs are 40 percent capital costs,  40
 percent energy costs, and 20 percent  operation and
 maintenance.
Process Status

This  bench-scale  research  on  electrochemical
dechlorination of organohalogens was sponsored  by
Pielkenrood-Vinitex, a Dutch  producer of wastewater
treatment  equipment (along  with the  European
Communities and various  Dutch Ministries), so it has
certainly  been geared  towards  practical  full-scale
application. Since Phase I  of this project has been  so
successful, Phase II,  which will last from June  1988
through  1989,  should show some progress towards
the  development  of  a full-scale   continuous
electrochemical  reactor.  The usefulness  of this
technology will probably be  proven in  Holland first
before intentions for exportation or licensing  abroad
arise.

-------
 Figure A-1.   Diagram of the apparatus for electrochemical
             treatment of organohalogens.
                                                      Figure A-2.     Mole fraction of the phenols during electrolysis
                                                                     of 2 L of 50 ppm PCP solution (10A).
                                                                100 (-    Mole Fraction
RESER-
    VOIR
                                                                                       60       90        120

                                                                                    -»•  Time of Electrolysis, mm
                                                                                                          150
 Source:
    PUMP

Schmal, D., J. van Erkel, and P J. van Duin.
"Electrochemical Reduction of Halogenated Compounds
in Process Waste Water," Electrochemical Engineering,
The Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series
No. 98. p. 262. April 1986.
     1.  PCP
     2  Tetrachlorophenols
     3  Trichlorophenols
     4  Dichlorophenols
     5  Monochlorophenols
     6  Phenol

Source   Schmal, D.,  J  van  Erkel, and P  J  van  Dum
         "Electrochemical  Reduction of  Halogenated  Com-
         pounds  in Process Waste  Wateer "  Electrochemical
         Engineering, the  Institution  of  Chemical Engineers
         Symposium Series No  98 April 1986
      Table A-1.    Results of Electrochemical Reduction of Three Organohalogens Tested at TNO
                                        Cathodic          Energy
Contaminant
PCP
CNB
DDVP

Initial Cone. Final Cone.
(ppm) (ppm)
50 <0.5
30 <0.1
560 <1

Current Time Consumption Toxicity
(amps) (mm) (kWh/gal) Notes
10 30
10 60
1 60

0.14 Toxicity
reduced
95%
0.11
0.0030 value =
56 ppm
Remarks
1 L in 0.1 M sodium sulfate/0.1 M sodium
hydroxide solution
1 L in 0.1 M sodium hydroxide solution
1 L in 0.1 M sodium sulfate solution

      Source:  Schmal, D., J. van Erkel, and P.J. van Dum. "Electrochemical Reduction of Halogenated Compounds in Process Waste
              Water," Electrochemical Engineering, The Institution of Chemical Engineers Symposium Series No. 98. April 1986.
                                                            10

-------
                                            Appendix B
           Research on Decontamination of Polluted Soils and Dredging Sludges in
                                    Bioreactor Systems at TNO
 TNO Division of Technology for Society
 P.O.  Box 342
 7300 AH Apeldoorn
 The Netherlands

 Mr. Guus J. Annokkee
 Dept. of Process Technology
 Tel.:  011-31 (55) 77 33 44

 Process Description

 A bioreactor is  primarily a  mixing  apparatus  whose
 main function  is  to  increase the  availability  of
 contaminants and nutrients to the microorganisms for
 accelerated  biodegradation  of these  hazardous
 compounds. TNO  studies have  found that  since the
 microorganisms  are bound to the soil particles,  mixing
 is  one  of  two important  contributors  to  high
 biodegradation rates.  In their research on bioreactor
 systems, TNO also uses detergents to  enhance the
 bioavailability of the contaminants.

 The factor other than  bioavailability which contributes
 to  high  biodegradation rates  is the ability  of the
 microorganisms   to  degrade   the   particular
 contaminants.  Microorganisms  specially suited  to
 break  down  certain  toxic compounds  can  be
 cultivated in the laboratory,  but where a site  is old,
 appropriate  microorganisms  are  usually  already
 present in the soil. The availability of nutrients and
 oxygen  is not the controlling factor in accelerating the
 biodegradation rate but is necessary for maintaining  it.
 The bioreactors  are continuously mixing  and aerating
 the soil  and operate  at ambient  temperature. The
 bioreactor design  employed by TNO could not  be
 viewed  because  the technology is  protected by their
 sponsors.

 Two types of bioreactor treatments  are employed  by
 TNO: dry and  wet  bioreactor systems.  The dry
 bioreactor system is similar  to a composting type of
 operation, while  the wet bioreactor is more closely
compared to an aerobic activated sludge  system. The
dry bioreactor operates under an ambient moisture of
 15 to  20percent and requires no dewatering step after
treatment. In the  wet bioreactor,  the soil is handled as
a slurry. Slurries are easier to  process  in that they
can be pumped,  but must be dewatered if the  soil  is
 to  be reused.  Both  wet and dry bioreactor systems
 are effective.  However, future TNO research  is
 focusing on the dry  (composting type system) due to
 the advantages noted above. A key finding of TNO's
 research has been that  the biodegradation reaction is
 rate-limited primarily  by diffusion  of the  organic
 material to the surface of the soil particles.

 Bioreactors are naturally applicable to biodegradable
 contaminants such as  mineral oils,  PCAs,  and other
 non-chlorinated  hydrocarbons.  Microorganisms  that
 secrete acid are used  to remove contaminants that
 are leachable, such  as  heavy  metals. A wide  variety
 of  soil  types,  from  sand  to loam and clay,  can be
 cleaned in  the bioreactor.

 Process Limitations/Performance  Data

 Bioreactors have  been found to  be effective  on
 contaminants  that  are biodegradable.  Chlorinated
 hydrocarbons, as a  result, have not been effectively
 treated  by  this  method. Results  of TNO's bioreactor
 degredation of  various  organic pollutants  in a  variety
 of  soil  types  are  shown  in Table B-1.   These
 performance data are from  batch laboratory  studies
 on  wet and dry  bioreactors performed at TNO.

 Table B-1.   Some Results from the TNO Bioreactor System
           (Batch Process)
Bioreactor
type Soil type
Dry
Dry
Sand
Sand
Contam-
inant
Cutting oil
Diesel
fuel
Concentration (mg/kg dry soil)
Day 0
3,000
4,200
Day 3
980
1,800
Day 14
680
900
Wet/slurry  Loamy  Cutting oil  26,000
           sand
Wet/slurry   Loam   Cutting oil  65,000

Wet/slurry   Loam   PCAs     3,900
9,000
1,200
       12,000

1,700     300
Source:  Annokkee, G. "Status of TNO Bioreactor System for Soil
       and Subaquatic Soil Decontamination." Handout from
       meeting with Alliance field team. March 22, 1988.
One advantage bioreactors have over soil washing
techniques  is  that they  are able  to  treat  large
quantities of  fines.  Most problems that  arise  in
                                                 11

-------
bioreactor installations are operational in nature, such
as pump failure or line clogging.

Cost

Because of the  early stage of bioreactor research,
actual capital, operational and maintenance cost data
are not available. Prices are expected to be  about
100  Dfl/tonne  ($45/ton). Actual treatment costs  are
dependent  on the  period of treatment  necessary.
Bioreactor  research  at  TNO  has focused  on
minimizing  of residence time necessary  for effective
treatment.
Process Status

TNO is nearing completion of  2 years  of laboratory-
scale  studies.  Pilot-scale  experiments  with  a
throughput  of  10  tonnes/day  (11  tons/day)  are
currently  in  preparation.   Laboratory-scale  studies
 have been batch-type.  Since  the  microorganisms
are  bound   to   the  soil  particles,  system
configuration(batch or continuous) does not affect the
biodegradation rate. TNO estimates that commercial
systems will be batch-operated,  have a capacity of
200 or 500 tons, and have treatment time of 10 to 14
days. Depending  on the type  of  bioreactor, even
larger systems are  possible. Bioreactors can  be
constructed to be stationary  or mobile.

Bioreactors are a simple technology and, therefore,
scale-up  of the  system  to allow  high  throughput
should not  be difficult. Research will continue at TNO
on  treating a greater  variety of  contaminants,
increasing  bioavailability  of the  contaminants,  and
scaling-up  the bioreactor  system.  This research
project  is  funded 30  percent  by  the  Dutch
government and 70  percent by Heidemij Uitvoering, a
site cleanup contractor. Heidemij has  the rights to the
technology, and their intentions  towards licensing or
exporting the technology are not yet formulated.
                                                  12

-------
                                            Appendix C
                In Situ Biorestoration of Contaminated Soil Research at RIVM
RIVM - National  Institute of Public Health
    and Environmental Hygiene
P.O. Box 1
3720 BA  Bilthoven
The Netherlands

Ir. Reinier van den Berg, Jos H.A.M. Verheul
    Soil Biochemistry and Microbiology
Soil and Ground  Water Research Laboratory
Tel.: 011-31 (30) 743338

Ms. Esther Soczo, Coordinator, Soil Development
    Laboratory for Waste Materials and Emissions
Tel.: 011-31 (30) 743060

Process Description

The following discussion briefly presents the status of
in   situ   biorestoration  research  currently  being
conducted at RIVM. Most of the research to date has
been  laboratory-scale,  however,  a  NATO/CCMS
demonstration study at Asten is scheduled to begin in
June 1988.

Undisturbed soil  columns  were  taken from  deep
layers in the Asten site contaminated with  gasoline.
Experiments were  carried  out  by the  Soil
Biochemistry and  Microbiology  group  at  RIVM on
these columns to determine the optimal  conditions for
biodegradation.  In  order to  stimulate biodegradation,
soil columns  were  percolated  with  a  variety  of
nutrients and 02  sources.  pH  and the  addition of
detergents, sodium acetate  and microorganisms were
all tested for their effects on biodegradation rate.

Results  showed  that it  is  possible to  increase  the
biodegradation rate,  measured as carbon dioxide
production,  from  1  to 10 mg  C/kg  day.  The
 Figure C-1    Infiltration, withdrawal and treatment setup proposed by RIVM for the Asten site.


