v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington DC 20460
Office of Research and
Development
Washington DC 20460
Superfund
EPA/540/5-88/003 Nov 1988
The Superfund
Innovative Technology
Evaluation Program:
Technology Profiles
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
-------
-------
THE SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY
EVALUATION PROGRAM:
TECHNOLOGY PROFILES
68-03-3490
Work Assignment No. 3
Work Assignment Manager
Jonathan G. Herrmann
Superfund Technology Demonstration Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-03-3490, Work Assignment No. 3 to
PEER Consultants, P.C. It has been subject to the Agency's administrative and peer review and
has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
Today's rapidly developing and changing technologies, and industrial products and practices
frequently carry with them the increased generation of materials that, if improperly dealt with, can
threaten both public health and the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is
charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate
of national environmental laws, the agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a
compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and
nurture life. These laws direct the EPA to perform research to define our environmental problems,
measure the impacts, and search for solutions.
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory is responsible for planning, implementing, and
managing research, development, and demonstration programs to provide an authoritative, defensible
engineering basis in support of the policies, programs, and regulations of the EPA with respect to
drinking water, wastewater, pesticides, toxic substances, solid and hazardous wastes, and Superfund-
related activities. This publication is one of the products of that research and provides a vital
communication link between the researcher and the user community.
This document contains information on technologies being evaluated under the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency's Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program. It de-
scribes, using the vehicle of Technology Profiles, the technologies in both the SITE Demonstration
and Emerging Technologies Programs. The intended audience for this document is Regional decision
makers and other interested individuals involved in Superfund site cleanups.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Acting Director
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
in
-------
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this document is to provide Regional decision makers and other interested
individuals with a ready reference on those technologies in the SITE Demonstration and Emerging
Technologies Programs. Each profile contains a: (1) technology description, (2) discussion on waste
applicability, (3) status report, and (4) EPA Project Manager and Technology Contact. Technologies
are presented in alphabetical order by developer name with separate sections for the Demonstration
and Emerging Technologies Programs.
This document was submitted in partial fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3490, Work Assign-
ment No. 3 by PEER Consultants, P.C., under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The work necessary for preparing this document was carried out from August 1988 through
November 1988.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Disclaimer ii
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Acknowledgements vii
I. Program Description 1
II. The SITE Demonstration Program 4
A. Program Description 5
B. SITE Demonstration Program Participants 6
C. Profile Sheets
1. American Combustion Technologies, Inc 11
2. Biotrol, Inc 13
3. Biotrol, Inc 15
4. CBI Freeze Technologies, Inc 17
5. CF Systems Corporation 19
6. Chemfix Technologies, Inc 21
7. DETOX, Inc 23
8. DETOX Industries, Inc 25
9. E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company 27
10. Freeze Technologies Corporation 29
11. GeoSafe Corporation 31
12. HAZCON, Inc 33
13. Haztech 35
14. International Waste Technologies 37
15. MOTEC, Inc 39
16. Ogden Environmental Services 41
17. Resources Conservation Company 43
18. Retech, Inc 45
19. Sanitech, Inc 47
20. Separation and Recovery Systems, Inc 49
21. Silicate Technology Corporation 51
22. Soliditech, Inc 53
23. Terra Vac, Inc 55
24. Toxic Treatments, Inc 57
25. Ultrox International 59
26. WasteChem Corporation 61
27. Westinghouse Electric Corporation 63
28. Zimpro/Passavant, Inc 65
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
III. The SITE Emerging Technologies Program 67
A. Program Description 67
B. SITE Emerging Technologies Program Participants 68
C. Profile Sheets
1. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd 69
2. Battelle Memorial Institute 71
3. Bio-Recovery Systems, Inc 73
4. Colorado School of Mines 75
5. Energy and Environmental Engineering, Inc 77
6. Envirite Field Services, Inc 79
7. Western Research Institute 81
IV. Information Request Form 83
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared in partial fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3490, Work Assignment
No. 3 by PEER Consultants, P.C., under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Jonathan G. Herrmann of the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio
was the Work Assignment Manager responsible for the preparation of this document, assisting him
in this effort was Diana Guzman. Special acknowledgement is given to Ronald D. Hill, Director of
the Superfund Technology Demonstration Division, Robert A. Olexsey, Chief of the SITE Dem-
onstration and Evaluation Branch, Stephen C. James, Chief of the Demonstration Section and the
many EPA Project Managers who provided guidance and technical input. Participating in the de-
velopment of this document for PEER Consultants, P.C. were Robert Mentzer, Vyvyan Boykin and
Barbara Cormier. Special acknowledgement is given to Rebecca Keiter, Helen Owens, Nancy Thomas,
Andrew Weisman, Toni Greene and Tammy Hanser for their contributions in the layout and graphics.
vn
-------
-------
oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
November 1988
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
Program Description
INTRODUCTION:
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) (Section 209(b)) amends
Title III of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA) by adding Section 311 which directs the Environmental Protection Agency to establish
an "Alternative or Innovative Treatment Technology Research and Demonstration Program". This
program, called the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program, is intended to:
(1) accelerate the development, demonstration and use of new or innovative technologies and (2)
demonstrate and evaluate new, innovative measurement and monitoring technologies. The overall
goal of the SITE Program is to maximize the use of alternatives to land disposal in cleaning up
Superfund sites. In essence, alternative technologies are any technologies that are alternatives to
current procedures or practices (See Figure 1).
Concept
Concept
Proven
Technology
Developed
Demonstration
Data
Collected and
Evaluated
Alternative
Technology
Proven and
Available
i -«
Bench-Scale
Testing
Pilot
Scale Up
Emerging
Demonstration
^^
Innovative
Guidance
Available
Figure 1. Commercialization process for alternative
technologies.
1
-------
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
For the SITE Program, alternative technologies are categorized by their commercialization status
as follows:
1. Available Alternative Technology. A technology that is fully proven and in routine com-
mercial or private use.
2. Innovative Alternative Technology. Any fully developed technology for which performance
or cost information is incomplete, thus hindering routine use at Superfund sites. An inno-
vative alternative technology requires field testing before it is considered proven and available
for routine use.
3. Emerging Alternative Technology. An alternative technology at a stage where laboratory
testing has been completed and pilot-scale work is now necessary.
To foster this comprehensive program for the commercialization of new and improved technologies,
the SITE Program includes the following components:
Demonstration Program — The demonstration and evaluation of technologies on a field-scale.
As part of Cooperative Agreements between technology developers and EPA, the developers
provide and operate the technology, and the EPA conducts sampling and analysis activities.
Demonstrations normally take place at a Superfund site, EPA Test and Evaluation Facility, or
the developer's site.
Emerging Technologies Program — The testing and evaluation of technologies from bench-
scale through pilot-scale. As part of Cooperative Agreements between technology developers
and EPA, the developers refine and improve the technology and the EPA cost shares in the
testing and evaluation efforts. Testing normally takes place at the developer's site or an EPA
Test and Evaluation Facility.
PROGRAM ACTIVITIES AND CONTACTS:
Requests for Proposals for the Demonstration Program are usually issued in January of every year,
and Requests for Preproposals for the Emerging Technologies Program are usually issued in July
of each year.
Persons seeking further information on the SITE Program should contact:
SITE PROGRAM
Robert A. Olexsey, Chief
SITE Demonstration and Evaluation Branch
U.S. EPA
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513 - 569-7696
FTS: 684-7696
-------
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
Stephen C. James, Chief
Demonstration Section
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513-569-7877
FTS: 684-7877
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM
Donald E. Sanning, Chief
Emerging Technology Section
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
513 - 569-7879
FTS: 684-7879
For SITE information on a specific technology evaluation in either the Demonstration or Emerging
Technologies Programs, individuals should direct inquires to the EPA Project Manager for the
technology of interest. For information on the technology itself, individuals should direct inquiries
to the Technology Contact.
DOCUMENT PURPOSE AND FORMAT
The purpose of this document is to provide Regional decision makers and other interested individuals
with a ready reference on those technologies in the SITE Demonstration and Emerging Technologies
Programs. Each profile contains a: (1) technology description, (2) discussion on waste applicability,
(3) status report, and (4) EPA Project Manager and Technology Contact. Technologies are presented
in alphabetical order by developer name with separate sections for the Demonstration and Emerging
Technologies Programs.
-------
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency November 1988
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE *
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
The objective of the SITE Demonstration Program is to develop reliable performance and cost
information on innovative alternative technologies so that they can be adequately considered in the
Superfund decision making process. The demonstrations are designed to provide sufficient infor-
mation to enable potential users to make sound judgements as to the applicability of the technology
for a specific site and to compare the technology's effectiveness and costs to other alternatives. The
results of the demonstrations identify the limitations of the technology, the potential need for pre-
and post-processing of the wastes, the types of wastes and media to which the process can be applied,
the potential operating problems, and the approximate capital and operating costs. The demonstra-
tions also permit evaluation of long-term operating and maintenance costs and long-term risks.
Demonstrations take place at Superfund sites or under conditions that duplicate or closely simulate
actual wastes and conditions found at Superfund sites to assure the reliability of the information
collected and acceptability of the data by users. The SITE Demonstration Program participants are
presented in alphabetical order in Table 1.
-------
(A
*-•
C
(C
o.
"o
c
co
o.
E
(0
I
o
"^
co
*-«
(A
O
0)
O
LU
LU
_J
OQ
1
Jj
3
cd
u
"o.
Q.
«
I
.a
J
'E
&
a
C
.2
4>
|l
CU c
>
OJ
c
c
c
1
CS
cs
o
y
"3
c
JS
1.
.0
X
z
^
"o
fu oo oc
2 {5 "^
l^t
I-.
N g
Is
^ Tt
C
OJ
>s
X
o
s
c
O i,
H (U
S c
>> 3
CL ffi
CJ
c
American
Combustion
Technologies, 1
Norcross, GA
(001 - 1986)
X
.1
Q.
rt ^
1U «
"° ^
c "c
3s
s
'3
.2"
y K. Stinson
321-6683
: 340-6683
1st
•o
c
CO
Sjq
Is
H vo
(««
0
Biotreatmei
Groundwat
•3|T
•2 -c S
« u S
Js ^
s| |
•^" C -M
^ -C
? £ BO
0. 2? 5
on IS S
c
<*~
u
"~ "cTI
C/D E
•g
"3
C/5
y K. Stinson
321-6683
: 340-6683
!§E
>^i
o> —
C "">
5 °0
> '
o> ^
GO
c:
xi
'3
uo
— ' nf ~"
0 ^ t
<-J ffl f*-)
.2 5 S
03 0 S
X
X
_-g
'3
,CT
-a
ackson Hubbai
569-7507
: 684-7507
^i^2
to "-> u.
c 2
'3 ON
3 ^
hH VO
p* m
S ^T
c<3 10
ss
i
e O*\
« 53 7
B. 3 0
U > S
a £
ill
& •?„•-
fV OQ pjj
c/3 ".c i
£ "3
,y E
•^ X
Q, S
c/3 x:
"O "^
P
III
s £ £
o|
—1 m
Si
G
.2
Tr?
J- G
Chemical F
Stabilizatio
c
Chemfix
Technologies, 1
Metairie, LA
(002 - 1987)
X
Z
2
'3
O*
aid F. Lewis
569-7856
: 684-7856
§~£
as ^ u.
c
cd
•a
_«
m
—i T
O £
IS o
o t>
S S
<&
Submerged
Fixed-Film
X c-2
O o i
Q Q §.
T3
1)
3
1=1
C
0
Applicable
c
0
Z
II
Z
= Applicable
X
-------
m
•o
0)
o
o
LU
_l
CO
o*
1
1
0)
Z
cs
"E.
a
'=
1
u
'E
S,
o
B
||
|
*J
,.
^ 0£
^ *
&* c
i*
Technology
Contact
1
0
B
1
&
§•
I
X
c£
£., "O
C
0 CX
in Q.
Z
•a
"o
t/i
'5 *£>
Jj to °°
. °° T
lo »o • •
o ^, ess
o 2 t-
^ .n fT
|M
Q °°
S r-i
® ~^f
H P
— .2
ffl Q
"™ - £"
S'gS
'Cm""
x S ~ i
O 3 rt
Ills
X
X
"3
,0-
.S oo
SKp
5S£
fc In UL,
< 0
11
c
S
S
aJ
X ov
c fS 4
cd a^ oo
-5^0^°
^St
; E. Hansen
>2^000
o> oo
H *o
cS O
—i (N
C
3 .U
GeoSafe Corp.
Kirkland, WA
(002 - 1987)
X
,/!
o ^^
^ V
a G
^i >i
o >
OJ CO
D. QJ
C/) -E
-o
"o
C/)
c
" r-
•S P 4
• dv °°
co 2 H
a, m u.
underburk
54-4500
^ ^
rt1^
C* ^
^
1 g
11
II
^ 2
C/5 00
i m . •
1st
'. Newton
)9-2660
» r4
uZ \O
(U —
c
0
si
35 ^
I CO
£ e/5
International
Waste
Technologies
Wichita, KS
(001 - 1986)
•o
OJ
c
p
Cu>
Applicabl
c
o
Z
II
Z
= Applicable
X
-------
•a
a>
o
o
LU
_i
m
U
c3
1
QJ
1
"a.
a.
<
a
"5
1
1
i
a.
SS
u.
u
'E
n
M
O
'5
a
Of
o
c
a
1
9 O*
DC
C
a
M „
o
1
a
1
o
"5
s
i
Develo
X
Z
•a -a
p
.2
£• cj
tu 17 4-
c ^ '*
W ^ la.
— ^o
ss
g)ON
m "*
™ ^
c ^
-c u->
•S3
o
Liquid/Solid
Contact Digest
"~1 ^ °°
g|7
° "8
X
z
^9 12
5?
~ o
O o <
UJ
"c
QJ
"o
c/)
Resources
Conservation
Company
Bellevue, WA
(001 - 1986)
X
Z
•a -a
11
—H
>.— 00
« oo £°
S r? ^
~& S ^
-j ^ C
1
c<^
|S
•S^?
ro (N
tU \o
uJ
a:R
K
1
ii .2 (N
B ^ Q
ai D S-
<^
Z
I 1
.u E
^B ^
a S
to j=
•a
5
i^. r^
« ^ yD
S!i
iz rg r^)
2 m ••
•f= ' m
•sst
c
o
d j?
13
CO (N
Ion Exchange
Sanitech, Inc.
Twinsburg, OH
(002 - 1987)
c
o
X QJ £ U
•S _g> S 2
"S ^ .c "^
O, ^ P?
CO « S c^
X
"o -a
.11
C
i— ff^
^ «? (N
TD r^ °°
i-- oo m
^ m . .
1^1
0
O
c
ll
I e „- i
o, 8 a •- m
s .§
•7^ C
l§§
0 "3 0
~ J -S
n. °0 'C
to 3 S
o 2
"" S
o E
S ^
as
C/) -C
"O "3
11
(/!
OJ
td '"•!"
CQ ^ '*"'
t — f~~
a ^ "°
S ^ co
S £ £
"ob-^
> i
c/5 ^o
Solidification/
Stabilization
Using Silicate
Compounds
1
Silicate
Technology
Corporation
Scottsdale, AZ
(003 - 1988)
•o
g
p
Applicable
c
o
Z
II
Z
= Applicable
X
-------
o
U
111
_l
CO
I
«
3
__
"E
D.
^
V
U
1
.;
'5
b,
a.
1
o
e
1
'c
0
U
*s
A
ff
o
B
cs
1
B
n
i —
B
O
U
o
0
e
S
Develo
X
X
„
'3
S
S
g.'w g>
c/o IS o
Z
T3 -0
p
c
S m
C m eg
2!
* CM ">
"5 j, i/)
2SC
•2 S
S3 P!
6 i
•-) 00
In-Situ Vacuum
Extraction
"*c"I
III
X
Z
'o
C/3
C 1^
D r- ^r
o- FT 4
"3 rn ^
(2 ^ fc
rt ^
|S
2 'S
C/5 CX
3 'S
•tt C/2
|||
III
X
z
^
'3
CT
'J
^
|P
Z >/^ PH
0>
li-
ed ^
•?^
Q "
c
.^
^3
Ultraviolet/Oxic
Treatment for
Liquids
Ultrox
International
Santa Ana, CA
(003 - 1988)
X
Z
•o -a
SI
T3
cfl
•^
S i^
aSSi
c •?. fr
S "^ S
"% m ^
w ^ £
II
i/i ?!
§ —
X °
\
c
o
Volume Reducti'
Solidification
d
WasteChem Cor
Paramus, NJ
(002 - 1987)
cd f~i '5
u a "o o
'§.-•§>•§
C/3 U ^ ^
Z
•g
'3
VI
'5 rs,
sli
M)^ «
W ^fe
Sv-^
«n
s
° ^ E
a
o
'T
E
|3 ^
^ P
•§_
Powdered Activ
Carbon/Biologii
Zimpro/
Passavant, Inc.
Rothschild, WI
(002 - 1987)
Applicable
c
0
Z
II
Z
= Applicable
X
-------
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNDINNOVA WE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
AMERICAN COMBUSTION
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The PYRETRON, an oxygen-air-fuel burner,
uses advanced fuel injection and mixing
concepts to provide faster ignition and more
thorough burning of wastes. Burner operation
is computer controlled to automatically adjust
the amount of oxygen according to sudden
changes in the heating value of the waste. The
burner can be fitted onto any conventional
combustion unit for burning liquids, solids and
sludges.
Pure oxygen in combination with air and natural
gas is burned in the PYRETRON burner to de-
stroy solid hazardous waste (Figure 1). Solids
and sludges can be co-incinerated when the
burner is used in conjunction with a rotary kiln
or similar equipment. The use of oxygen allows
a higher burning temperature (up to 4500°F as
compared to a maximum of 2400°F in a con-
ventional burner) without the addition of excess
air. Using less air is advantageous because the
nitrogen in air takes away heat, puts a greater
load on the air pollution control equipment, and
requires a longer retention time in the combus-
tor before the waste is fully incinerated. The
higher temperatures also ensure more complete
incineration of the wastes, thereby increasing
the destruction and removal efficiency and re-
ducing stack gas emissions. The rate of waste
throughput is also increased, thus reducing unit
costs.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: Solid wastes con-
taminated with hazardous organics are suitable
for the PYRETRON. Generally, the technology
is applicable to any waste that can be inciner-
ated. However, no advantages are known in
processing aqueous wastes, RCRA heavy metal
wastes, or non-organic wastes.
Oxygen Rich
Combustion
Final .
Combuftion '
Combustion
Control
System
Figure 1. Pyretron combustion and heating process
flow diagram.
11
-------
STATUS: The demonstration project, using
contaminated soil from the Stringfellow Acid
Pit Superfund site in California and decanter
tank tar sludge, began in November 1987; it was
completed at the end of January 1988. The
demonstration was conducted at EPA's Com-
bustion Research Facility in Jefferson,
Arkansas.
Recently, the draft demonstration report was
received and distributed for review by EPA. The
applications analysis report is also being pre-
pared. The final report is expected to be released
by December 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7881
FTS: 684-7881
Technology Contact:
Mark Zwecker
American Combustion Technologies, Inc.
2985 Gateway Drive, Suite 100
Norcross, Georgia 30071
404-662-8156
12
-------
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
BIOTROL, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Aque-
ous Treatment System (ATS) is a remediation
approach based on the use of specific micro-
organisms as the sole treatment agent for the
biodegradation of toxic organic compounds in
groundwater. Both broad spectrum removal as
well as toxics removal of organics can be ac-
complished by use of specific microbes. The mi-
crobiological system selected completely
degrades the organic contaminants via immo-
bilized film bioreactor units without leaving re-
sidual intermediate compounds. Depending
upon the target contaminants, these units can
be based on either aerobic or anaerobic
conditions.
Effluent to POTW
NPDES or Reuse
Influent
Immobilized Film
Bioreactor Unit*
Continuous Operation
Figure 1.
Biotrol aqueous treatment system
process diagram.
The ATS consists of a receiving tank, a heating
unit, two bioreactor units, and an air supply
unit. In essence, contaminated influent enters a
receiving tank where it is conditioned for treat-
ment (Figure 1). After treatment, the water
passes through a heating unit; heat conservation
is used to control the temperature of influent
water and to minimize energy requirements.
Then, the water enters the center of the ATS,
the submerged packed bed bioreactors, where
the microbes are immobilized as a fixed film,
and the packed bed is submerged in the water
stream. Aeration is accomplished by spraying a
stream of bubbles through the bed, and there-
fore, a long residence time is realized in the
bioreactor units. As the water is passed through
the bioreactor units, the microbes mineralize
and/or metabolize the organic contaminants
into harmless constituents, including carbon
dioxide and water. Finally, the decontamination
effluent flows out of the bioreactor units to a
POTW or for reuse. It is also monitored to
assure system performance is at the required
discharge standards.
According to the developer, this technology will
require expertise in the isolation and cultivation
of unique microbes, and the amendment of in-
digenous microbial populations. It will also re-
quire the design of wastewater treatment
systems and the design of low-cost bioreactors.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
mainly applicable to groundwaters contami-
nated with organic compounds, such as pen-
tachlorophenol and creosote from wood-
treating chemicals, gasoline or other fuels'
hydrocarbons, pesticides, halogenated aliphatic
solvents (such as trichloroethylene and many
others), alcohols, phenolic and PNA wastes
from coal gasification processes, and effluent
13
-------
from pulp and paper mills. This technology is
also applicable for the removal of certain inor-
ganic compounds (such as nitrates); however, it
cannot be applied to metals removal.
Other potential wastestreams that are targeted
for treatment in the ATS include chlorinated
hydrocarbons, coal tar residues, and organic
pesticides. Underground storage tank contam-
inants, such as fuels and solvents, are also being
evaluated.
STATUS: A wood-preserving facility, possibly
in the state of Washington, will most likely be
considered for the demonstration project under
the Superfund Innovative Technology Evalua-
tion (SITE) Program.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
201-321-6683
FTS: 340-6683
Technology Contact:
Thomas Chresand
Biotrol, Inc.
11 Peavey Road
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
612-448-2515
14
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNDINNOVA TIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
BIOTROL, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Soils
Treatment System (STS) is a remediation strat-
egy based on a series of physical separation and
washing steps using water as a carrier for the
soil. The objective of the system is to reduce
significantly the level of contaminants in soils,
to recover the contaminants for reuse or dis-
posal (effecting a volume reduction), and to
achieve the environmental remediation stand-
ards required of the contaminated site. This
technology is most effective on soils with a high
proportion of sand having a majority of the soil
particles coarser than 200 mesh. The fine silts
and clays typically adsorb and/or absorb or-
ganic contaminants disproportionately due to
surface chemistry phenomenon and high surface
areas. The STS removes these fine particles
along with oils and solid organic materials as a
concentrated contaminated stream to be dis-
posed of by other means and finally, leaves a
washed coarse soil as the "cleaned" product.