                                                Infiltration
                                                                           100-1000
                                                                           (mg Gasoline/kg Soil)
   •A 6
          y/////////////////////////////////7//77//. Clay Loam Layer
 Source  van den Berg, R , E R Soczd , J H A  M Verheul, and D H Eikelboom "In Situ Biorestoration of a Subsoil Contaminated
        with Oil " RIVM Report No 728518003 p 24 November 1987
                                                 13

-------
degradation  activity was most  enhanced  by the
addition  of  seeding material  from  a  landfarm.  The
addition  of  sodium  acetate  to  build  biomass,
saturation with water, the addition of  phosphate and
nitrate,  buffering, and a  neutral  pH  all contributed  to
favorable conditions  for  biodegradation. Detergents
had a negative effect, and the source  of the nitrogen,
whether it  was  KNOa,  NhUNOa,  NHUCI,   or
(NH4)2SO4,  had  no effect. As  alternative  oxygen
sources,  hydrogen  peroxide  (H202)  was  suitable,
whereas nitrate slowed biodegradation. Results of the
laboratory-scale research supported the assumption
that  the rate-limiting  step was the  availability of the
oil components to the microorganisms.

A  diagram of the  infiltration and withdrawal system
proposed for the Asten  site is shown in Figure C-1.
This system  will  enhance  the  leaching  and
biodegradation of gasoline contaminating the site  by
the addition of nutrients  and oxygen and extract iron
from the  withdrawn  water  using a  small water
treatment unit.
                                   Process Limitations/Performance Data

                                   Biorestoration,  in general,  is only  effective  on
                                   biodegradable  contaminants and is difficult  in  soils
                                   with  a high clay  and/or organic  carbon  content.
                                   Experimental results from one laboratory-scale study
                                   are shown in Figure C-2. In this graph, the effects of
                                   water saturation,  nutrient addition  and  seeding with
                                   KONI soil (from  a landfarm)  on  biodegradation  of
                                   gasoline  is  shown.  Although  acceleration  of  the
                                   biodegradation process  from 1  to  10  mg C/kg day
                                   was  found to be  possible, this  rate is  still  relatively
                                   slow. This is apparently  due to the fact  that very few
                                   microorganisms occur naturally in the site.

                                   Some possible limitations that  could arise in  carrying
                                   out the treatment  are problems due to cold or wet
                                   weather  extremes,  or   mechanical problems  with
                                   pumps or the ground water treatment  unit.  Clogging
                                   of the wells at the Asten  site is not likely because the
                                   soil  layers to be  treated are mostly sand, with less
                                   than  0.05  percent  organic  material.   Part  of  the
                                   installation  includes  hydrological  isolation   of  the
                                   contamination vertically  and  horizontally.  Special
     Figure C-2.   Biodegradation of gasoline measured as CO2-production (mg C/kg). Gasoline concentrations: 3000-
                5700 mg C/kg. Effects of water saturation, nutrient addition (CNP ratio 100:10:1 and 100:10:5) and
                seeding with KONI soil: 50 g/kg.
         Carbon dioxide
          production
          [mg C/kg]
          (Thousands)
Blanc        -|- Water saturation

            /^ C:P 100.5
                                                                         o  Water, CNP 100:10:1

                                                                  Seeding with KONI
     Source: van den Berg, R., E.R. Soczo, J.H.A.M. Verheul, and D.H. Eikelboom. "In Situ Biorestoration of a Subsoil Contaminated
            with Oil." RIVM Report No. 728518003 p. 16. November 1987.
                                                    14

-------
attention will be  paid  to  the  percolation under  the
buildings on  the  site,  where the contamination has
already begun to spread.

Cost

Conventional cleanup for this site, such as extraction
or incineration, would  typically  cost  1.2 million  Dfl
(about $672,000). In  situ biorestoration, including
ground water treatment, is expected to cost half this
figure or  about  $336,000. These  figures  do  not
include the costs  of sampling and analysis necessary
for monitoring the progress of the installation, or  the
cost of seeded soil which was determined not to be a
cost-effective additive.  Since 1500  m3  (1961 cu  yd)
of soil  is contaminated,  costs  will  be  400 Dfl/m3
($171/cu yd).

Process Status

A  full-scale system  will  be  installed  beginning  in
June 1988 in the  gasoline-contaminated  site  at
Asten,  in  the  province  of  Noord-Brabant.  This
remediation  is  a   NATO/CCMS  Pilot  Study
demonstration project whose research began at  RIVM
in 1985. The cleanup operation is expected to take
 1-1/2  years  to reach  the  Dutch  "A"  limit  of  20
mg/kg. This  cleanup period is based  on a daily
circulation of water calculated at 1,850m3 (488,400
gals) with a daily degradation rate of  10 mg C/kg.

The  remediation program of RIVM at the Asten site
will not provide any  innovative technologies  to  be
licensed  for  marketing abroad.  It  will  provide,  if
successful, valuable information  on soil chemistry and
soil microbiology in the field, as well  as  a practical
and  less  expensive  alternative to  extraction  or
incineration treatment  for  gasoline-contaminated
soils.

RIVM  is a  government center  for  research  and
development of all aspects of public  health.  They also
advise the various government Ministries and provide
the service of information exchange  for industry. The
laboratory research  done for this remediation project
is  just one  part of a  4-year,  56 million  Dfl  ($31.4
million) Soil  Research Program  started in  1987.  The
Environment, Agriculture,  Water Management,  and
Education Ministries are involved with this research
program, which is part fundamental  science research
and part technological development.
                                                  15

-------
                                           Appendix D
                                Heijmans Soil Washing Operation
Heijmans Milieutechniek b.v.
Graafsebaan 13
Postbus 2 5240 BB Rosmalen
The Netherlands
Ing.  W.P.J.  Kemmeren,  Assistant  Director/Mr. C.
Jonker
Tel.:  011-31-4192-89111
Process Description

Heijmans  has developed  a simple semi-transportable
soil washer capable  of handling  10 tonnes/hour  (11
tons/hour) of  soil.  Like most  soil washers,  the
Heijmans  soil washer operates on the  principle that
most  contamination  is  adsorbed to the  fine  soil
particles. Thus, the Heijmans soil  washer consists of
several particle sizing steps with the goal of  removing
the fines < 63 urn and disposing of that fraction as a
sludge byproduct,  while  the coarser fractions  are
further washed and used as clean soil.
The  soil cleaning plant of  Heijmans wet-sieves  out
coarse material > 100mm and rubble > 5 mm first to
allow particles  < 5 mm to be washed in the scrubber.
The  slurry is extensively mixed in the scrubber with
extracting agents and  oxidizing chemicals. A flotation
unit is then used to separate out organic constituents,
which must be disposed of. Finally,  hydrocyclones
separate out cleaned sand, 63  jam <  x  <  5mm,
which is commonly  used  in asphalt  by Heijmans'
road-building division.
The  scrubbing water and  contaminated fines < 63
urn are passed through a tiltable plate separator in
order to extract out oil and  silt < 63 pm. The water is
further  treated by coagulation,  flocculation  and
precipitation,  and  then  Heijmans  uses flotation  to
remove additional  solids. The  type  of  chemical
additives used to initiate coagulation, flocculation, and
precipitation varies  with the  types  of  contaminants
present. Water is completely recirculated within  the
system. A  flow diagram of the process is shown in
Figure  D-1.
Process  Limitations/Performance Data

Heijmans'  soil washer  can be applied  to  soils
containing:

    •  Cyanides;

    •  Water-immiscible and  low-density
       (S.G. < 1.0) hydrocarbons;

    •  Heavy metals
       (such as Cr, Cd, Cu,  Ni, Pb, Zn); and

    •  Combinations of these contaminants.

Heijmans accepts soils with  fine  fractions  < 63 jam
up to 30 percent,  but their  process works best on
sandy  soils  with  a  minimum  of  humus-like
compounds. Because  no sand or charcoal filters are
employed by Heijmans, the system is not able to treat
such  contaminants  as chlorinated hydrocarbons or
aromatics.  Like most soil washing  techniques, the
throughput  and cost of treatment  is dependent on
quantity of  fine fractions (<  63 urn) in the soil to be
cleaned.

The system has had its greatest success treating soil
contaminated  by  cyanides  (CN).  Heijmans  adds
hydrogen peroxide  (H202) into the  scrubber to  react
with CN to  form C02 +  NH4. In one experiment, CN
at a concentration  of 5,000  to 6,000 mg/kg dry soil
was reduced to 15mg/kg. A table showing the results
of the Heijmans soil washer  on seven different types
of contaminated soil is  shown in  Table D-1.

Costs

Operating  costs   at  Heijmans  average  140-180
DfI/tonne ($73-91/ton) for typical soils with 10 to 15
percent fines  < 63 iam, but can go as high as 400 Dfl
per tonne  ($205/ton) for very  heavy metal-laden
soils. At their maximum accepted level of  30 percent
fine fraction  < 63 jam, costs would be  about  200
Dfl/tonne ($102/ton).  These  costs  include landfilling
abroad of the toxic and organic residues at a cost of
250 Dfl/tonne ($136/ton).

Capital costs  for  a second  generation  plant being
constructed by Heijmans, with  a throughput  of 30
                                                 17

-------
Figure 0-1.   Process scheme of the installation of Heijmans Milieutechniek b.v. Adapted from: TNO - Assink, J.W. and W.J.
            van den Brink. 1st International TNO/BMFT Conference on Contaminated Soil. Utrecht, The Netherlands.
            November 11-15,1985.
MAKE-UP • • OXIDIZING
EXTRACTING : : CHEMICALS
AGENT f t 1 	 *• GRASS' COKE
DRY AND WET 	

I
COARSE
MATERIALS
>100 mm
>5 mm
CONTAMINATED
SOIL
^. SCRUBBER
(INTENSIVE
MIXING &
CHEMICAL
OXIDATION)

FLOCCULANTS —
COAGULANTS
FLOCCULANTS
PRECIPITANTS
PH (8.5)
SOLIDS. SLURRY
SIEVE -4 	 1
/ k HYDROCYCL
( *

t
TILTABLE 	 > OIL
* PLATE
SEPARATOR 	 > SILT <
V
COAGULATION
AND
FLOCCULATION
w _
FLOTATION
W

	 /MAIMI y\ i mi Jin
, ETC.
ONES 	 ^ DEWATERING
SIFVF ~|
I
T
CLEANED
SAND
< 63 nm)
b DOUBLE
WIRE
PRESS
DOUBLE 1
WIRE V
PRESS
MINERAL
1 SLUDGE
Table D-1.   Results of Soil Cleanings Performed by
           Heijmans Milieutechniek b.v. (Analyses
           performed by an independent laboratory)
                                  Before      After
    Site     Soil type  Contaminant    (mg/kg)	(mg/kg)
Galvanizing




Fuel drilling

Galvanizing






Gasworks

Gasworks

Diesel fuel


Galvanizing


Silt

Sand


Coarse
sand
Fine sand






Fine sand

Coarse
sand
Silt

Fine Sand
Coarse
sand

Total
Cyanide
Chrome
Nickel
Zinc
Kerosine

Total
cyanide
Chrome
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Total
cyanide
Total PCAs

Mineral oil


Total
cyanide
Zinc
250-500

43-45
250-890
460-720
5,000-
7,000
400-1 ,000

100-2,500
4-18
100-250
100-600
100-450
80-220

250-400

3,000-
8,000

75-300

160-170
10-15

11-15
40-70
140-200
80-120

6-10

70-120
0.5-1.4
25-60
50-80
20-70
5-15

0.5-10

90-120


7-10

50-80
                                                                               SLUDGE
tonnes/hour (33 tons/hour), is expected to be 8 million
Dfl ($4.5 million). Included in this price is construction
of a  paved  storage  area  for  soils and a runoff
collection and treatment system.