This soil treatment process begins with the ex-
cavation and screening of the contaminated soil
to remove oversized material and debris, typi-
cally from one-half to 1 inch size (Figure 1). A
system to process oversized material could in-
clude various segregation methods to sort debris
into categories followed by size reduction of
certain categories. Each type of debris would be
processed by appropriate treatment methods
prior to disposal, and the debris handling equip-
ment would have to be engineered on a case-by-
case basis.
Soil _ :
Classification !OvertiM
Contaminated
Water
Recycle
Concentrated
Organic
Contamination
Options
Figure 1. Biotrol soil treatment system process diagram.
15
-------
Following debris removal, the contaminated soil
is then fed to the soil washing system where
hydrophobic components (such as oil and cer-
tain clay minerals) are removed, and the flota-
tion underflow stream contains the bulk of the
soil while the organic contaminants are concen-
trated in the froth phase. The soil then enters a
countercurrent scrubbing system (within the soil
washing system) composed of attrition scrub-
bing and spiral classification of the soil. From
here, the contaminated water enters some type
of water treatment system (usually a fixed-film
reactor) and is recycled back to the soil washing
system. It then leaves as concentrated organic
contamination for recycling to the process or
decontamination. The bulk of the soil from the
soil washing process will leave as clean soil, and
the inorganic, fine, clay-type particles (which
typically are laden with organic contaminants)
leaving the process undergo some type of resid-
ual management.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
was initially developed for cleaning soils con-
taminated with oil, pentachlorophenol, and
creosote (polyaromatic hydrocarbons) from
wood-preserving sites. It is also expected to be
applicable to other contaminants such as fuel
oils, PCBs, and metals.
STATUS: A demonstration under the Super-
fund Innovative Technology Evtiluation (SITE)
Program will occur at a wood-preserving facil-
ity. The average soil from such a site is expected
to contain 1 to 5 percent total oil, grease and
creosote, including up to 5000 ppm of pen-
tachlorophenol. Currently, the site has not been
selected.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
201-321-6683
FTS: 340-6683
Technology Contact:
Steve Valine
Biotrol, Inc.
11 Peavey Road
Chaska, Minnesota 55318
612-448-2515
16
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNDINNOVA WE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
CBI FREEZE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: Freeze
concentration is a physical process based on the
well established principle that ice crystals
formed by partial freezing of a solution essen-
tially contain only pure water. These ice crystals,
when separated from the mother liquor (brine),
washed and melted, produce salt free water. The
mother liquor retains essentially all foreign ele-
ments originally present and becomes concen-
trated as a result of water removal.
In an indirect freeze process, a refrigerant ab-
sorbs heat through a metallic barrier from a
flowing solution, cooling the brine to its freezing
point. It is most desirable and important that
ice crystals form in the bulk of the liquid without
growth on the heat removal surface.
The most significant feature of the system is the
vertical freeze exchanger, which is basically a
shell and tube heat exchanger. The solution
flows downward as a falling film inside the ex-
changer tubes while refrigerant is outside the
tubes (shell side of exchanger). Ice sticking to
the tubes or ice blockage of the tubes does not
occur because of the tube surface preparation
and the design of the brine inlet at the top of
the freeze exchanger.
A flow schematic of the system is shown in Fig-
ure 1. Aqueous waste is fed to the freezer from
the feed tank where water is frozen in the form
of distinct ice crystals. A slurry of ice crystals,
mother liquor and any precipitate which may
have formed is sent to the ice separation tank
from where a slurry of ice crystals and mother
liquor is sent to a gravity wash column. In the
wash column, ice crystals rise to the top and
form an ice pack which is continuously rinsed
and scraped at the top. The harvested ice crys-
tals are then melted recovering the refrigeration
to produce the water. A slurry of precipitates
J- — 1
A...--,
Ice
i
]
Freezer Separation
Tank
t
Prvcifiv**
Centrifugal
Pump
Receiver
Displacement
Pump
Crystallizer
Positive
Displacement
Pump
Wash
Column
Surge
Tank
Reject
Concentrate
Reject
Precipitate
Figure 1. Process flow schematic
17
-------
and mother liquor from the separation tank is
sent to a crystallizer vessel where precipitates
are grown, separated from mother liquor and
discharged. Most of the concentrated mother
liquor from the wash column and crystallizer is
recycled back to the freezer, rejecting a meas-
ured amount as the final concentrate of the
aqueous waste.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: Liquid wastes
containing ions, metals, organic compounds and
pesticide rinse waters are suitable for this tech-
nology. Waste containing from 1 to 10 weight
percent dissolved solids can also be treated by
this system.
STATUS: The work assignment to develop the
Demonstration plan has been submitted to the
contracts office. The cooperative agreement ap-
plication is being prepared prior to submission
to the Grants Administration Division (GAD).
Currently, site selection is proceeding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
S. Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7507
FTS: 684-7507
Technology Contact:
Matt Husain
CBI Freeze Technologies, Inc.
1501 Division Street
Plainfield, Illinois 60544
815-436-2912
18
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
CF SYSTEMS CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This tech
nology utilizes liquified gases as the extracting
solvent to remove organics, such as hydrocar-
bons, oil and grease, from wastewater or con-
taminated sludges and soils. Carbon dioxide is
generally used for aqueous solutions, and pro-
pane is used for sediment, sludges and soils
(semisolids).
Contaminated sediments are fed into the top of
the extractor (Figure 1). Solvent (condensed by
compression at 70°F) flows upwards through
the extractor, making non-reactive contact with
the waste. Typically, 99 percent of the organics
are dissolved out by the solvent. Then, clean
material is removed from the extractor. A mix-
ture of solvent and organics leave the extractor,
passing to the separator through a valve where
pressure is partially reduced. In the separator,
the solvent is vaporized and recycled as fresh
solvent. Finally, the organics are drawn off from
the separator, recovered for disposal, or reused
off-site in industrial processes.
The difference in the mobile units for aqueous
solutions and semisolids can be found in the
extractor. For example, mixing variations can
exist in the extractor whereby aqueous solutions
can go through one type of mixer having a series
of trays while semisolids can go through a "ce-
ment-type" mixer.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be applied to a wide variety of organics such
as the following: carbon tetrachloride, chloro-
form, benzene, naphthalene, gasoline, vinyl
acetate, furfural, butyric acid, higher organic
acids, dichloroethane, oils and grease, xylene,
toluene, methyl acetate, acetone, higher alco-
hols, butanol, propanol, phenol, heptane, PCBs
and other complex organics.
STATUS: Currently, a pilot-scale system has
been tested on PCB-laden harbor sediments
from the Massachusetts New Bedford Harbor
Superfund site during September 1988. During
r
— tx
Separ
Prop
j— »-
ator -
ane
\
1
.
Clean
Sediment!
Organic!
Figure 1. Solvent extraction unit
procen diagram.
19
-------
the test, PCB concentrations (ranging from 300
ppm to 5000 ppm) and the number of passes
through the unit were varied for each of the
four separate test runs. About one-half drum
(30 gallons) of sediments, with additional water
added to obtain the appropriate consistency,
was processed for each run. Results of the dem-
onstration will be available in several months.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Richard Valentinetti
U.S. EPA (RD-681)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
202-382-5753
FTS: 382-5753
Technology Contact:
John M. Moses
CF Systems Corporation
140 Second Avenue
Waltham, Massachusetts 02154
617-890-1200
20
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
CHEMFIX
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
This chemical fixation/stabilization process is
based on the use of soluble silicates and silicate
setting agents. The inorganic chemical system
reacts with polyvalent metal ions, certain other
waste components, and also with itself to pro-
duce a chemically and physically stable solid
material. The cross-linked, three dimensional
polymeric matrix displays properties of good
stability, high melting point, and a rigid, friable
texture similar to that of a soil.
Within this process (Figure 1), a liquid or solid
waste is first blended in the reaction vessel with
certain reagents, which are dispersed and be-
come dissolved throughout the aqueous phase.
Reactions occur using the reagents, polyvalent
cations in the waste, and some of the water.
Inorganic polymer chains (insoluble metal sili-
cates) form throughout the aqueous phase and
physically entrap the organic colloids within the
microstructure of the product matrix. Then, the
water soluble silicates are reacted with complex
cations in the presence of a siliceous setting
agent, producing amorphous, colloidal silicates
(a gel structure) and SiO2 which acts as a pre-
process _t
Mixer
To Solidification
Cells
Figure 1. Soil treatment system.
cipitating agent. Most of the heavy metals con-
tained in the waste become part of the complex
silicates with some of the heavy metals precip-
itating with the structure of the complex mole-
cules. However, a very small percentage
(estimated to be less than one percent) of the
heavy metals precipitate between the complex
silicates and are not chemically immobilized.
Since some organics may be larger particles than
the colloids, all of the waste (during the process
treatment) is pumped through processing equip-
ment, creating sufficient shear to emulsify such
organic constituents. Emulsified organics are
then solidified. This mixture is then discharged
to a prepared solidification area in which the
gel continues to set. Cementitious reactions cre-
ate a solid which, though friable, encases within
its macrostructure organic substances which
may have escaped emulsification. Such sub-
stances are immobilized by the impermeability
of the macrostructure. Portions of the water
contained in the wastes are involved in three
reactions after treatment: (1) hydration similar
to that of cement reactions; (2) hydrolysis re-
actions; and (3) equilibration with the environ-
ment through evaporation. There are no side
streams or discharges from this process. How-
ever, the gel which was formed during process-
ing is discharged to a receiving area. Even at
this stage, the water in the product does not
form a separate phase; some of the water be-
comes part of the solids, but most is physically
bound in the hydrophilic product. Although it
can evaporate, it is not free water.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
suitable for base, neutral, or acid extractable
organics of high molecular weight such as refin-
ery wastes, creosote, and wood-treating wastes.
21
-------
It is also applicable to heavy metals such as
aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryl-
lium, cadium, chromium, iron, lead, man-
ganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
thallium, and zinc.
This technology has also proven successful for
fixing heavy metals in wastes such as electro-
plating wastes, refinery wastes, contaminated
soil, electric arc furnace dust and municipal
sewerage sludge. With or without additives, this
process has been noted to be effective for or-
ganic constituents with low solubility.
STATUS: Presently, the Demonstration Plan is
scheduled for completion in November 1988.
The demonstration project is scheduled to begin
in early 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Edwin Barth
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7669
FTS: 684-7669
Technology Contact:
C. Paul Lo
Chemfix Technologies, Inc.
Suite 620, Metairie Center
2424 Edenborn Avenue
Metairie, Louisiana 70001
504-831-3600
22
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
DETOX, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This sub-
merged fixed-film bioreactor system relies on
aerobic microbial processes to metabolize con-
taminants present in a liquid waste stream. The
unique design of this system allows it to biolog-
ically treat liquids containing low concentrations
(< 20 ppm) of readily biodegradable materials
and discharge concentrations in the low parts
per billion (ppb) range. The bioreactor can also
operate at hydraulic retention times as low as
one hour.
The biological treatment system consists of an
above ground fixed-film reactor, supplemental
nutrient storage tank and pump, sump tank with
pump, cartridge filter, and final activated-
carbon filter. The bioreactor is operated on a
one-pass, continuous-flow basis. The process
begins (Figure 1) when water from a ground-
water well or equalization tank is pumped di-
rectly into the bioreactor. The influent stream
is evenly dispersed over the reactor packing
through the use of a header-distribution system.
High surface area plastic media is used to fill
the reactor, and the water level within the re-
actor is set to cover all of the packing material.
Bacterial growth is attached as film to the sur-
face of the plastic media.
As water passes by the biofilm, organics are
removed. An air distribution system below the
plastic media supplies oxygen to the bacteria in
the form of fine bubbles. An effluent water
header system collects water from the bottom
of the reactor after it has been treated. Water
exiting the reactor is passed through a cartridge
filter to remove biological solids, and is finally
passed through an activated-carbon canister to
ensure that all organics have been removed
(Figure 1). Depending upon the effluent water
discharge criteria, the cartridge and carbon fil-
ters may not be needed. The water to be treated
must also fall within guidelines for pH (6.5 to
8.5) and temperature (60-95°F), and be free of
toxic and/or inhibitory compounds which may
include certain metals.
Carbon
Adsorption
Tank
(optional)
Sump with
Pump
(optional)
Groundwater Well
Figure 1. Proposed Detox biological treatment system.
23
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
typically used to treat groundwater and indus-
trial process waters, but is also applicable to
lagoon and/or pond waters. Since the bioreactor
uses an aerobic microbial metabolism to destroy
contaminants in the waste stream, readily bio-
degradable compounds such as methyl ethyl
ketone (MEK) and benzene can be treated along
with some organic chemicals initially more re-
sistant to biodegradation, e.g., chlorobenzene.
However, certain halogenated compounds (such
as tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene and
chloroform) are not readily biodegraded by a
strictly aerobic process and are not amenable to
treatment within these systems.
STATUS: Currently, efforts are underway to
find a suitable site for a demonstration project
using this technology.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Ronald F. Lewis, Ph.D.
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7856
FTS: 684-7856
Technology Contact:
George J. Skladany
DETOX, Inc.
759 East Congress Park Drive
Dayton, Ohio 45459
513-433-7394
24
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
DETOX INDUSTRIES, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The es
sence of this biotechnology involves the adap-
tation of naturally occurring microorganisms to
perform specific biodegradation of targeted or-
ganic hazardous wastes. Once these microbes
are adapted, the process involves the accelerated
growth of these microorganisms and their in-
noculation into the contaminated soil or the
slurry tank in which the waste is contained. Nu-
trients and catalysts are added to the matrix to
enhance the microbial activity. The process in-
volves the slurrying of a contaminated soil with
water in an open top agitated tank (Figure 1).
The tank has special air inlet distributors to sup-
ply air required for metabolism by aerobic bac-
teria and to keep the soil in suspension.
Subsequent innoculations of microorganisms,
nutrients and catalysts are added over time when
necessary. The result is a systematic biodegra-
dation of the organic contaminants over a rel-
atively short period of time (usually two to four
months).
Contaminated
Soil
Water
f
-|
" i
i
Microbes
Nutrients
•"x
i
>
Figure 1. Biodegradation process diagram.
By-products of this metabolic consumption are
carbon dioxide, water and cell protoplasm.
Once the organic contaminants have been biod-
egraded, the microbes die out due to the lack
of their adapted food source. This leaves non-
hazardous cell protoplasm behind which in turn
acts as a food source for the indigenous micro-
organisms present in the matrix.
The treatment period can be from one week to
up to four months in the reaction tank to de-
stroy the organic contaminants. Sampling and
analyses will show when the treatment is com-
pleted, the liquids could be discharged, and the
soil could be returned to its point of origin.
Biotreatment can occur in the 5 to 40°C range
while reaction rates are slower at 5 to 12°C than
they are at 18 to 30°C. The liquid effluent may
be discharged to a sewer to go to a municipal
waste treatment plant. Or, it can be discharged
to a surface water (creek, stream or lake) pro-
vided it meets NPDES discharge permit require-
ments and does not contain significant levels of
priority pollutants after the treatment process.
The solid residue after treatment may be re-
turned to its point of origin for delisting or may
be taken to a municipal landfill if it no longer
contains priority pollutants. Otherwise, the
sludge and soil will need to be treated as a haz-
ardous solid waste and will require incineration
or disposal to a secure landfill site.
For full-scale treatment, either much larger re-
action tanks can be built or the treatment can
be performed in lagoons created on site by using
synthetic liners, emplaced in areas from which
contaminated soil had been excavated for treat-
ment. Floating aerators can also be used in these
lagoons which may contain up to 300,000 gal-
lons of slurry to be treated.
25
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
suitable for treating liquids, sludges and soils.
Currently, microorganisms have been developed
to biodegrade the following organic contami-
nants, which until now were felt to be too re-
fractory in nature to biodegrade:
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP), creosote, oil, phenolics, po-
lycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
chlordane and my rex.
STATUS: Pilot tests have been conducted on
the degradation of creosote wastes and PCB-
laden wastes. However, the process is amenable
for the treatment of other types of organic
wastes.
The pilot study will use 2 to 5 cubic yards of
soil with added water and nutrients making a
final volume of approximately 300 cubic feet of
slurry in the reaction tank. Biodegradation will
continue with monitoring until either no further
significant degradation occurs for a period of 2
to 3 weeks or 4 months of treatment has elapsed.
The developer and the U.S. EPA wish to test
the maximum amount of degradation that can
be achieved in a reasonable period of treatment.
Currently, a demonstration project is scheduled
to occur at the United Creosote Superfund site
in Conroe, Texas. The total site, comprised of
about 100 acres, contained two large waste
ponds which were used to treat or dispose of
the creosote wastes. These ponds are causing a
plume of contaminated ground water. At this
time, soil samples for the treatability study have
been collected and are being held until the de-
veloper is ready to proceed with the bench-scale
study.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Program Manager:
Ronald F. Lewis, Ph.D.
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7856
FTS: 684-7856
Technology Contact:
Thomas Dardas
Detox Industries, Inc.
12919 Dairy-Ashford
Sugarland, Texas 77478
714-240-0892
26
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The auto-
matic pressure filter (APF) system uses low-
cost, DuPont Tyvek® roll goods for automatic
microfiltration of hazardous wastes in an en-
closed, unattended manner. The filter unit,
manufactured by the Oberlin Filter Company,
produces dry filter cakes (40-60% solids) that
are suitable for further treatment (i.e., landfill-
ing, storage, incineration, recycling, etc.). This
treatment unit is mobile and is similar to the
trailer-mounted dewatering systems (e.g., filter
presses, belt presses, centrifuges, etc.) currently
used throughout the U.S. for lagoon and basin
cleanup operations.
In the APF process (Figure 1), liquid hazardous
wastes are pumped into a sealed chamber
(platen) through the special sub-micron Tyvek®
filter media (which has a throughput 10 times
FILTtR
WLET
higher than conventional Tyvek®) at a fairly
high operating pressure (up to 60 psig). The
resulting filter cake and filtrate from this system
may require further treatment prior to disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This combination
technology can treat hazardous waste suspen-
sions, particularly heavy metal effluents,
groundwater leachate, stilling basin leachate and
runoff, oily wastes, radioactive wastes, etc.,
with solids concentrations ranging between 10
and 300,000 ppm. The APF system is best suited
for low solids wastewater (less than 5,000 ppm
solids); otherwise, cake capacity and handling
becomes limiting. Any type of solids can be
handled including inorganics, organics, and oily
wastes, with a wide variety of particle sizes.
Particulates as small as 0.1 micron may be
separated.
•CXH*-
Figure
Oberlin APr/Tyvek* process diagram
27
-------
Volatile wastes can also be processed because
the unit is enclosed. For example, the APF sys-
tem can be used for volatile organic solids re-
moval, prior to deep-well injection. Waste
liquids having viscosities as high as 16 cps have
also been treated.
STATUS: Activities on this demonstration
project have been recently initiated. The site
selection process is just getting underway.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
John F. Martin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7758
FTS: 684-7758
Technology Contact:
Ernest Mayer, Ph.D.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company
Engineering Department LI 359
P.O. Box 6090
Newark, Delaware 19714-6090
302-366-3652
28
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
FREEZE TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: Freeze
crystallization operates on the principal that
when water freezes, the ice crystal structure that
forms naturally excludes all contaminants from
the water molecule matrix (Figure 1). Thus,
when the ice crystals are recovered and washed
with pure water to remove any adhering brine
contaminants, that which remains is very pure
water.
ORGANICS
VOLATILE
STRIPPING
SORPTION
BIO/CHEM
HEAVY
[ SORPT'ION 1
OXIDATION
FRE
INORGANICS
METALS | SALTS
1
| SORPTION"[
MEMBRANES
1
EVAPORATORS
1
EZE
Figure 1. Water molecule matrix.
A version of freeze crystallization that directly
injects the refrigerant into the waste has been
created by the developer. In this process, the
mixed waste liquid enters through the feed heat
exchanger where it is cooled to within a few
degrees of its freezing temperature (Figure 2).
The cooled feed then enters the crystallizer
where it is mixed with boiling refrigerant. Water
is crystallized in the stirred solution, and is
maintained at a uniform concentration or ice
fraction by continuous removal of a slurry
stream (liquid + ice) that flows to the eutectic
separator-growth column. The eutectic separa-
tor is used in the system when dissolved mate-
rials in the feed are themselves crystallized
because of high water recoveries. The growth
Refrigeration
| Syitem
Melt
Feed
Brine
Feed
Exchangera
Freexer
Figure 2. Procesa schematic.
column is a zone where water crystals are in-
creased in size to better accomodate subsequent
washing.
Ice slurry from the crystal separator is pumped
to the wash column where it forms a porous
pack. The slurry liquid is removed from the col-
umn via screened openings, and is then either
returned to the eutectic separator or is removed
from the system for recycle/disposal. The ice is
separated from the liquid in the wash column
by filtering screens that allow passage of liquid
concentrate but not the ice crystals. Hydraulic
forces generated (by the flow of liquid to the
screens in the middle of the ice pack) provide
the mechanism for propelling the ice pack up-
ward in the column. Ice is washed with melt
water and scraped from the top of the pack into
a reslurry chamber in the wash column. Within
the wash column, melted product is used to
transport the ice to a shell and tube heat ex-
changer, where the slurry is heated on the tube
side and hot refrigerant gas is condensed on the
shell side.
29
-------
In most applications, more heat is generated by
melting the ice in the refrigeration system than
can be used. This leaves some uncondensed re-
frigeration vapor that needs to be further com-
pressed and condensed by cooling water in a
heat reinjection system.
All refrigerants are soluble in water to some
degree. Strippers are therefore provided in the
system to remove this refrigerant from the pur-
ified water, the concentrated liquid, and any
other liquid phases produced from the process.
The strippers operate under vacuum and contain
heaters which generate low pressure steam to
enhance refrigerant removal, if that is necessary.
Excess generating capacity is built into the melt
stripper for use in rapid melt-out of vessels and
lines for maintenance or other access.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
will remove both organic and inorganic, ionic
and non-ionic species, from contaminated
aqueous streams. It works on both surface
waters and groundwaters as well as directly on
process wastes.
The process is applicable to free liquids, whether
the solvent is water or an organic. It can also
be used in conjunction with other processes to
treat other media. For example, contaminated
soils can be washed to transfer the contaminant
into a liquid (i.e., water) medium. This has not
been particularly attractive because of the low
concentrations in the washing medium. Freezing
can concentrate this to allow by-product recov-
ery or more economical final destruction.
STATUS: This project was accepted into the
SITE Demonstration Program in July 1988.
Activities associated with the evaluation of the
technology were initiated in August 1988, with
site selection currently the focus of activity.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Contact:
Jonathan G. Herrmann
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7839
FTS: 684-7839
Technology Contact:
James A. Heist
Freeze Technologies Corporation
2539-C Timberlake Road
P.O. Box 40968
Raleigh, North Carolina 27629-0968
919-850-0600
30
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNDINNOVA JIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
GEOSAFE CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: In-Situ Vi-
trification (ISV) is based on the concept of
joule-heating to electrically melt soil or sludge.