Process Status

The  soil  washing unit on  the site  of  the Heijmans
headquarters  in  Rosmalen was  built in  1985 as  a
pilot-scale transportable unit.  It  has  an  average
throughput of 10 tonnes/hour  (11  tons/hour). Due to
the complexities of attaining permits  in Holland for the
transport  and operation  of a mobile  hazardous waste
treatment unit, the soil  washer  has  become a fixed
operation. Heijmans  will begin  construction  in  May
1988  of  a  full-scale  unit  with  a throughput of 30
tonnes/hour (33 tons/hour). This new facility will be  a
fixed  unit, probably located in Moerdijk, near one of
the most contaminated  areas  of Holland. Heijmans
has not sought to license or import their soil cleaning
technology abroad.
Translated from the brochure "Heijmans Milieutechniek b.v.
Bodemsanenng, Installatie Voor Het Remigen Van Grand," January
1988.
                                                     18

-------
                                           Appendix E
              In Situ Cadmium Removal and Onsite Treatment by Ion Exchange
TAUW Infra Consult B.V.
P.O. Box 479
Handelskade 11
7400 AL Deventer
The Netherlands

L.G.C.M. Urlings - Head,
    Research and Development
Tel.:  011-31-5700-99911

Process Description

TAUW Infra Consult B.V. has applied an  in  situ
cadmium leaching technique to a 30,000 m3 (39,200
cu  yds)  site  in  the  Netherlands. The following
discussion  presents  a brief  synopsis  of this
successful project.

Cadmium is desorbed from the soil in situ by leaching
with  hydrochloric acid (HCI,  1Q-3 mol, pH  =  3.5).
Wells and drains were installed to establish a system
for infiltration and withdrawal.  Horizontal drains were
used  instead of  vertical deep  wells in order to get
straight  ground-water flow lines.  A cross-section of
the infiltration  and withdrawal  system installed  by
TAUW is shown  in Figure E-1.

The  Cd-contaming  percolate is pumped to  a water
treatment system housed on-site. Ion exchange was
the technique  chosen to remove the Cd from the
acidic percolate. The resin used is a Rohm and  Haas
IMAC GT-73 and is  regenerated  with  a  5 percent
HCI  solution. The cleaned  acidic water is  then  in-
filtrated again  into  the  cadmium-polluted soil. A
schematic of the water  treatment plant is shown in
Figure E-2.

TAUW divided the site into five compartments. The
first compartment was successfully  cleaned  between
August and December 1987. By October 12,  1987, all
the soil  samples showed Cd  concentrations  equal or
less than 1 mg/kg dry soil, and the  Cd concentration
in  the percolate was 10 pg/L Acidification of the
infiltrate was stopped, and reneutralization of the soil
was  started  with NaOH at a pH of 8.5.  When the
percolate Cd concentration of every drain  was below
the detection limit (<  10 jag/L), neutralization was
stopped  and  the  installation  moved  to  the  next
compartment. Cleanup of the first compartment was
so successful  that the final  four compartments are
being treated together.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

TAUW expected  to  encounter problems  with  the
installation due to freezing over the  winter, however
no problems were encountered. The  thermal mass of
the earth prevented  the in situ  operations  from
freezing  up, apparently  aided  somewhat by  a mild
winter.

A limitation inherent to the use of ion exchange is the
necessity to treat  the concentrated  regenerant.
TAUW's  infiltration and withdrawal  scheme  simply
extracts the  contaminant and concentrates it into  a
CdCI  salt solution. The regenerant  salt solution is
then treated off-site.  This  system  also  has the  risk
of  allowing or even encouraging further movement of
the plume. If the remediation  continues as scheduled,
TAUW will  have  cleaned  the  area  just before  the
plume  would  have reached  a ground-water  source
of  drinking water which is  near the site. TAUW was
fortunate to have  found an ion exchange resin that
removes cadmium effectively  at a low pH.

Cost

In  situ remediation was selected  over  conventional
sanitation for cost reasons. The entire project will cost
approximately 4 million DM ($2.5 million). The whole
treatment involves 30,000 m3 (39,200 cu yds) of soil
within an area of 6,000 m2 (7,200 sq  yds), and a total
Cd content of the soil estimated at 725 kg (1,600 Ibs).
Thus  the treatment cost is  $83/m3  ($63/cu yd) or
approximately 80 percent of the cost of soil washing.

Process Status

This operation is a full-scale, in situ  remedial action,
ongoing since June 1987, with completion anticipated
for June 1988. In their capacity as  a consultant for
Mourik B.V. of Groot  Ammers, Holland, TAUW is not
able to license or export any of  the techniques
employed  in  this  installation.  Mourik,  as  the
contractor,  owns all  the  equipment  and  any
technologies developed as a result of  this cleanup.
                                                 19

-------
 Figure E-1.     Cross-section of the infiltration and withdrawal system installed by TAUW for Cd leaching.
                             pH Control
                                                                                     Drain — 10cm.
                                                                                     Extension of the Drains
         
-------
                                           Appendix F
                    Rotating Biocontactor for Ground Water Pretreatment
                                   of Pesticide Contamination
TAUW Infra Consult B.V.
P.O. Box 479
Handelskade 11
7400 AL Deventer
The Netherlands

L.G.C.M. Urlings - Head,
    Research and Development
Tel.:  011-31-5700-99911

Process Description

TAUW employs  rotating  biocontactors  (RBC)  for
treatment of  ground water  contaminated  with
pesticides. Honeycomb metal disks with a diameter of
about 1  meter,  are  rotated in the  contaminated
ground water.  Microorganisms colonize  on the  disks
and  biodegrade the organic  contaminants. Gaseous
emissions from the RBC  are  exhausted through a
compost filter to  remove  organics.  To  prevent
shocking of  the microorganisms, the contaminated
ground  water  first passes through  an equalization
basin before it is  pumped  into the installation.  A
sketch of the  on-site  installation is shown in Figure
F-1. Ground  water  from the  equalization  basin
passes  through  two  RBCs  in  parallel  and  as a
polishing step, through two  sand  filters  and  three
activated carbon filters.

The RBC can  be applied to ground  water or leachate
polluted  with  organic contaminants.  One  unique
aspect of the TAUW system is that no supplementary
nutrients or  microbes  were  required  to  initiate or
maintain  biodegradation. TAUW believes the age of
the site at which this  process is being  applied has
established an acclimated microbial population in  the
soil.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

RBCs  are  limited  to  applications  involving
contamination  by  biodegradable compounds.  The
RBC  biomass may be susceptible to  thermal and
loading shocks.

TAUW applied RBCs  to  ground water from an  old
pesticide manufacturing site.   The results from  this
cleanup,  presented in Table F-1,  show removals of
benzene  and chlorobenzene exceeding 98  percent.
Figure F-2 shows the loading and  removal efficiency
of alpha and gamma HCH isomers. Note that  after the
40th day, the loading was increased and the microbes
adapted to the shock,  returning  to  a high  removal
rate. The significance  of these  results  is in  the
effectiveness of an  acclimated  aerobic  biological
treatment system with regard to chlorinated  aromatic
compounds.

   Table F-1.    Results of Water Treatment by the
              TAUW Biocontactor
                Influent   Effluent  Removed Removed
                 (H9/L)    (ng/L)   (pg/L)     (%)
   Benzene
   Chlorobenzene
440

470
 6

15
434

455
99

98
   Source:  TAUW Infra Consult B V article, untitled, undated,
          sent by L G C.M Urlings to J Hyman, March 2,
          1988.
Cost

The purpose of the RBCs was to reduce the amount
of contaminants reaching the carbon filters so that the
life of the carbon would be extended,  thus reducing
costs  of regeneration or new carbon. Although exact
figures  are  not available, biological  pretreatment
reduced carbon costs to 7 percent of the cost without
pretreatment.  When factoring in the cost  of the RBC
system, the  total costs  of ground water purification
were  reduced by 30 percent. In addition,  the  RBC
system  would generate  significantly less hazardous
residue  than the carbon system,  consistent with the
waste  minimization  goals  stated in  the SARA
legislation.

Process Status

RBCs are mobile units  that may  be easily used on-
site. The TAUW installation has been  operating  full-
scale  since November 1987. Its throughput is roughly
25 m3/hr (110 gpm).  As a consulting firm,  TAUW is
not in a position to license or export this technology.
The  success of this  installation, however,  will
hopefully  encourage  the application of  rotating
biocontactors  to site remediation in the United States.
                                                 21

-------
Figure F-1.    Sketch of the TAUW ground water treatment installation near Utrechtg.
                                                                        Legend
                                                                        RBC =   Rotating Biological Contractor
                                                                        SF   =   Sand filter
                                                                        AF   =   Activated charcoal filter
                                                                        CF   =   Compost filter
Raw
water


infl
effl


Spare
basin







k


Clean
water



                                                                      To sewer
                                                                       Road
                                                Stream
Source:  TAUW Infra Consult b.v. article, untltled, undated, sent by L.G.C.M. Urlings to J. Hyman, March 2, 1988.
                                                              22

-------
Figure f-2.   Loading and efficiency over time of the TAUW rotating biocontactor installation.