Melt temperatures, in the range of 1600 to
2000°C, act to destroy organic pollutants by
pyrolysis. Inorganic pollutants are immobilized
within the vitrified mass. Both the airborne or-
ganic and inorganic combustion by-products are
collected in a negatively pressurized hood which
draws the contaminants into an off-gas treat-
ment system that removes particulates and other
pollutants of concern.
The ISV technology is trailer-mounted on three
semitrailers that are suitable for highway trans-
port. At the site to be treated, the system must
be set up on relatively level ground for most
effective operation. The vitrification process
(Figure 1) is carried out by inserting large elec-
trodes into contaminated zones containing suf-
ficient soil to support formation of a melt.
Graphite is placed on the surface to complete
the circuit between the electrodes. An electric
current is passed through the electrodes and
graphite, and the heat generated from this cur-
rent causes a melt that gradually works down-
ward through the soil.This process permits soil
or sludge to be vitrified over an area of approx-
imately 27 feet on a side to a depth of 20 feet
and requires seven to ten days to complete. (This
is called "one setting"). GeoSafe Corporation
has projected vitrification depths to 50 feet with
the ultimate limiting factor being melt tonnage
per setting. The system is then moved to a sec-
ond setting where the vitrification process is re-
peated. This is continued until the entire
contaminated soil or sludge volume on the site
has been vitrified. The vitrified mass then cools
over a period of several months to a year or
more.
The basic configuration of the ISV process con-
sists of an electrical network with four elec-
trodes driven or pushed into or placed in drilled
augered holes in the soil or sludge, a capture
hood to collect fumes or gases from the setting
and direct it to an off-gas treatment system, and
the off-gas treatment system itself. The off-gas
treatment system consists of a quench tower,
pH-controlled venturi scrubber, mist eliminator,
heater (temperature controller), HEPA filters,
and carbon adsorbers.
Figure 1. In-situ vitrification process.
31
-------
The ISV process shares the same process control
requirements as other thermal processes that
convert hazardous materials into gaseous or va-
por form. It is necessary to monitor the process
to ensure that the off-gas treatment equipment
is properly performing. Because of the high
temperature of the melt, the great majority of
gases evolving from the melt have been pyro-
lyzed into low molecular weight molecules or
into diatomic gases that do not pose significant
hazard to workers or the environment. How-
ever, the possibility exists for a small amount
of hazardous materials to volatilize from the
process; these must be treated by the off-gas
treatment system to prevent an uncontrolled re-
lease to the environment.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: The ISV process
can potentially be used to destroy or volatilize
organics and/or immobilize inorganics in con-
taminated soils or sludges. ISV can be per-
formed on saturated soils, but the initial
application of current will be used to volatilize
the moisture in the soil or sludge in the vicinity
of a starter path of glass frit and graphite. Once
this is done, the vitrification process begins.
Sludges must contain a sufficient amount of
glass-forming material (non-volatile, non-des-
tructible solids) to produce a molten mass that
will destroy, remove, or immobilize the organic
and inorganic pollutants.
The ISV process is limited by (1) the presence
of groundwater in the contaminated soil or
sludge with a permeability of greater than 1 x
10 5 cm/sec, (2) the presence of buried metals
in excess of 5 percent of the melt weight, and
(3) the ability to maintain a negative pressure
on the off-gas collection hood by the off-gas
treatment system, and (4) the amount and con-
centration of the combustible organics present
in the soil or sludge. Each of these limitations
should be addressed based on site-specific
conditions.
STATUS: The ISV process has been demon-
strated at full-scale on radioactive wastes at the
Department of Energy's Hanford Nuclear Re-
servation; pilot tests have also been performed
on PCB wastes, industrial lime sludge, dioxins,
metal plating wastes and other solid combusti-
bles and liquid chemicals. Identification of a site
for this technology demonstration is currently
underway.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Jonathan G. Herrmann
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7839
FTS: 684-7839
Technology Contact:
James E. Hansen
GeoSafe Corporation
303 Parkplace, Suite 126
Kirkland, Washingtion 98033
206-822-4000
32
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
HAZCON, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The soli
dification/stabilization technology mixes haz-
ardous wastes, cement, water and an additive
called Chloranan. Chloranan, a nontoxic chem-
ical, encapsulates organic molecules, rendering
them ineffective in retarding or inhibiting soli-
dification. This treatment technology immobi-
lizes the contaminants from soils by binding
them into a concrete-like, leach-resistant mass.
After contaminated soil is excavated and
screened out for oversized material, it is fed to
a mobile field blending unit to treat the wastes
(Figure 1). The unit consists of soil and cement
holding bins, a Chloranan feed tank and a
blending auger to mix the waste and pozzolanic
materials (portland cement, fly ash or kiln dust).
Then, water is added as necessary, and the re-
sultant slurry is allowed to harden before dis-
posal. The treated output are the contaminants
bound by encapsulation into a hardened, con-
Figure 1. SoIldlfication/itiblHzation process diagram
crete-like mass. For the treatment of large vol-
umes of waste, larger blending systems are also
available.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
suitable for soils and sludges contaminated by
organic compounds, heavy metals, oil and
grease.
STATUS: A former oil reprocessing plant con-
taining high levels of oil and grease along with
volatile and semi-volatile organics, PCBs, and
heavy metals in Douglassville, Pennsylvania,
was selected for demonstration testing using this
technology. The Field Demonstration occurred
October 1987. A Final Report was completed
in September 1988, on the test results for six
wastes stabilized at Douglassville.
DEMONSTRATION RESULTS: The com-
parison of the soil, 7-day and 28-day sample test
results were generally favorable. The physical
test results were very good, with unconfined
compressive strength between 220 to 1570 psi.
Very low permeabilities were developed (good)
and the porosity of the treated wastes were
moderate. Durability test results were very
good, there was no change in physical strength
after the wet/dry and freeze/thaw cycles. The
microstructural analyses seemed to indicate
possible sample degradation in the future. The
210-day sample core and future sample core
testing will confirm or deny these projections.
There was a waste volume increase of about
120%. By using less stabilizer smaller volume
increases can be obtained, but lower strengths
will result. There is an inverse relationship be-
tween physical strength and the waste organic
concentration.
33
-------
The results of the leaching tests were mixed.
The TCLP results of the stabilized wastes were
very low; essentially all values of metals, volatile
organics and semi-volatile organics were below
1 ppm. Lead leachate concentrations dropped
by a factor of 200 from the untreated soil results
to below 100 ppb. Volatile and semi-volatile or-
ganic concentrations, however, did not change
from the untreated soil TCLP. Oil and grease
concentrations were greater in the treated waste
TCLPs than the untreated waste, from less than
2 ppm up to 4 ppm. PCBs could not be detected
(< 1 ppb) in the TCLP leachates for either the
treated or untreated wastes.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Paul R. de Percin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7797
FTS: 684-7797
Technology Contact:
Ray Funderburk
HAZCON, Inc.
P.O. Box 947
Katy, Texas 77492
713-934-4500
34
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNDINNOVA WE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
HAZTECH
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The elec-
tric infrared incineration technology (originally
developed by Shirco Infrared Systems, Inc. of
Dallas, Texas) is a mobile thermal processing
system which uses electrically powered silicon
carbide rods to bring the organic waste to com-
bustion temperatures and then, to incinerate any
remaining combustibles in an afterburner. The
mobile system is comprised of four components:
the electric-powered infrared primary chamber,
a gas-fired secondary combustion chamber, an
emission control system, and a process man-
agement and monitoring control center.
Waste is fed into the primary chamber on a wire
mesh conveyor belt and exposed (at high tem-
peratures of up to 1850°F) to infrared radiant
heat provided by the horizontal rows of electri-
Conveyor
Emission Duct
cally-powered silicon carbide rods above the belt
(Figure 1). A blower provides air at selected
locations along the belt and can be used to con-
trol the burning rate of the waste feed and its
location while burning on the belt.
The ash material which drops off the belt in the
primary chamber is quenched by water sprays.
This quench is scrubber water effluent and is
used to reduce the amount of scrubber water
effluent for disposal or reprocessing. The ash is
then screw conveyed out of the primary cham-
ber into the ash hopper where it is removed to
a holding area, analyzed for PCB content, and
then piled in a new location away from the proc-
essing area, after the PCB content is determined
to be less than 1 ppm.
Primary Combustion
Chamber (PCC)
Secondary Combustion
Chamber (SCO)
SCC Emission
Outlet Duct
Emergency
Bypass Stack
ToPOTW
* Sludge to
Disposal
Figure 1. Peak Oil incineration unit process diagram.
35
-------
Gaseous volatiles from the primary chamber
flow into the secondary chamber which at higher
temperatures provides residence time, turbu-
lence and supplemental energy (if required) to
destroy these gases. Gases from the secondary
chamber are ducted through the emissions con-
trol system and then exhausted via a stack. An
emergency stack is installed prior to the venturi
scrubber system so that if the temperature con-
trol system and its interlocks were to fail, then
the emissions control system would not be
melted by the hot gases.
In the emissions control system, the particulates
are removed in a venturi section. Acid vapor is
neutralized in a packed tower scrubber, and then
an induced draft blower draws the cleaned gases
from the scrubber into the free standing exhaust
stack.
The scrubber liquid effluent then flows into a
clarifier where scrubber sludge settles out for
disposal. Finally, the scrubber effluent flows to
an effluent tank, through an activated carbon
filter for reuse, or to a POTW tank for disposal.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
suitable for organic wastes contained in soils or
sediments. Liquid organic wastes can also be
handled once they are mixed with sand or soil.
STATUS: Report and summary was published
in September 1988. The EPA document number
is EPA 540/2-88/002.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Howard O. Wall
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7691
FTS: 684-7691
Technology Contact:
Mark de Lormier
Ecova Corporation
12790 Merit Drive, Suite 202
Dallas, Texas 75251
214-404-7540
36
-------
OrEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
INTERNATIONAL WASTE
TECHNOLOGIES
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This in-
situ stabilization technology immobilizes organic
and inorganic compounds in wet or dry soils by
using reagents (additives) to polymerize with the
soils and sludges producing a cement-like mass.
Two basic components of this technology are
the Geo-Con/DSM Deep Soil Mixing System,
a system capable of delivering and mixing chem-
icals with the soil in-situ, and the batch mixing
plant that supplies the proprietary treatment
chemicals (Figure 1).
The Geo-Con/DSM Deep Soil Mixing System,
incorporating mechanical mixing and injection,
consists of one set of cutting blades and two
sets of mixing blades attached to a vertical drive
auger, which rotate at approximately 15 rpm.
Two conduits in the auger allow for the injection
of the additive slurry and supplemental water.
Additive injection is on the downstroke, with
further mixing occurring upon auger with-
drawal. The treated soil columns, whose di-
ameter is 36 inches, are positioned to provide
an overlapping pattern. In each sector, alter-
nating primary and secondary soil columns ex-
ist, with all primary columns prepared before
the secondary columns are augered.
The developer states that their proprietary ad-
ditive generates a complex crystalline connective
network of inorganic polymers and that the
structural bonding in the polymer is mainly cov-
alent. Furthermore, in the process, there is a
two-phased reaction in which the contaminants
are complexed first in a fast-acting reaction and
then in a slow-acting reaction where the building
of macromolecules continues over a long period
of time. For each type of waste, the quantity of
additives used varies and must be optimized.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be applied to soils, sediments, and sludge-
pond bottoms contaminated with organic com-
pounds and metals.
Pump
Valve
Flow Line
Control Line
Communication Line
Figure 1.
ln-«itu stabilization batch mixing plant
process diagram.
37
-------
STATUS: The technology has been laboratory
tested on soils containing PCBs, PCPs, refinery
wastes, and chlorinated and nitrated hydrocar-
bons. Under the auspices of the Superfund
Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program, this technology combined with the
use of the Geo-Con soil injection and mixing
equipment has been demonstrated at a PCB-
contaminated site in Hialeah, Florida. The
demonstration occurred in April and May of
1988. The final report will be published in April
1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
201-321-6683
FTS: 340-6683
Technology Contact:
Jeff P. Newton
International Waste Technologies
150 North Main Street, Suite 910
Wichita, Kansas 67202
316-269-2660
38
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNOINNOVA T1VE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
MOTEC, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The liquid
solid contact digestion (LSCD) technology in-
volves organic wastes which are placed in a high
energy environment and solubilized into the
aqueous phase, thus allowing microorganisms
to degrade or detoxify organic constituents. The
system uses two or three portable tank digesters
or lagoons. The portable system has three
phases: (1) Primary Contact or Mixing Phase,
(2) Primary Digestion Phase, and (3) Polishing
Phase.
This technology, used for the destruction of
toxic organic compounds, is simple in operation
and allows mass-balance determinations. Its
treatment time may be a month or more de-
pending on the type of contaminants, concen-
trations and temperature. The technology may
also be a source of air emissions.
In the primary contact phase (Figure 1), mixers
(aerators, in many cases) are used to mix the
influent waste material containing between 2
and 800,000 ppm of total organic carbon, such
TO ATMOSPHERE
as sludge or soil, and to achieve a 20-25 percent
solids concentration. Make-up water is added
(80 percent by volume) either from the contam-
inated source or fresh water source. Emulsifying
chemicals are added, and pH is adjusted to in-
crease the solubility of the organic phase.
After the organics have solubilized into the liq-
uid phase, the "batch" mixture is transferred
to primary digestion tanks or cells where pH is
adjusted, acclimated seed bacteria is added, and
aerobic biological oxidation is started. During
this phase, most of the biological oxidation oc-
curs. Generally, when the biodegradable organic
concentration is reduced to a level of 50 to 100
ppm, the "batch" is transferred to the polishing
cell for final treatment; the process is operated
in a sequential mode.
Once the pH has been readjusted in the polish-
ing cell, cometabolites and nutrients are added
to maintain and enhance the biomass which de-
grade organic constituents to target concentra-
tion levels. Because the system runs on a
PRIMARY
DIGESTION TANK
WASTE IN
I igiire 1 I SCO prwess flow diagram
39
-------
negative water balance, make-up water is added
throughout the process. Following the comple-
tion of the "batch", the supernatant from the
polisher is recycled to the primary contact tank
or cell, and the sludge is treated in land farms/
reactors on site.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: The technology is
suitable for treating halogenated and nonhalo-
genated organic compounds, PCBs, dioxins,
and pesticides. However, it is not suitable for
inorganic-laden wastes. LSCD has been dem-
onstrated on liquids, sludges, and soils with high
organic concentrations.
STATUS: A demonstration project is proposed
to test this technology by processing 50 to 100
cubic yards of contaminated soil over a 3-month
period. The soil will be from a wood preserving
facility. The demonstration is planned for April
of 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Eugene F. Harris
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7862
FTS: 684-7862
Technology Contact:
John Bogart
MOTEC, Inc.
Clearview Plaza Mall
P.O. Box 338
Mt. Juliet, Tennessee 37122
615-754-9626
40
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
OGDEN
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Cir-
culating Bed Combustor (CBC) uses high air
velocity and circulating solids to create a highly
turbulent combustion zone for the efficient de-
struction of toxic chemicals and the retention
of resultant acid vapors. It is based on the ad-
vanced fluidized-bed incineration system and is
distinct from conventional fluidized beds since
it operates at a higher velocity air flow and pro-
duces a higher combustion efficiency.
The circulating combustor technology is appli-
cable to solids, liquids and soils. This technology
uses high velocity air to entrain circulating solids
in a highly turbulent combustion loop. Waste
material and limestone are fed into the com-
bustion loop along with recirculated bed mate-
rial from the hot cyclone (Figure 1). Limestone
addition provides for quick neutralization of
acid gas. NOX and CO emissions are kept low
by effective mixing and relatively low combus-
tion temperatures (1600°F). Hot gases pass
through a convective gas cooler and a baghouse
before exhausting to the atmosphere.
Combustor
Limestone
Fee.)
Sohd
Feed
Cooling
Water
Ash Conveyor
System
Figure 1. CBC process diagram.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: CBC technology
may be applicable to hydrocarbon wastes, soils
and lagoons containing hazardous and non-haz-
ardous wastes, oily sludges, and munitions and
chemical agents. It is said to be capable of treat-
ing feedstock contaminated with PCBs, PCPs,
halogenated wastes, chlorinated sludges, aniline
still-bottoms, oily and solvents sludges, among
others. It has also been applied, during trial
tests, to wastes such as carbon tetrachloride,
freon, malathion, trichloroethylene, dichloro-
benzene, aromatic nitrate, and PCBs.
STATUS: The CBC is one of only seven incin-
erators nationwide permitted to burn PCBs. A
pilot plant exists for treatability studies and two
field-scale units (100 tons/day) have been con-
structed with two more units to be constructed
in 1989.
Discussions about using the McColl Superfund
site for demonstration of the CBC technology
are underway. Some opposition issues still need
to be addressed and resolved.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Joseph McSorley
U.S. EPA
Air & Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Alexander Drive
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919-541-2920
FTS: 629-2920
Technology Contact:
Brian Baxter
Ogden Environmental Services
10955 John J. Hopkins Drive
San Diego, California 92121
619-455-2613
41
-------
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
RESOURCES CONSERVATION
COMPANY
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Basic
Extraction Sludge Treatment (B.E.S.T.) process
is a chemically enhanced separation technique
for breaking difficult-to-handle oily sludges into
oil, water and solids. To break oil-water emul-
sions and release bonded water and oil from the
sludge, an aliphatic amine [usually triethylamine
(TEA)] is used. Since TEA is completely mis-
cible with water below 65°F, the B.E.S.T. proc-
ess takes advantage of this solubility property
by mixing refrigerated recycled TEA with the
oily sludges. Pretreatment requirements can
vary widely and are dependent on the raw feed
sludge state. Feed materials must be screened
to a one-fourth inch diameter size and must
either be pumpable or be able to be slurried into
a pumpable mass. Acidic materials must be neu-
tralized, and feed components tested to assure
Sludge
that reactions between the TEA solvent and feed
components do not occur, or emulsifiers or
other separation interfering compounds are not
present. pH must be adjusted to a range of 7.0
to 12.0, as TEA at low pHs can form salts and
would be lost in the water phase. Laboratory
tests of wastes are required to assure optimum
extraction performance. Post-treatment re-
quirements can also vary between applications.
Some product oil/organic, water, or solids up-
grading may or may not be needed depending
on the intended disposition of these materials.
The B.E.S.T. process is essentially a fully-en-
closed system except at the product residue out-
lets. After the influent sludge is fed into the first
mixing chamber (Figure 1) and mixed with
TEA, the solvent immediately turns the mixture
Azeotrope
Steam
Condensate
Solids Product
Figure 1. BEST process flow diagram.
43
-------
into a homogeneous solution. Since the temper-
ature is kept below the solubility line, solids are
no longer bonded by the oil/water emulsion
(that was part of the original sludge) and are
released from the solutions. Once the solids are
removed, the temperature of the liquid fraction
(which contains the oil, water and solvent) is
heated above the solubility point, and the water
separates from the oil and the solvent. The last
step in the process is to remove the solvent from
the oil using distillation.
Solids are separated from the liquid mass gen-
erally by a solid bowl decanter centrifuge under
a force of several thousand g's. This type of
machine ensures a clear centrate and a good oil
product. The solid cake from the first centrifuge
(which normally contains about 50 percent sol-
ids by weight) is rewashed with solvent in a mix
tank and recentrifuged in a second solid bowl
decanter. The oil content in the cake is reduced
to 1 percent liquid, and in the cake is TEA which
is driven off in a steam-heated, hollow-disk, in-
direct heater. The drying step requires one
eighth the energy than if water was being evap-
orated alone.
The centrate that leaves the first centrifuge con-
tains all the oil and water extracted from the
raw sludge. The centrate is heated in a series of
heat exchangers to temperatures above the sol-
ubility limit, so that two phases now exist. The
two phase stream is sent to a decanter where
the lower water fraction is separated and sent
to a stripping column to remove residual sol-
vent. The top fraction leaving the decanter is
primarily the solvent-containing oil extracted
from the raw sludge. This fraction is sent to a
second stripping column where the solvent is
recovered and the oil is discharged. Recovered
solvent is refrigerated and recycled back to the
front end of the process.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be applied to difficult-to-handle oily
sludges, oils, or PCB-contaminated soils and
sediment. No special climatic restrictions to the
B.E.S.T. system exist, although system modi-
fications such as steam tracing or handling of
frozen feed materials may be required in freez-
ing climates.
STATUS: Currently, a demonstration is pro-
posed for a site which is still unidentified. This
technology was used by Region 4 to conduct a
removal action at the General Refining site near
Savannah, Georgia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Edward R. Bates
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7774
FTS: 684-7774
Technology Contact:
Paul McGough
Resources Conservation Company
3006 Northup Way
Bellevue, Washington 98004-1407
206-828-2400
44
-------
v>EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
RETECH, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Cen
trifugal Reactor is a thermal treatment tech-
nology that uses the heat from a plasma torch
to create a molten bath which is used to detoxify
contaminated soils. Organic contaminants are
vaporized and react at very high temperature to
form innocuous products. Solids melt and are
incorporated into the molten bath. Metals are
retained in this phase, and when cooled, this
phase is a nonleachable matrix.
In the diagram of the centrifugal reactor (Fig-
ure 1), contaminated soils enter the reactor
through the bulk feeder, where they are proc-
essed as described above. The interior of the
reactor (the reactor well) rotates during waste
processing. Centrifugal force created by this ro-
tation prevents waste and molten material from
flowing out of the reactor through the bottom.
It also helps to transfer heat and electrical en-
ergy evenly throughout the molten phase. Pe-
Feeder
riodically, the reactor is emptied. Molten solids
fall into the collection chamber where they are
allowed to solidify. Gases travel through the
secondary combustion chamber where they re-
main at high temperature for an extended period
of time. This allows for further thermal de-
struction of any organics remaining in the gas
phase. Downstream of the secondary combus-
tion chamber, the gases pass through a series of
air pollution control devices designed to remove
particulates and acid gases. In the event of a
process upset, a surge tank has been installed
to allow for the reprocessing of any off-gases
produced.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: Liquid and solid
organic compounds can be treated by this tech-
nology. It is most appropriate for soils and
sludges contaminated with metals and hard-to-
destroy organic compounds.
Plasma Torch
Reaction Chamber
Cf
— .
uM
Rotating Reactor Well
Secondary Combustion Chamber
Residue Collection Chamber
Figure 1 Centrifugal reactor
45
-------
STATUS: A demonstration is planned for early
next year at a Department of Energy research
facility in Butte, Montana. During the demon-
stration, the reactor will process approximately
4000 pounds of waste at 100 pounds per hour.