                         12


                         11


                         10
           LOADING,
              m3/hr
               %
           REMOVAL
                          9  _
                          7  _
                          4  _
                            10
                                   D -TAUW RBC
                                   X - KLEIN RBC
                       100


                        90


                        80


                        70
                        60  -
                        50  -
                        40  -
                        30


                        20


                        10


                         0
                                       20
                                                  30         40

                                                 TIME in days
                                                                              55
                                                           D  alpha - HCH
                                                           x  gamma - HCH
                            0
                                     20
                                                                   80
                                                                                 110
                                               40       60


                                                 TIME in days


Source:  TAUW Infra Consult B.V. article, untltled, undated, sent by L G C.M. Urlings to J. Hyman, March 2, 1988.
                                                       23

-------
                                           Appendix G
                                 HWZSoil Washing Operation
HWZ Bodemsanering
Vanadiumweg 5
3812 PX Amersfoort
The  Netherlands

Ing. H.C.M. Breek/lr. B. Spruijtenburg
Tel.:  011-31-33-1  3844

Process  Description

The  HWZ  soil  cleaning  method  is  based  on
techniques  of soil washing and particle sizing, along
with  a  water treatment stream. A flow schematic of
the system is shown in Figure 1. After first crushing
the larger pieces of rubble, pieces 4 mm <  x <
50mm  are   separated  out  of the  stream by  wet
sieving. Soil particles 63 urn < x < 4 mm comprise
the main soil stream. These particles are washed of
adsorbed contaminants by scrubbing with detergents
and  adjusting the pH to 12-13 by addition  of NaOH.
The  HWZ  soil  scrubber  employs  two mixing
propellers, one mixing  up and the other mixing  down,
with  a net flow  downward. A hydrosizer then removes
low  density organic  and carbon particles such  as
wood  and   rubber.  After  a  dewatering  step,  the
remaining sand  (63 urn < x  < 4 mm) is often clean
enough to be used in asphalt batching, or else it must
be landfilled. The fines (<  63 urn)  are separated by
hydrocyclones and dewatered in a belt press. It is in
this small volume of fines that the  contaminants are
concentrated, and so  it must be  disposed  of  as
hazardous waste.

The  contaminated scrub water and the overflow from
the wet sieves, hydrocyclones  and belt press are
cleaned in the  water treatment stream. After residual
fines are removed  by sedimentation,  the water is
treated  in  a tank by  precipitation,  neutralization,
coagulation, and flocculation to remove the dissolved
contaminants.  CN can  be  removed  here by  the
addition of  ferrous sulfate.  In the last steps of the
water  treatment  stream,  floating  iron  hydroxide
particles are removed by sand filtration, and dissolved
organics by activated  carbon. The  cleaned water is
then  discharged or recycled.
Process Limitations/Performance Data

Depending on  the  chemical  additives used  in  the
flocculation tank,  this  system  can  successfully
remove:

•   Complex and free cyanides;

•   Heavy metals, Pb, Zn, Ni, Cr, As, Hg;

•   Aromatics;

•   Chlorinated  aliphatic hydrocarbons/solvents; and

•   Chlorinated  aromatic hydrocarbons.

The treatment  of  soil contaminated  with  bromine
compounds has been successful  on  a  laboratory-
scale, but has not yet been tested on a full-scale.

Pollutant levels  and  removal  efficiencies  achievable
by soil washing  strongly depend on the distribution of
the pollutants over the different fractions  and  the
presence  of soil particles other than sand  (such as
adsorbing carbon  particles) which are  difficult  to
wash. Where the amount of fine fractions <  63 um is
greater than 20 percent, the volume reduction of the
contaminated soil  will  not  be  sufficient  to  warrant
economical treatment.  Where  a combination  of
pollutants  is present, a treatment recipe for the  soil
must  be  tailor-made. HWZ  has  also had some
problems in extracting  PNAs and oily material.

The rate-limiting  step  in HWZ's  soil  cleaning
operation  is the jet-  or hydro-sizer, which  can be
slow at times and inaccurate,  depending on the  type
of  soil. HWZ is  considering  a larger unit to use in its
place. Another unit which HWZ may add  to improve
the process is a crusher, which will crush the large
rubble  >  50  mm (currently done offsite), in  addition
to  pulverizing the dense  clumps of clay  which  can
contain   a  high   concentration  of  absorbed
contaminants. The  chemicals  in the  clay  clumps
cannot be reached by scrubbing, but if crushed, can
be taken out in the sludge. Removal efficiencies for
some contaminants are shown in Table G-1.
                                                25

-------
Table G-1.   Typical Removal Efficiencies for the HWZ Soil
           Cleaning Technique
    Contaminant
Input (ppm)
Output (ppm)
CN (complex)
Polynuclear aromatics
Chlorinated
hydrocarbons
Heavy metals
100-250
100-150
20-30
300
5-15
15-20
< 1
75-125
Source: Written correspondence of H C.M Breek to J. Hyman, March
       16, 1988.
Maintenance  costs  can depend on  such factors  as
the corrosivity of the contaminants  treated and the
age  of  the installation.  The  present  maintenance
costs vary between 50,000  Dfl and  100,000 Dfl/year
($28,000-56,000).  Capital  costs for  such  an
operation  are  estimated  to  be 4-6  million  Dfl  ($2.2
to 3.4 million). The development  costs  and changes
in a later stage are not included in this figure.
Cost

The operating  costs of HWZ are  typical for soil
washing, in the  range  of  100-150  Dfl/tonne  ($55-
82/ton). This price depends  on a variety  of factors
including:

•   Quantity of sludge < 63 pm;

•   Chemical additives necessary; and

•   Cleanability of the soil.

One can estimate 100 to 110 Dfl/tonne ($53/ton) for
basic operations, with 5Dfl/tonne ($2.50/ton) for each
percent of soil fraction < 63  pm. At  the maximum of
20  percent the cost will, therefore, be 200  Dfl/tonne
($103/ton).  HWZ pays at  least  250   Dfl/tonne
($136/ton)  to dispose  of the  contaminated  fines
abroad.
                               Process Status

                               HWZ built this unit in 1984 to be mobile, but the effort
                               necessary  to  permit  its transport  in  Holland is  so
                               great that it has become a fixed treatment facility. It is
                               located on Nordzeeweg, in the western harbor area of
                               Amsterdam. The  unit  is  full-scale,  with  a  typical
                               throughput of 20 tonnes/hour (22  tons/hour),  this
                               figure depending on the quantity of fines present.

                               HWZ is owned by HBG, one of the  largest operating
                               groups in Holland, and is doing a comfortable  amount
                               of business.  As  a result, they have not  needed  to
                               expand  their  business or  technology  outside   of
                               Holland.  In addition,  HWZ  holds no  United  States'
                               patents on their equipment,  so they are  not  able  to
                               license  their  technology   abroad.  Most  of  the
                               technology involved in this soil extraction facility HWZ
                               was borrowed from the mining industry.
                                                   26

-------
Figure G-1.  HWZ soil treatment scheme.
                     WATER
                      20 t/hr
                                                                            CARBON
                                                                           PARTICLES,
                                                                          WOOD, GRASS
                                                                             0.5 t/hr
                                                       SEDIMENTATION
                                                          SYSTEM
 CONTAMINATED
      SOIL
 (WITH CYANIDE)
      25 Vhr
     POLYELECTROLYTE
         SLUDGE
       CONDITIONER
                 MECHANICAL
                   SLUDGE
                 THICKENING
                SLUDGE CAKE
                IRON CYANIDE
                   5-7 t/hr
Fe-
HYDROX-
IDE
2 t/hr
 PRECIPITATION
NEUTRALIZATION
 COAGULATION
 FLOCCULATION
                                             CYANIDE
                                             3 t/hr
SULFURIC ACID
POLYELECTROLYTE
FERROUS SULFATE
                                                      SEDIMENTATION
                                                           TANK
                                         WATER STREAM

                                     RECYCLE FLOW 30 t/hr
                                                                                       T
                                                                                     CLEAN
                                                                                      SOIL
                                                                                     17.5-20
                                                                                       t/hr
                                                                                                                   DISCHARGE
                                                                                                                     WATER
                                                                                                                     15 t/hr
            SAND/SLURRY
            SLUDGE
            WATER
Adapted from: Breek, H.C.M., written correspondence to J. Hyman of Alliance, March 16, 1988.

-------
                                            Appendix H
                          Heidemij Soil Washing Using Froth Flotation
Heidemij Uitvoering BV
afd. Milieutechniek
Veemarktkade 8 (5222 AE)
Postbus 2344
5202  CH 's-Hertogenbosch
The Netherlands

Ir. R. Haverkamp  Begemann,  Product Leader - Soil
    Cleaning
Ing.  E.G.  Mulder,  Product  Leader -  Cum-Bac,
    Steam Stripping
Tel.:  011-31-73-21  50 50

Process Description

The  froth  flotation  method  of  soil cleaning  was
developed out of mining technology and enlarged to a
pilot-scale  plant by  Heidemij  Uitvoering.  The  first
step of  the process  is wet-screening out the coarse
rubble fragments >  4 mm.  The resulting slurry (one
part  earth, three  parts water),  is  conditioned  with
cleaning agents before entering the froth  flotation
tanks.  The  slurry  has  a  certain dwell time in the
flotation  cells, depending on the  form  of the
pollutants. To allow for this flexibility,  Heidemij has up
to ten  flotation cells which  can be  used  in parallel.
The contaminated  float is skimmed off and the slurry
is pumped to wet-scouring  tanks where  it  receives
its final  washing in clean water. The  cleaned slurry is
dewatered  by filtration and  the soil is  then usually
returned to its original site.

The water in  the system is completely recycled. The
contaminated sludge is either incinerated  or  sent
abroad  for  disposal. No special  water  treatment
stream  is necessary since  it  is  cleaned  during the
froth flotation process.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

Heidemij's froth flotation process is applicable to soils
contaminated by a number  of materials  by slightly
adjusting the  process  and using   the appropriate
cleaning agents. These materials include:

•  Oil products;

•  Heavy metals;
•   Inorganic compounds;

•   Aromatic compounds;

•   Polycyclic hydrocarbons;

•   Chlorinated hydrocarbons; and

•   Pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides.

The chemical additives used by Heidemij remain their
"trade secret."

Heidemij does not treat soils with  a fine fraction  (<
50  pm)  over 20  percent.  It  is  not  economically
practical  and the  efficiency  of  the  soil  washing
process  is  not  good enough  to reach  accepted
standards. Typically, the  end volume of the cleaned
soil is 85 to 90  percent of the  starting  volume.
Results of laboratory  and pilot-scale  studies on a
variety of contaminants is shown in Table  H-1.

Table H-1.   Results of Laboratory and Pilot-Scale Studies
           Using the Heidemij Froth Flotation Soil Cleaning
           Method
Contaminant
Cyanide
PCAs
Oils
Heavy metals: Pb
Zn
Hg
As
Chlorinated HCs: HCH
Extractable org-CI
compounds
Pesticides
Oil, Toluene, and
benzene
Copper compounds
Lead compounds
Before (ppm)
200-1,000
19
> 1,000
1 1 ,900
6,040
67
135
276
5.3

650
3,000-18,000

10,000-20,000
500-1,000
After (average
ppm)
5
0.34
65
110
150
1.5
19
0.5
0.4

14.4
20

1,000
90
Source:  "Procestechnologie, heidemij Uitvoering," brochure,
       undated.
Heidemij has not had the opportunity  to treat  HCH
(hexachlorocyclohexane - usually  pesticides)  with
                                                  29

-------
Figure H-1.    Two diagrams showing the Heidemij method of in situ steam stripping.
                           Steam Pipe
                                   is
                                   o
                                   o
                                   o
                             Condensor
                                                                                      Sketch of the Steam

                                                                                       Stripping  Method

1
\
f


C7
Vi



[W2H

	
n

Out f
v_
o
u
o
H



'
L^

r



St
Ml
earn Boi

er







^

                                                                                                 Generator
                                                Steam Lance
                                             Extraction Pipe
                                                                                   Final Clean-Up Approach
                                Vacuum
                               •^	



                                    .  Steam
v ^Vacuum ^ ^
^ ^ . Steam ^
^ ^Vacuum . ^

B
v », >, 	 «.
• » « • •
•^ • » »
R
                2 00 M
                                                                       ,160
                                                                                                >160
                                                                                                      Steam Boiler




                                                                                                        Condensor
                                                                                                      Section B-B
                                                                     1 00 M
                                                                                  1 00 M
Source   "Stoomstripper, Heidemij Uitvoering" brochure, undated
                                                         30

-------
Figure H-2.    An artist's rendering of a typical Cum-Bac" installation by Heidemij.
 Source  "Cum-Bac, Heidemij Uitvoering," brochure, undated
their  full-scale  system, however  laboratory-scale
treatment studies  have been  successful.  Heavy
metal-contaminated  soil has only been treated  on  a
pilot-scale by this system.
Cost

The  processing  cost varies  from  145 Dfl to 250
Dfl/tonne ($90-155/ton),  not  including  laboratory and
pilot-plant  investigations.  Heidemij's  full-scale
mobile unit  capital  cost was  5-6 million  Dfl  ($2.8-
3.4 million).  Their  break-even  point,  assuming  3
days for  mobilization and demobilization of the plant,
is  2,000  tonnes (2200 tons) of material per location.
At least four  different permits  are necessary to treat
on-site  and the  cost  of  disposing  of the
contaminated residue can be as high as 350 Dfl/tonne
(about  $182/ton).  Heidemij  is  working  on  increasing
the volume reduction of the contaminated fraction and
decreasing the amount of chemical additives used in
order to reduce costs.

Process Status

The  Heidemij  mobile soil washer consists  of  nine
transportable  skids,  the  heaviest one  weighing  8
tonnes (9 tons).  The plant occupies  an  area of 950
m2 (1140  sq  yds)  and boasts a  throughput of 27
tonnes/hour (30 tons/hour).

Since permitting  a mobile unit for site remediation is
so difficult in Holland, Heidemij hopes to permit their
mobile plant at the site of their headquarters in 's-
Hertogenbosch by the end of 1988.

Heidemij Steam Stripping and
Composting
Heidemij Uitvoering has  several  other  remediation
techniques that  they are beginning to market  in
                                                 31

-------
Holland. One technique that has been employed with
success at several  sites is  in situ  steam stripping.
Although it takes a few months for the ground  to be
heated  enough  to initiate  steam  stripping of
contaminants, cleanup only takes a few months more.
Heidemij  injects steam  at  150-200°C  (302-392°F)
and  extracts volatile organic contaminants  under
vacuum at a maximum of 0  mBar. Two  diagrams of
the process  are shown  in Figure  H-1.  Data on this
technique  were  not available.
Heidemij  is  entering the biological  decontamination
market with  a composting technique they call  Cum-
Bac®. A rendering of a typical Cum-Bac® installation
is  shown in  Figure  H-2.  Operating  details and  data
were not available on Cum-Bac® due to its novelty.

Heidemij Uitvoering does not currently have intentions
for licensing  or  exporting  their  remediation
technologies.
                                                 32

-------
                                            Appendix I
                        High-Temperature Slagging Incineration (HTSI)
SCK/CEN, Belgium Nuclear Research Center
Waste Treatment Department
Boeretang 2000
Mol  B-2400 Belgium

Mr. Rik Vanbrabant, Project Leader
Tel.: 011-32 (14) 31 68 71

Process  Description

High-Temperature  Slagging  Incineration  (HTSI)  is a
volume  reduction  technique originally designed  for
low-level radioactive wastes, but may be applied  to
almost any  waste  type.  HTSI  thermally transforms
waste into  a  mechanically  strong  and  chemically
stable basalt-like material in granules or bulk  form.
A  schematic   of   the HTSI  process   is shown  in
Figure  1-1.

The first stage of the  HTSI  process  is  waste
pretreatment. Wastes  are sorted, shredded to 7 cm,
and then mixed in large bins to create a homogenous
waste stream.  Screw  feeders  convey the blended
waste to the combustion chamber, the central  unit of
the HTSI.

In  the combustion chamber,  a burner powered by fuel
and oxygen heats the top of  the wastes into a layer of
molten  slag at about  1400°C  (2550°F). Figure I-2
shows the  progression of the molten slag  film and
waste feed.  The underlying  waste layer  serves as a
thermal  barrier between  the  molten  slag  and the
refractory lining. This  lower layer pyrolyzes, and the
upper molten layer undergoes oxidation. The molten
slag acts as  a liquid filter for the  lower layers,
absorbing most of the dust particles generated.

The  slag droplets flow off the end of the refractory
bell into the granulator where they are  quenched and
burst into granules. At the same time, the off-gases
travel into the off-gas treatment  section of the  HTSI.

The first  stage   of  off-gas  treatment  is  post-
combustion. In the post-combustion  chamber, the
off-gases and  the water  vapor produced in the
granulator are  completely oxidized  and cooled  to
900°C (1650°F). The  post-combustion chamber can
be fired  by either oil or combustible liquid wastes. The
off-gases are then  vigorously purified  by  a  string  of
cleaning units:  teflon bag  filters, followed by  a
scrubber unit, and  ending with  a series  of HEPA
filters. This redundant gas cleaning system results  in
a very low flue-gas organics  and  particulate content.

Process Limitations/Performance  Data

The Belgian  HTSI  has not  been  able  to process
regular quantities of hazardous waste due  to its low
capacity,  but experimental  test runs  have been
performed on the destruction  of PCBs. Results of this
study are shown in Table 1-1. In the  study, off-gas
concentrations for PCDDs (tetra,  penta, hexa, hepta,
octa isomers) and  for PCDFs  (tetra, penta, hexa,
hepta,  and octa  isomers) were  all  below  detection
limits. The data  in  the table  shows  a  combustion
efficiency of  PCBs at 957°C (1755°F) to be 99.99977
percent. The ORE for PCB is expected  to be much
higher  (> 99.9999 percent)  because the decontam-
ination factor  of the complete  off-gas system  is
between  104 and 106. However, this  ORE has not
been proven because  in  Belgium  destruction
efficiency  and not  removal  efficiency  has  highest
priority. When capacity permits, more test runs will be
performed in the  future.

Because of the high temperatures involved,  HTSI can
destroy  even the most stable chlorinated aromatics.
Its most severe limitation, however, is cost.  Although
most of the  high cost of the Belgian  unit  can be
attributed to  safety measures to  control  and contain
radioactivity,  this  technique would still be  expensive if
applied to hazardous wastes.  As a result of its current
high cost, it  is likely that  the HTSI  technology would
find  applications  limited to high hazard wastes  such
as dioxins and PCBs. Another likely application would
be asbestos  waste where concerns regarding fibrous
emissions  would  be  minimized  both  during
incineration and from the solid residues.

Cost

Annualized capital cost, assuming a 10-year life for
the 60 kg/hr  HTSI unit, is  estimated at $600,000.  The
facility  at  SCK/CEN  runs 24 hours/day for  5
days/week and  has  operating costs  of  $160,000,
$13,000 and  $16,000 a year for labor,  energy  and
oxygen,  respectively.  Maintenance  costs  are  also
high, at $50,000  a year each for  labor and  materials.
                                                 33

-------
Figure  1-1    Schematic of HTSI incineration process.
                                                                          Water
                                                                                                   Cooling Water
                                                                                                   Blow-Down Water
Source  Vanbrabant, R , and N Van de Voorde  "High Temperature Slagging Incineration of Hazardous Waste " 2nd International
        Conference on New Frontiers for Hazardous Waste Management Proceedings  Pittsburgh, PA. p 42 September  27-30,
        1987
                                                          34

-------
 Figure 1-2.
Purification action of the molten film in the HTSI
combustion chamber.
Table 1-1.   Experimental Test Results of PCB
           Incineration in the HTSI
                Combustion Gases
                                       ? \>a<>
                                  : Molten Slag Film

                                    Waste
Source.  SCK/CEN  "Hazardous Waste Incineration, HAWAI
        System, BWT, Belgian Wastes Technology," Brochure,
        p. 14. Undated.
Mass flow rate of PCB
Air flow rate
Off-gas flow rate
% H2O in off-gases
% CO2 m off-gases
%N2 in off-gases
PCB mass flow rate in
off-gases
Residence
Combustion temperature
Lambda air factor
Off-gas O2 concentration
Combustion efficiency
248 g/h
1 222 Nm3/h
1272 Nm3/h
7.81%
8.47%
75.91%
0.55 mg/h
1 .92 sec
957 °C
1.635
7.8%
99.99977%
                                              Source:  Vanbrabant, R., and N. Van de Voorde. "High
                                                     Temperature Slagging Incineration of Hazardous
                                                     Waste." 2nd International Conference on New
                                                     Frontiers for Hazardous Waste Management
                                                     Procedings. Pittsburgh, PA. p. 40. September
                                                     27-30, 1987.
The price per year,  therefore,  adds up to $889,000.
At a capacity of 60 kg/hr (133  Ib/hr), treatment costs
$3.50/kg ($1.60/lb).