Sampling of all feed and effluent streams will
be carried out to assess the performance of this
technology. A report on the demonstration
project will be available after its completion.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Laurel Staley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7881
FTS: 684-7881
Technology Contact:
R.C. Eschenback
Retech, Inc.
P.O. Box 997
100 Henry Station Road
Ukiah, California 95482
707-462-6522
46
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNO INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
SANITECH, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This ion
exchange technology involves the use of ion-
exchange-like materials which process and se-
lectively remove toxic heavy metals from con-
taminated ground or surface waters. This
technology is a liquid waste treatment system
consisting of a prefilter followed by an ion-ex-
change bed. The exchange medium is described
as silica particles coated with a selective ion-
exchange compound; this medium removes
metals from the liquid waste stream and is sub-
sequently regenerated with acid. In the process,
only one-third of the bed volume of diluted re-
agent (HC1 or H2SO4) is required to regenerate
the Devoe-Holbein (DH) composition resin
(Figure 1). Fresh water rinse "chases out" con-
centrated metal to a recovery tank. Then, con-
centrated metal solution can be sent back to a
plating/recovery operation.
Wastewater
II
fl
fa
uc.
Return to
Tank for
Reuse
80%
Concentrated
Metal
Treated Water
Figure 1. Wastewater process unit column showing regeneration.
The treatment system can be mobile, treating 3
to 4 gallons or up to 12 gallons per minute of
liquid wastes. A removal efficiency of greater
than 99 percent and effluent qualities of less
than 0.1 ppm of a metal have been reported.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be used to treat contaminated groundwaters
or surface waters laden with toxic heavy metals
such as zinc, chrome III and VI, nickel, cad-
mium, lead, copper, and mercury.
STATUS: Currently, a demonstration site is
still unselected.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Richard Traver
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
201-321-6677
FTS: 340-6677
Technology Contact:
Sidney G. Nelson
Sanitech, Inc.
1935 East Aurora Road
Twinsburg, Ohio 44087
216-425-2354
47
-------
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
SEPARATION AND RECOVERY
SYSTEMS, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This lime-
based technology has been proven to effectively
fix sludges with a high level of hydrocarbons.
No hazardous materials are used in the process.
The lime, and other minor chemicals, are spe-
cially prepared to significantly improve their
reactivity and other key characteristics.
In this process, sludge is removed from the
waste pit and mixed with lime in a separate
blending pit. The fixation reactions occur over
a twenty minute period and are exothermic. The
temperature of the material in the blending pit
rises for a very brief time to around 100°C, and
some steam is evolved. After twenty minutes,
almost all of the material has been fixed. The
reactions are completed over the next few days.
The fixed material is stored in a product pile
until the waste pit has been cleaned. Then, the
product is returned to the pit and compacted to
10~'°cm/sec. The volume of the waste is only
increased by 30 percent. This process uses con-
ventional earth moving equipment and is, there-
fore, highly mobile.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: The technology is
applicable to acidic sludges containing at least
5 percent hydrocarbons (typical of sludges pro-
duced by re-manufacturing lube oils). The tech-
nology can also stabilize waste containing up to
80 percent organics. Claims are made that met-
als are immobilized, but the process tolerates
only low levels of mercury and moderate levels
of lead.
STATUS: Currently, the EPA is in the process
of locating a suitable site for the demonstration
of this technology.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Richard Valentinetti
U.S. EPA (RD-681)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, B.C. 20460
202-382-5753
FTS: 382-5753
Technology Contact:
Joseph de Franco
Separation and Recovery Systems, Inc.
16901 Armstrong Avenue
Irvine, California 92714
714-261-8860
TELEX: 68-5696
49
-------
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
SILICATE TECHNOLOGY
CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This soli
dification/stabilization technology using silicate
compounds are two separate technologies that:
(1) fix and solidify the organics and inorganics
contained in contaminated soils and sludges,
and (2) remove organics from contaminated
groundwaters. The primary technology, solidi-
fication, utilizes a proprietary reagent, FMS sil-
icate, to selectively adsorb organic contaminants
prior to mixing the waste with cementitious ma-
terial to form a high-strength, non-leaching
monolith. The second technology, stabilization,
uses the same reagent in conjunction with gran-
ular activated carbon to remove organics from
the water streams. The resulting waste material
is then solidified by the first process.
The soil solidification process coordinates a sys-
tems engineering approach with standard con-
struction practices for application to
contaminated wastes. Since the type and dosage
of reagents depend upon the waste's character-
istics, treatability studies and site investigations
need to be conducted to determine required re-
agent formulations for the site. The process be-
gins with the pretreatment of the contaminated
material where the coarse material is separated
from fine material (Figure 1). The coarse ma-
terial is then sent through a shredder which cuts
the material to the size required for the solidi-
fication technology. The fines and shredded
hazardous material are conveyed into a batch
plant where the treatment reagent is applied.
Here, the hazardous material is weighed, and
the proportional amount of treatment reagents
are added. This mixture is conveyed to a con-
crete mixing truck where hydration water is
added and thorough blending occurs. The con-
crete mixing truck then places the treated ma-
terial in a confining pit on site for curing.
Figure 1. Contaminated soil procea
How diagram.
51
-------
The contaminated water process uses a self-
contained mobile filtration pilot facility for the
decontamination of organic contaminated
water. This patented process uses reagents for
the removal of high molecular weight organics
along with granulated activated carbon for the
removal of low molecular weight organics. The
process consists of passing the contaminated
water through a column filter containing the
reagent. The high molecular weight organics are
removed from the water in this step. The ef-
fluent from this column filter is then passed
through a second column filter containing gran-
ulated activated carbon.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This combined
technology can be applied to metals in soils and
sludges along with cyanides, fluorides, arse-
nates, ammonia, chromates, selenium, etc., in
unlimited concentrations. Higher weight organ-
ics in groundwaters and soils and sludges in-
cluding halogenated, aromatic and aliphatic
compounds can also be treated by this combined
process. However, the process is not as suc-
cessful on low molecular weight organics such
as alcohols, ketones and glycols.
STATUS: A demonstration of this combined
technology should occur between April 1988,
and August 1989, at the Tacoma Tar Pits Su-
perfund Site in Tacoma, Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Edward R. Bates
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7774
FTS: 684-7774
Technology Contact:
Steve Pegler
Silicate Technology Corporation
Scottsdale Technology Center
14455 North Hayden Road, Suite 218
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
602-948-1300
52
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUNO INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
SOLIDITECH, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This soli
dification/stabilization process incorporates a
proprietary reagent, URRICHEM, into a mix-
ture of the waste material and pozzolanic fly
ash, kiln dust, or Portland cement. Dispersing
the URRICHEM reagent throughout the mixed
batch achieves complete blending of all ingre-
dients. A multiphase cementation process coats
large particles with pozzolanic materials, links
organic and inorganic components, and seals
pore spaces within the solidified matrix. Haz-
ardous constituents contained in the waste slurry
are chemically and physically immobilized. The
reagent formula, other additives, and mixing
proportions are optimized for each specific
waste type.
The process begins (Figure 1) when waste is
placed in a mixer by pump or other means, and
waste samples are obtained for testing and qual-
ity control purposes. URRICHEM reagent is
added to the waste in the mixer and thoroughly
dispersed by blending. Pozzolan is then added
in predetermined proportions and blended. Fi-
nally, the waste is removed from the mixer and
pumped or transported to a storage/disposal
site or containers, and samples are again ob-
tained for quality control purposes.
Urrlchem*
Waste
Mlxar
Sotidlfted W»»ta
Figure 1. Basic process flow diagram.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be applied to a broad range of organic and
inorganic slurries and to bulk hazardous liquids
prior to disposal (i.e., landfilling). However,
wastes containing radioactive nuclides, explo-
sives, and/or high levels of strong inorganic
acids (HC1 or H2SO4) are not suitable for this
process.
STATUS: This technology has been tested on
several dozen waste types on a bench scale. It
is in use at full scale by a deep-well injection
company to stabilize oily waste residues. A lo-
cation for demonstration of this technology has
been tentatively selected, and the demonstration
is scheduled for late in 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Walter E. Grube, Jr., Ph.D.
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7798
FTS: 684-7798
Technology Contact:
Carl Brassow
Soliditech, Inc.
6901 Corporate Drive
Suite 215
Houston, Texas 77036
713-778-1800
53
-------
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUHD INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
TERRA VAC, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This in-situ
vacuum extraction technology is a process for
the removal and venting of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from the vadose or unsat-
urated zone of soils. Often, these compounds
can be removed from the vadose zone before
they have a chance to contaminate groundwater.
In using this technology, subsurface organic
contaminants are "vacuumed up" via a well,
vapor/liquid separated, and then exposed to ac-
tivated carbon before the "vapor" is allowed
to be released into the atmosphere.
The technology uses readily available compo-
nents such as extraction and monitoring well(s),
manifold piping, vapor/liquid separator, vac-
uum pump, and emission control equipment,
such as activated carbon canisters. Once a con-
taminated area is completely defined, an ex-
traction well (or wells) is installed (depending
upon the extent of contamination) and is con-
nected by piping to a vapor/liquid separator de-
vice (Figure 1). A vacuum pump draws the
subsurface contaminants through the well, sep-
arator device, and an activated carbon canister
before discharge of the air streams is allowed
to the atmosphere. Subsurface vacuum and soil
vapor concentration are monitored via vadose
zone monitoring wells.
The technology does not require highly trained
operators or soil excavation, and it also is not
depth limited. The technology works best when
it is applied towards the remediation at sites
which are contaminated by liquids having high
vapor pressures. However, the process is limited
in applicability; diffusion rates through dense
soils (such as compacted clays) are much lower
than through sandy soils, and if activated car-
bon is used, then spent carbon must be proc-
essed. In addition, depending on the soil type
and the depth to groundwater, the radius of
influence of a single extraction well can range
from tens to hundreds of feet. Typical contam-
inant recovery rates also range between 20 and
2500 pounds per day and are a function of vol-
atility of the organic compound recovered.
Therefore, the more volatile the organic com-
pound, the faster the process works. The de-
veloper also states that the process is more cost
effective where contaminated soils are predom-
inantly above the water table, although systems
have been designed for vapor and groundwater
recovery.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
applicable to organic compounds that are highly
volatile at ambient temperatures in soils and
groundwater.
Primary
Activated
Carbon
Canisters
Figure 1. Process diagram for in-situ vacuum extraction.
55
-------
STATUS: This in-situ vacuum extraction proc-
ess is being utilized in many locations across the
United States, such as the Verona Wells Super-
fund Site (U.S. EPA Region 5, Battle Creek,
Michigan) — which mainly contains trichloroe-
thylene contamination — and several gasoline
station spills. Although it was first demon-
strated at a Superfund site in Puerto Rico where
carbon tetrachloride had leaked from an under-
ground storage tank, a field demonstration of
the process was performed under the auspices
of the Superfund Innovative Technology Eval-
uation (SITE) Program and was conducted at
the Valley Manufactured Products Company,
Inc. property, which is a part of the Groveland
Wells Superfund site in Groveland, Massachu-
setts. This site has been mainly contaminated
by trichloroethylene, which was used as a de-
greasing agent by the machine shop that is still
in operation at the site. The technical report
from this demonstration project will be pub-
lished in April 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Mary K. Stinson
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
201-321-6683
FTS: 340-6683
Technology Contact:
James Malot
Terra Vac, Inc.