Process Status

The SCK/CEN  HTSI  has been operating full-scale
since 1981. A unit  was  sold  to Japan in 1985 for
treating  low-level radioactive  waste  and  another
Japanese firm recently purchased a second plant to
start up in  September 1990,  also for that purpose. In
the  United States,   International  Technologies  of
Torrance, CA is  marketing the HTSI  technology under
the name  Hazardous  Waste Incineration system,  or
HAWAI  system. The  HAWAI system  has  a  slightly
modified geometry,  the capabilites of using oxygen in
                                          both  the  primary  and  secondary  combustion
                                          chambers, and a throughput of 400 kg/hr (883 Ib/hr).
                                          The engineering  details for  this  scaled-up system
                                          were worked out in  1987, but a unit has not yet been
                                          built. Currently, no HTSI facility exists for the purpose
                                          of treating hazardous wastes.

                                          The HAWAI  unit,  with  a higher throughput than the
                                          HTSI  unit,  would  probably  not meet the capacity
                                          demanded by hazardous waste treatment facilities  in
                                          the  United States.  Costs would stay about the same
                                          as  HTSI, but treatment would  only  be practiced for
                                          those  wastes which cannot be effectively  treated by
                                          rotary  kilns  such as PCBs,  or  wastes that  need
                                          special handling such as pathological wastes.
                                                   35

-------
                                           Appendix J
        In Situ Vacuum Extraction and Air Stripping of Volatile Organic Compounds
Hannover Umwelttechnik GmbH
Impexstrasse 5
6909 Waldorf
Federal Republic of Germany

Dr.  Mathias Stein, Project Leader
Tel.: 011-49 (622) 79 052


Dr.  Peter Wolff,  Director
Tel.: 011-49 (511) 61  40 35
Process Description

Hannover Umwelttechnik (HUT)  has developed  an
inexpensive and relatively effective in situ  treatment
technology for vacuum extraction  of volatile  organic
compounds from  soil  vadose  zones  and  ground
water.  A  diagram  of  a typical  HUT installation  is
shown in  Figure J-1.
The  equipment used  by HUT  is fairly  simple  and
commonly available. PVC slotted piping,  2 inches in
diameter with 0.5 mm wide slots, is placed into the
ground where the contamination is the highest as an
extraction well. A small pump, attached to the top of
the pipe  via flexible plastic tubing, draws the volatile
contamination  along  with  soil moisture  through  a
condensation drum for water removal. The air stream
is  then passed through an activated carbon canister
to  remove  the volatile organic compounds. One
extraction well under  ideal  conditions  will  affect an
area up  to  100  m  (90  yds)  in diameter.  As many
pipes and pumps may be used as are necessary for
the contamination at a given site.
When the ground water  is contaminated, cleanup by
air  stripping is practiced  in coordination  with  the
vacuum extraction. Compressed air is pulsed into the
aquifer through injection wells.  The  compressed  air
strips the contaminants in the ground water and they
are then drawn to the extraction wells. A diagram of
this  technique is  shown in  Figure J-2.  The
compressed air is introduced in a pulsed manner, not
continuously, to prevent channeling or short circuiting.
Process Limitations/Performance Data

The HUT  vacuum  extraction technology  is  most
effective  on  sandy  soils,  typically  reaching
background levels of  200 ppb  hydrocarbons in  the
soil gas. Where there is  a  large clay fraction,  the
slotted pipes may become clogged or filled with  silt.
To  try to avoid these  problems, HUT has devised a
double pipe extraction well. A second,  larger slotted
pipe (3 inches in diameter, 1 mm slot width) is placed
concentric  to the typical  2-inch extraction well, with
gravel pack in between, to act as filters to  the silt and
clay particles. This  extraction well configuration has
shown some success in the field.

The vacuum extraction and air stripping technologies
are  only  effective  on  volatile  contaminants.
Contaminants not treated  by this method  include, for
example, extractable organics and PCBs.  Figure  J-3
shows the  range and effectiveness of one extraction
well after 2 months of operation.  Figure  J-4 shows
the effects  of  vacuum  extraction  on  hydrocarbon
concentration followed by extraction with  in  situ air
stripping of the ground water.

Cost

In carrying  out a remediation project, HUT sells their
equipment  to  the customer. After  the treatment is
completed, HUT may  buy back the  equipment at a
depreciated price.  Typical treatment costs  by this
method are <  10 DM/tonne (<  $5 ton). The  initial
investigations  for a typical installation cost about
2,500  DM  ($1,500).  The  cost  of  a  pumping
installation is typically  2,500  DM  ($1,500)  also,
bringing the total price of a treatment to  5,000 DM
($3,000). If the  scale of  the  project  is  large,  an
automatic activated carbon  filter and regenerator
made by Prouter may be  leased for 7,000 DM/month
(about $4,000/month).

Process  Status

A large insurance company developed HUT  as a
service arm to remediate  dumped spills and  storage
tank leak problems at their clients' sites. The vacuum
extraction equipment developed  by HUT differs from
                                                37

-------
 Figure J-1.    Vacuum extraction of volatile organics in the vadose zone by HUT.
                                 Ground Water
                                     Table
                                Direction
                                of GW
                                 Flow
                                                         Unaffected
 Source:  Hannover Umwelttechnik GmbH brochure, "Em Unternehmen Stellt Sich vor," p 1 1, October 1 987
that found in the United States market by virtue of its
simplicity and lower cost.
The  key advantage to a vacuum extraction system is
that  it  achieves cleanup of soils with minimal waste
byproducts and is adaptable to contamination beneath
buildings. When  used in  combination  with  on-site
carbon  regeneration,  the  by-product generation  is
minimized to an even greater extent.
HUT has had over 300 vacuum extraction installations
throughout Germany. Two research projects recently
being carried  out by  HUT are  an ozone-enhanced
biological  treatment  study and  the in  situ use  of  a
non-toxic  surfactant  to leach oils from  the soil.  HUT
does not yet have serious intentions for licensing their
technology abroad and they hold no patents.  If they
did become interested in transferring their technology
to the United States'  markets,  they would probably
start  a  U.S.  affiliate  and  have  the  necessary
equipment produced in the U.S.
                                                   38

-------
Figure J-2.   Volatilization of organics in ground water by pulsing with compressed air.

                        c
                        ID
                              o
                                  Ground Water
                                      Table
                                 Direction
                                 of GW
                                  Flow
                                           is
                                               •Us!
                                                         Injection
                                                          Well

                                                                             Well
Source   Hannover Umwelttechnik GmbH brochure, "Em Unternehmen Stellt Sich vor," p. 9, October 1987.
                                                     39

-------
       Figure J-3.  Performance and range of an HUT vacuum extraction installation.
                 HC
               (mg/m3)

               1000  r   VACUUM
                        EXTRACTION
                          OF SOIL
      VACUUM EXTRACTION OF
     SOIL AND COMPRESSED AIR
       INJECTION OF GROUND
              WATER
                     0           100  |        200          300     Days

                                     BEGIN COMPRESSED AIR INJECTION OF GROUND WATER

       Source:  Hannover Umwelttechnik GmbH brochure, "Em Unternehmen Stellt Sich vor," p. 18, October 1987.
Figure J-4.   Soil gas hydrocarbon concentration over time with HUT in situ vacuum extraction and air stripping.


                                                                             20
                                                                                 EXTRACTION WELL
                                      WFI i
                                      VVCL.U
                                                                             AFFECTED RANGE OF
                                                                             EXTRACTION WELL
INITIAL HC CONCENTRATION (mg/m3)
HC CONCENTRATION AFTER 2 MONTHS TREATMENT
 Source:  Hannover Umwelttechnik GmbH brochure, "Em Unternehmen Stellt Sich vor," p. 6, October 1987.
                                                     40

-------
                                           Appendix K
                    HarbauerSoil Washing Using Low Frequency Vibration
Harbauer GmbH & Company KG
Ingenieurburo fur Umweittechnik
Bismarckstrasse 10-12
1000 Berlin 12,
Federal Republic of Germany

Mr. Werner, Managing Director
Mr. Groschel, Engineer
Tel.: 011-49 (30) 341  19 12

Ms. Margaret Brown Nels, Consultant
Tel.: 011-49 (30) 404 17 96

Process Description

The Harbauer  soil  washing  system  is  currently
considered  to  be  among  the  best soil  washers
developed in  the FRG. The heart of the unit is a low
frequency vibration step used to improve cleaning by
mechanical action.  The  Harbauer  unit,  currently in
operation at the Pintsch  Oil site in Berlin, has high
operating  costs due  to  an extensive ground
water/wastewater treatment system. A flow  schematic
of the Harbauer  soil washing  facility is  shown in
Figure K-1,  with  more  detailed  explanation  that
follows.

The first step in the  Harbauer soil cleaning process is
soil  preparation.  Particle  sizes  > 60  mm  are
separated out of the  stream  by a  vibrating  sieve.
Gravel in the size  range 10 mm  <  x <  60  mm is
separated out and washed with a blade washer before
the mam soil stream, x <  10 mm enters the vibration
unit.

Harbauer attributes the success of  their soil cleaning
plant primarily to the vibration unit. In this unit, the soil
is subjected to  oscillations using mechanical  energy
to dislodge  the  contaminated  fines from the  soil
matrix. The  soil is mixed with  an  extractant and
passed  through  the  vibration unit by  a  screw
conveyor to which the vibrations are axially applied.
Because  the energy  and  residence time can be
carefully controlled, the unit can handle a wide  variety
of pollutants and soil types. After passing through the
vibration unit, the cleansed soil is  then separated in
stepwise  fashion with  removal of particle sizes  from
10 mm down to 200 pm occurring in the first step by
sedimentation; the second fraction  is removed down
to 20 jam by a series of hydrocyclones; and the last
fraction is removed down to 15 pm by a flocculation
step followed by  a filter belt press.  Dewatering of the
sludge is done by belt press, to decrease the volume
of residues which must be landfilled.

All the contaminated effluents  from soil washing are
pumped to the ground water  treatment system on-
site. The  ground water treatment  system  has  five
main operations:  dissolved air flotation  (DAF), counter
current  stripping, air  stripping, sand  filtration,   and
adsorption (activated  carbon  and  resin).  Cleaned
water is reused or discharged into a receiving stream.

Most  of Harbauer's treatment  experience has been
with organic contaminations. The Harbauer facility has
treated  10,000  tonnes   (11,000  tons)   of   soil
contaminated by  organics. Heavy metals were treated
with some success, but data are not yet available. In
addition, data are being developed  on  gas works soil
treatment, which  is also in the testing stages.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

Although specific data is not available to support  it, it
seems that a combination of low frequency vibration
and other washing  techniques   is  effective  at
desorbing  contaminants from  the  smaller  particles,
allowing Harbauer to  separate out a larger proportion
of reusable  soil.  Harbauer separates  soil  particles
from  15 ym and greater for a recovery rate of 95
percent. Data on the  efficiency of  the  Harbauer soil
washing system on sandy and clayey soils polluted by
various organics  is provided in Tables K-1  and  K-2.
The data in  Tables K-1  and  K-2  show similar
organics  removal efficiencies  for  sandy and clayey
soils. However,   it  is noted  that  higher  residual
volumes will be generated by  the clay soil  cleaning,
adding to the treatment costs.

Limitations that   Harbauer  has  encountered   are
typically associated with the treatment process  they
employ,  such as the costly  disposal  of  carbon
containing PCBs  and polyaromatics, or problems with
the separation  efficiency  of  hydrocyclones.  As
previously mentioned, Harbauer  has  had limited
success in treating  heavy  metal contamination,  but
additional techniques  are  being examined for   this
purpose.
                                                 41

-------
Figure K-1.   A flow schematic of the Harbauer soil washing installation. Adapted from: Harbauer GmbH, "Harbauer soil
           cleaning process," undated.
               RAW
               SOIL
                                        <60 mm
ELECTRO
MAGNET
k
W
                                            RUBBLE
                                            >60 mm
                                                                       METALLIC OBJECTS
      LOW FREQUENCY
       VIBRATION UNIT
       HYDROCYCLONES
          WATER ADDITION
             AIR STRIPPING
                                                                           GRAVEL
                                                                        10 mm - 60 mm
                                        <10 mm
                              CONDITIONING
                    HCI
                    NaOH
                    SURFACTANTS
                                                                    SAND FRACTIONS
                                                                     0.2 mm - 10 mm
                                                                          FLOCCULATION
                                                            20
                                                               FINE SAND
                                                                  - 0.2 mm
                                                                                   <20 urn
                                                                                          SLUDGE

                                                                                        15 urn - 20 n
                                     WASHWATER TREATMENT
                                                                  FeCI3        NaOH
COUNTER CURRENT
    STRIPPING
                                                                                  4-J
                              SAND
                           FILTRATION
                 GRANULAR
                 ACTIVATED
                  CARBON
                                                                              SOLIDS/SLURRY
                                                                              LIQUID
                                                 42

-------
Table K-1.   Performance of the Harbauer Soil
           Washing System on Sandy Soil
    Pollutant
Input
         Removal
         Efficiency
Output      (%)
Total organics
(mg/kg)
Total phenol
(mg/kg)
PAH (mg/kg)
Extractable
org-CI
compounds
(mg ClVkg)
PCB (mg/kg)
5403

115

728.4
90.3



3.2
201

7

97.5
n.d.



0.5
96.3

93.9

86.6
100



84.1
Table K-2.   Performance of the Harbauer Soil
           Washing System on Soils with High
           Clay Content
Pollutant
Total organics
(mg/kg)
Total phenol
(mg/kg)
PAH (mg/kg)
Extractable
org-CI
compounds
(mg ClVkg)
PCB (mg/kg)
Input
4440.5

165

947.8
33.5



11.3
Output
159

22.5

91.4
n.d.



1.3
Removal
Efficiency
96.4

86.4

90.4
100



8S.3
Cost

Although the  Harbauer system is considered  semi-
batch, because only some of the steps  are run in
batches, it has a throughput of 20 to 40 tonnes/hour
(22 to 44 tons/hour). The unit cost is 250 DM/tonne of
soil (about $136/ton, not including the cost of residue
disposal). Capital  costs for the  same  facility  today
would be in the range of 7 to  10 million DM  ($4.3 to
6.1 million).

Process Status

The Harbauer soil  washing facility was  built  in 1986
as  a pilot-scale  unit  to  remediate  the  Pintsch  Oil
site.  With  all  the  money  and effort that went  into
building the facility  on-site, Harbauer plans  to keep
the facility on the  Berlin  site as a  fixed unit  (the
legality  of this  action  is  pending)  and  is  already
treating soil brought in from other  sites. Three other
units, which can be mobile or stationary, are currently
in  the planning stages.

The  ground-water  treatment facility is full-scale,
treating 360 m3/hr (1,584 gpm). Unique  in its large
capacity, it has  been  operating since 1984 and  is  a
NATO/CCMS Pilot Study demonstration facility.

Harbauer  is carrying  out  experiments  to  study  the
form  and  behavior  of contaminants  in order to
increase the removal efficiencies and the percent of
soil recovered by their  soil  washing operations. They
plan  to license  and  export the  technology and  are
currently negotiating with several U.S. firms.
Source for both tables:Harbauer GmbH, "Harbauer Soil
 Cleaning Process," undated.
                                               43

-------
                                           Appendix L
                           So/7 Washing Using the Oil CREP System
TBSG Industrievertretungen GmbH
Langenstrasse 52/54
2800 Bremen 1, FRG

Fred K. Gunschera, Director
Tel.: 011-49 (421) 17 63 267

Process  Description

The Oil CREP Soil Washer system is  among the
simplest operations seen in Europe. This system was
developed mainly for remediation of hydrocarbon and
oil  contaminated sandy  soils.  The  unit  is  typically
fitted  with  add-on  particle  sizing to remove fine
materials (<100 urn) when  used  on well-graded
materials.

Oil CREP  (Cleaning  Recycling  Environmental
Protection)  is a proprietary combination of surfactants,
solvents and aromatic hydrocarbons which cleans and
extracts oil from various media while preserving the
structure of the oil so that it may be recycled. The
recently developed  Oil CREP I  is a slightly less
efficient,  biodegradable version  of its predecessor.
After the oil is separated from the water where Oil
CREP I was used, the water is normally clean enough
to be returned to a receiving stream.

The Oil CREP System  SSC-20A  is a  mobile soil
washer  which  occupies  one  20-foot,  15-ton
container. It was initially built to clean sandy  beaches
contaminated with oil products. A diagram of the Oil
CREP system SSC-20A is shown in Figure L-1.

Oil-contaminated sand/gravel no larger than 50 mm
is fed into  the system via a hopper. Oil CREP I is
injected into the sand as it is mixed in a screw  mixer.
The sand then travels to a rotating  separation  drum
where the oil is floated off the sand using fresh or sea
water,  and spilled  over  into a collection  tank. The
cleaned sand is reused  on-site and the contents of
the oil collection tank, which includes the Oil  CREP I,
is transferred to a holding tank until it can be removed
for refining or disposal.

Where necessary,  TBSG  often  supplements  their
SSC-20A unit  with  other equipment.  Hydrocyclones,
for example, are  added  where a  large fraction  of
contaminated fines  < 100pm are  present in  the soil.
Mixers, crushers and even flotation tanks have been
added to the  system. If contaminants other than oils
are present, they will usually tend to form an emulsion
when  mixed with Oil CREP  I.  In  this  case a water
treatment plant must be added.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

Although Oil CREP is meant for extracting oily
compounds.  FSBG is prepared  to  adapt their
technology  to any  of a variety of situations. Where
contaminations are complex  and  a large fraction of
fines  are  present  however, prices will  rise  and
effectiveness will decrease.

This  technique  is applicable to gasoline, crude oil,
mineral  oil, and  other  oil  products. The Oil CREP
System  was used successfully  in  Spring, 1986 on  a
site in Hansburg, FRG, to remove PCBs, PAHs, and
various hydrocarbons. At this site,  Oil CREP was not
effective on fluoroanthene.

A  diagram  demonstrating  the  effectiveness of Oil
CREP I  with respect to the quantity added based on
recent test trials  is presented in Figure L-2.

Other data on  the  performance   of the Oil CREP
System  SSC 20A is shown in Tables L-1 and  L-
2.  It is recommended that Oil CREP I not be  confused
with Oil CREP, its toxic counterpart.

Cost

Including transport,  but not including disposal  of
residues, cost of  treatment using the Oil CREP
System  is   150-190  DM/tonne  ($82-109/ton).
Because  of  the  set-up  and break-down time
involved, only sites with over 3,000 m3 (3920 cu yds)
of  contaminated soil can be treated economically.

For a typical installation, costs run:

•  25-30,000 DM  ($15-18,000)  for mobilization
   and demobilization

•  10,000 DM ($6,000) for daily operations, and

•  10,000  DM  ($6,000)  for  daily treatment  of
   contaminants.
                                                45

-------
Figure L-1.   The Oil CREP System SSC-20A.
     1  Oil contaminated sand
     2  Cleaning agent OIL—CREP I
     3  Mixing unit
     4  Separation drum
5  Washwater tub
6  Washwater reserve tank
7  Oil collection tank
8  Cleaned sand
Source   Bremer Vulcan AG, et al , "Protection of the Environment, On-the-Spot Cleaning of Oil-Contaminated Sand and Soil, Oil
        CREP System SSC-20A," undated
Process Status

TBSG, a shipping company, originally used Oil CREP
to clean out the tarry oil residues in their  oil tankers.
Not only did Oil CREP dislodge the thick oil from the
sides of the tanks  in conjunction  with spraying with
high pressure  water jets, but it changed its viscosity
to allow it  to be pumped out.

TBSG, Bremer Vulcan AG  and  AEG Marine and
Offshore  Systems Division,  jointly developed the Oil
CREP System  SSC-20A  in 1984  to clean  sand
contaminated by oil. It has a throughput of about 10
m3/hr (44 gpm). A prototype  unit, an updated version
of the first, has an average throughput of 8 m3/hr (35
   gpm). A third full-scale  unit is  in  planning  stages,
   and is expected to have a throughput of 20 m3/hr (88
   gpm), supposedly the theoretically highest throughput
   achievable with  this  technique.  A  third washing
   compound, Oil CREP II, for use  with soil types other
   than sand, is also being researched at this time.

   TBSG is applying for licenses in Germany to sell their
   SSC-20A  and  in the  future will  seek European
   licenses. TBSG  has not yet sought licenses in the
   U.S. The washing solutions Oil CREP and Oil  CREP I
   are patented  and can  also be purchased separately
   from TBSG.
                                                   46

-------
 Figure L-2.   An illustration of the residual oil contents related to Oil-CREP I injection in recent test trials.
                                   ppm
                                  3,000

                          residual
                            oil
                          content
                            in
                          relation  2 000
                            to
                           wet
                           sand
                                   1,000
 Source:
                                     0.5        1.0      1.5        20VOL-%
                                    Oil-CREP I addition related to the input

Bremer Vulcan AG, et al., "Protection of the Environment, On-the-Spot Cleaning of Oil-Contaminated Sand and Soil, Oil-
CREP System SSC-20A", undated.
Table L-1.    Performance of the Oil CREP System SSC-20A
      Site #                 1                   2
Volume in
Volume out
• Clean soil
• Sludge
• Centnfugate
Contamination
Lead (Pb)
Nickel (Ni)
PCB
Aromatics
Hydrocarbons
Extr.
Halog.-org.
PAHs
Acenapthylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Pyrene
Benzo(a)-
anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo(b)-
fluoranthene
Benzo(k)-
fluoranthene
Benzo(b)-
pyrene
Water content




Infl.
10
1.4
10.8
<0.5
1900
39

1977
n.d.
7727
3323
6863
803
51
133
13
4.6
n.d.

13%
3.0 m3
2.5 m3
-
0.5 rn3
Effl.
5.2
2.2
0.11
<0.5
29
1.5

19
1.5
54
46
2.9
27
2
2.3
0.83
0.53
0.51

1%
5.0
40

1 0
Infl.
58.7
5.8
3.6
<05
534
4.3

286
nd.
1158
607
961
269
14
36
13
11
n.d.

15%
m3
m3
-
m3
Effl.
7.8
1.9
0.48
<0.5
94
1.5

74
8.5
132
88
14
49
4.6
4.5
19
12
11

10%
                                                           Table L-2.        Performance of the Oil CREP
                                                                            System SSC-20A on Four
                                                                            Different Samples


Sample
Number
1

2
3

4
Infl.
Effl.
Infl.
Effl.
Infl.
Effl.
Infl.
Effl.

Water
Content
3.7
108
4.5
8.4
5.7
85
4.4
9.6
Total
Extractables
(ppm)
4238
56
8686
57
3584
81
4017
78

HCs
(ppm)
1410
19
2859
17
1603
27
1267
26
                                                                     Source:  TBSG Industnevertretungen GmbH,
                                                                             Correspondence to J. Hyman, May 4,
                                                                             1988.
Source:  TBSG Industnevertretungen GmbH, Correspondence to J.
        Hyman, May 4, 1988.
                                                          47

-------
                                           Appendix M
                Biological Remediation of Soil Using the ECO-PLUS Biosystem
Umweltschutz Nord GmbH
Bergdorfer Strasse 49
2875 Ganderkesee 1
Federal Republic of Germany

Mr. Kurt Lissner, Board of Directors
Dr. Gustav Henke, Biologist

Process Description

Umweltschutz  Nord  has developed an on-site or ex
situ composting  technique  called the  ECO-PLUS
Biosystem that is currently in use on a number of
sites in Germany. They begin  with a unique substrate
made  of pine bark,  wood chips  and straw that  is
composted  on  the  site  of  their headquarters in
Ganderkesee.  Acclimated  microorganisms that have
an affinity for degrading hydrocarbons colonize in the
substrate because  of hydrocarbons  that  occur
naturally in the pine bark.

Construction  of  the  ECO-PLUS Biosystem begins
with  a PET-lmed  bed   and  leachate  collection
system. The contaminated soil is cleaned of all wood,
plastics, stones and other large items. A large mixer
called  a "Mole"  is  trucked  on site  and  used to
homogenize  the  soil and  combine the  substrate  with
the contaminated soil  at a ratio of about 1:9.  The
substrate/soil mixture is then put into the  beds at 100
m3/bed (131 cu yds/bed). Dimensions of  the bed are
approximately 20  m x  5 m x 1 m, and as many beds
are used  on-site as  necessary.  The  leachate is
collected and recirculated  over  the beds periodically
depending on relative humidity and  soil moisture
conditions. Regular sampling  is performed to  check
oxygen and  nutrient levels, for example, so that high
biodegradation rates can  be maintained.  When wind
and rain  are a problem,  the  beds are protected by
planting grasses, ground covers, or clear greenhouse
enclosures.

At times, the native  population  of  microbes are not
effective  enough for timely degradation of pollutants.
In this case,  Umweltschutz Nord brings  their mobile
bioreactor on-site to  develop  supplemental  biomass
by combining leachate from the beds  with heat, air,
and nutrients. This enriched solution is then sprayed
over the beds. Treatment of the  soil typically requires
about 12 months. Translucent bubbles can be placed
over the  beds,  keeping  them  warmer  (24-35 °C,
75-95°F)  and  decreasing  treatment  time  to  6
months.  When  employing  a  bubble  system,  a
compost filter is often used for emissions control.

The  ECO-PLUS Biosystem treats soils contaminated
with  hydrocarbons,  primarily oils. PACs  and some
organics  are also treatable. For  each  project,  a
special substrate  is  formulated  depending  on the
contaminants in  the site. When a site  is  heavily
contaminated, the  soil  is  separated  into three
sections:  low, medium,  and high concentrations. The
low  concentration soil  is  not treated;  the  medium
concentration soil is  treated  in  the  normal  manner,
and  the high concentration  soil  is washed  prior to
normal treatment.

Where the soil cannot be economically  excavated,
Umweltschutz Nord performs biorestoration in situ. In
this  case  bioreactors  are used  on-site  to  cultivate
the microorganisms in combination with nutrients.
This solution  is  then  pumped  into  the soil  and
recirculated. This technique  is  most effective  on
sandy soils. On very sandy soils, the microbe/nutrient
solution is not applied by pumping, but placed on top
of the contaminated area and let to seep. At the time
of this writing, Umweltschutz Nord  had  five in situ
installations  operating in   the Federal  Republic of
Germany.

Process Limitations/Performance Data

The  ECO-PLUS  Biosystem,  being only effective  on
biodegradable contaminants such  as hydrocarbons, is
not  effective  on heavy   metal-  or PCB-polluted
soils. Another limitation  is  the length of time required
for treatment, relative to other remediation techniques
such as soil washing or incineration.

To improve  their  process, Umweltschutz Nord  has
developed a type of mixer  that will be used to mix and
aerate the soil in the beds. The use of this mixer, in
conjunction with a bubble,  will decrease the treatment
time from 6 to as low as 3 or 4 months.

There  are  a  total  of  43 ECO-PLUS  Biosystem
installations in West Germany at  the time of writing.
Results from two of such projects is provided in
Tables M-1  and M-2.  In   these  two  situations, the
                                                 49

-------
high concentration  soil was  not  washed, but diluted
with the low concentration soil prior to treatment. The
cleanup  level set  by the German  government  for
these two  projects was  at most 1 g hydrocarbon/kg
dry soil.

 Table M-1.   Results of an  Eco-Plus  Biosystem Open
             Bed  Installation  at  a  Mineral   Oil-
             Contaminated  Storage Tank  Facility  in
             Altlast. Concentrations  Shown  are the
             Average from 14 Beds.
        Date of Sample        Average mg HC/kg Dry Soil
6/86
7/1/86
10/1/86
1 2/1 6/86
3/87
8/5/87
3/88
7,000
6,911
4,240
1,380
1,000
396
145
  Source:  DGMK (German  Scientific Society for Oil,  Gas and
         Coal),  "Report on the Results  of Biological Ex situ
         Rehabilitation  of Oil-Contaminated  Soil." DGMK
         Project No. 396-02, Hamburg, Federal  Republic of
         Germany, January 1988, p. 30.
  Table M-2.   Results of an Eco-Plus Biosystem Open
             Bed  Installation at  the Diesel  Oil-
             Contaminated  Department Grounds  in
             Wedel. Concentrations Shown  are  the
             Average from 16 Beds.
        Date of Sample	Average mg HC/kg Dry Soil
           6/10/86
           12/18/86
            7/3/87

           9/22/87
13,300

 9,430

 5,987

 4,820
  Source:  DGMK (German Scientific Society for Oil, Gas and
         Coal), "Report  on the  Results of Biological Ex situ
         Rehabilitation of Soil."  DGMK Project No. 396-02,
         Hamburg,  Federal Republic of Germany,  January
         1988, p. 42.
Umweltschutz Nord literature claims levels less  than
500  mg  HC/kg soil  can be  easily  reached  within
several months, depending on conditions. The treated
soil is commonly  returned  to  its original place,  but
because  of its high biological activity, could be useful
for embankments or as landfill covers.

Cost

For the two projects previously mentioned, the costs
were  144 and  187 DM/tonne,  respectively ($76 and
$99/ton). These  costs  exclude  excavation  and
preparations.  Umweltshutz  Nord  predicts  total
treatment costs for ex situ biorestoration  to fall in the
range 150 to 240  DM/tonne ($82 to $136/ton). In situ
treatment will cost less.

Process Status

Umweltschutz  Nord is the  name  of the  company of
scientists and  engineers  that performs  the research
and  cleanups.  lAT-Biosystems  is the  subsidiary that
manufactures all  the  necessary equipment. They are
both  located together at Ganderkesee.  Besides the
ECO-PLUS  Biosystem,  Umweltschutz Nord has at
their  disposal  a  wide variety  of  mobile remediation
processes including physical/chemical  units such as
flotation  tanks, self-actuating  and  continuous oil-
skimmers,  and  reed beds  for  ground-water bio-
remediation.

Since there is a  German  law  that  remediation  by
recycling be selected over destructive  technologies,
Umweltschutz  Nord  has received  a  great  deal of
business. The  company is hoping that a small partner
in the United States can be found  to help them out
with contacts in the oil and environment  industries. A
small consulting  branch  has been established in Big
Sandy,  Texas for this  purpose,  called ENTEC,
telephone number (214)  636-4376.
                                                                   •ftU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 - 548-158/87045
                                                    50

-------