356 Fontaleza Street
P.O. Box 1591
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00903
809-723-9171
56
-------
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
TOXIC TREATMENTS, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: A trans
portable treatment unit called a "Detoxifier" is
used for in-situ steam and air stripping of vol-
atile organics from contaminated soil during site
remediation. Drills are modified to allow the
injection of steam and air into the soil through
the cutting blades (Figure 1). The ground area
being drilled is covered by a containment system
to trap and recover the stripped volatiles.
Two main components of the on-site treatment
equipment are the process tower and process
train. The process tower contains two counter-
rotating drills, each having a modified cutting
bit 5 feet in diameter which is capable of oper-
ating to a 27 foot depth. Each drill also contains
two concentric pipes where the inner pipe is used
to convey steam supplied by an oil-fired boiler
at 450°F and 450 psig to the rotating cutting
blades. The outer pipe conveys air at approxi-
mately 300°F and 250 psig to the rotating blades.
In this process, steam is piped to the top of the
drills and injected through the cutting blades.
The steam heats the ground being remediated
increasing the vapor pressure of the volatile
contaminants and thereby increasing the rate at
which they can be stripped. Both the air and
steam serve as carriers to convey these contam-
inants to the surface. The shroud, a metal box
designed to seal the process area above the ro-
tating cutter blades from the outside environ-
ment, collects the volatile contaminants and
ducts them to the process train. In the process
train, the volatile contaminants and the water
vapor are removed from the off-gas stream by
condensation. The condensed water is separated
from the organics by distillation, then filtered
through activated carbon beds and subsequently
used as make-up water to a wet cooling tower.
Steam also is used to regenerate the activated
carbon beds and acts as the source of heat for
distillation of the volatile contaminants from
the condensed liquid stream.
Ivated Carbon
Hydrocarbon
Coalescer/
Separator
Recovered
Hydrocarbons
Figure 1. Typical detoxifer system process
flow diagram.
57
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
may be applicable to the family of organic con-
taminants in soil which exhibit a sufficient par-
tial pressure to enable their removal by a
stripping process. Wastes from areas which have
been exposed to hydrocarbons, solvents, or
other volatile liquid contamination are also ap-
plicable. These contaminants may be reme-
diated from soil without limitation due to
concentration, viscosity, particle size, constitu-
ent volatility or constituent interference.
STATUS: A site in California has been selected
as a demonstration site. A demonstration plan
is in preparation. The field treatability study at
the San Pedro site has been completed and a
report submitted to the state of California. Final
permit approval is pending. The U.S. EPA SITE
Demonstration is scheduled for January/
February 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Paul de Percin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7797
FTS: 684-7797
Technology Contact:
A.P. Statham
Toxic Treatments, Inc.
901 Mariners Island Boulevard
Suite 315
San Mateo, California 94404
415-572-2994
58
-------
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
S'JPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
ULTROX INTERNATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This ultra-
violet (UV)/oxidation process using ozone (O3)
and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is suited for de-
stroying toxic organic compounds, especially
chlorinated hydrocarbons, in dilute concen-
trations in water. The process oxidizes toxic
and/or refractory (those which are resistant to
biological oxidation) compounds in concentra-
tions measured in the ranges of parts per million
or parts per billion, and is capable of reducing
them to non-detectable levels. No residues,
sludges or spent adsorbents are generated, in
contrast to granular activated carbon, the usual
competitive process.
The system consists of a reactor module, air
compressor/ozone generator module and hy-
drogen peroxide feed system. It is skidmounted
and portable and permits on-site treatment of
a wide variety of solutions such as industrial
wastewaters, groundwaters, and leachates. The
reactor size is determined from the expected
wastewater flow rate and the necessary "resi-
dence time" for contaminated water to remain
in contact with the UV radiation and the oxi-
dants. Approximate UV intensity and ozone/
hydrogen peroxide dosages are determined from
pilot-scale studies and are precisely controlled
in the full-scale reactor.
In this process, influents flowing into the reactor
(Figure 1) are simultaneously exposed to UV
radiation, whereby ozone and/or hydrogen per-
oxide create a strong oxidizing environment for
inducing photochemical oxidation of halogen-
ated organic compounds. End products of the
reaction are carbon dioxide, water and innoc-
uous salts. Off gases from the reactor pass
through a catalytic ozone decomposer unit,
which reduces ozone levels to acceptable air
quality standards before air venting. A catalytic
unit can also be installed to destroy gaseous
chlorinated VOCs stripped off in the reactor.
Effluents from the reactor can be reused or di-
jf CFFUIEMT MR
DCCOMPOZON »Q ...
CATALYTIC o. oecoMPoeem vL^5^ \^
OZONE
GENERATOR
COOUNO WATER
DRYER
INfLUENT
COOUNQ WATER
UtTROX UV/O,
REACTOR
Figure 1. ULTROX* UV/O, process flow schematic.
59
-------
rectly discharged to sewage treatment plants or
receiving waters.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
destroys organic compounds, including chlori-
nated hydrocarbons in dilute concentrations in
water and has been previously demonstrated on
site at various locations. Contaminated ground-
water, industrial wastewaters and leachates
containing trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene,
methylene chloride, phenol, pentachlorophenol,
miscellaneous pesticides and PCBs are suitable
for this on-site treatment process.
STATUS: A proposed demonstration project
for a Superfund site remediation of contam-
inated groundwater is scheduled to begin in
mid 1989.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Norma Lewis
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7665
FTS: 684-7665
Technology Contact:
David B. Fletcher
Ultrox International
2435 South Anne Street
Santa Ana, California 92704
714-545-5557
60
-------
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
WASTECHEM CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Vol-
ume Reduction and Solidification (VRS) system
is used for volume reduction and stabilization
of liquid or dried wastes. Depending upon the
waste characteristics, various thermal pretreat-
ment equipment may be used in combination
with this technology.
In this process, waste liquid or sludge is trans-
ferred to either the batch mix tank or pretreat-
ment equipment; any off-gas is drawn to the
scrubber. As required in the batch mix tank, the
waste sludge is fluidized. Then, the waste sludge
(or dried solids) and asphalt are simultaneously
fed to the extruder/evaporator unit where as-
phalt encapsulates the waste. Since this unit is
a one-step volume reduction and solidification
process, the waste/asphalt mixture is then dis-
charged to a 55-gallon drum, where it solidifies.
Distilled in the evaporation process, trace or-
ganics along with the water flow by gravity to
an organic distillate detoxification tank. At a
caustic-adjusted pH of 10.5 to 11.5, the distillate
and off-gas produced are destroyed by ozone.
Then, the residual trace organics in the detoxi-
fied distillate are removed by a carbon absorber/
filter; the detoxified effluent is stored, analyzed,
and discharged once permit requirements are
met. The off-gas from the detoxification tank
passes through a scrubber and then through an
organic detoxification cell. Residual organics are
also removed via an ozonation process and car-
bon absorber/filter prior to atmosphere release.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
versatile in that most liquid or dried waste is
suitable for processing.
Dry Waste
Recirculation
System
Recycle and
Recovery
Figure 1 Mobile VRS" system
61
-------
STATUS: The developer has decided to termi-
nate the demonstration. Therefore, the dem-
onstration of this technology will probably be
deleted from the SITE 002 program. All the
data developed to date will be included in a final
report for EPA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
S. Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7507
FTS: 684-7507
Technology Contact:
Hans Theyer
WasteChem Corporation
One Kalisa Way
Paramus, New Jersey 07652
201-599-2900
62
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC
CORPORATION
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The pyro-
plasma process is based on the concept of py-
rolyzing waste molecules using a thermal plasma
field. The heart of the destruction system is a
plasma torch which is entirely contained as a
unit in a 48-foot tractor trailer and requires only
4160 volts, 3-phase power, water and sanitary
sewer discharge lines. When configured as a
mobile unit, the technology can be transported
and used in emergency response to clean up haz-
ardous material spills or to perform waste site
cleanups.
The pyroplasma unit uses electric power across
a colinear electrode assembly to produce an
electric arc which causes an injected low pres-
sure air stream to be ionized, forming a thermal
plasma with temperatures in the 5,000-15,000
degree Celsius range. Waste feed introduced into
the thermal plasma (Figure 1) causes the waste
molecules to be completely dissociated into their
atomic components because of the unique
plasma properties for the breaking of molecular
bonds. These atoms recombine in the reaction
chamber to form non-toxic gases, typically car-
bon monoxide, nitrogen and hydrogen along
with some methane and ethane. Acid gases (hy-
drogen chloride-HCl) formed from the de-
struction of chlorinated wastes and the
subsequent combination of hydrogen and chlo-
rine gases are neutralized and cooled in a wet
scrubber with caustic soda. Particulate carbon
produced is also removed in this stream. The
product gas is drawn off by an induction fan
and flared directly. It can also be routed to a
combustor for heat recovery.
This technology requires highly trained opera-
tors. It may degrade arc and refractory mate-
rials due to the high temperatures, may have
a durability problem, and is very sensitive to
voltage drops and energy/mass balance of
the system.
• Carton
• Chlorine
• Hydrogen
0 Oxygen
A NaOH
A Water
Typical PCB
Waste Stream
Run-off
to Sanitary
Sewer System
Figure 1. Plasma torch waste destruction process.
63
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
suitable only for liquids or pumpable wastes and
chlorinated organics, such as pesticides, wood
preservatives (PCP, creosote compounds), and
petroleum compounds.
STATUS: Currently, a 3 GPM (1 ton/hour)
unit operating at 750 kW is available for the
Demonstration Program. Even though depend-
able cost data are not yet available, preliminary
estimates are that this technology will be com-
parable with conventional thermal systems, such
as rotary kilns.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Eugene F. Harris
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7862
FTS: 684-7862
Technology Contact:
John F. Gross
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Waltz Mill Site
P.O. Box 286
Madison, Pennsylvania 15663
412-722-5655
64
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Demonstration Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
ZIMPRO/PASSAVANT, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The pow-
dered activated carbon treatment (PACT) proc-
ess is a biological treatment process that
incorporates physical adsorption using pow-
dered activated carbon. The PACT process was
developed for the treatment of wastewaters
from both industrial and municipal sources. In
the PACT process, powdered activated carbon
(PAC) is added to the active biomass in the aer-
ation basin at a wide range of dosages to ac-
commodate the biodegradability and adsorptive
characteristics of the contaminants in the was-
tewater. Treatment effectiveness of this system
depends on the carbon dose added, the hy-
draulic detention time (HDT) of the aeration
basin, and the solids residence time (SRT) for
the carbon-biomass mixture in the basin. The
SRT affects the biological population both in
terms of concentration and organism selection.
SRTs can vary from 2 days to approximately
50 days.
The wastes fed into the PACT process (Fig-
ure 1) should be in an aqueous medium and
have adequate nutrients to support growth of
the active microorganisms in the aeration basin.
The temperature range of 40 to 100°F and an
influent pH range of 6 to 8 are desirable for the
process. The HDT must also be sufficiently long
to provide destruction of biodegradable com-
ponents of the wastewater. Typically, HDTs can
vary from 2 to 24 hours.
The carbon concentration is also important in
determining the settling characteristics of the
PAC-biomass mixed liquor and the volatilization
of organics. Generally, higher concentrations of
carbon will enhance the settleability of sludges
removed from the basin and reduce air stripping
of the organics.
Excess solids (PAC with adsorbed organics, bi-
omass, and inert solids) are removed from the
system by wasting a portion of the solids from
the clarifier or thickener (Figure 1).
RAW
POLYeLeCTROLYTE
PRODUCT
WATER 1
FILTER
OPTIONAL
Figure 1. PACT" process flow scheme.
The PACT system that will be used for dem-
onstrating this technology under the SITE pro-
gram will include a wet air oxidation (WAO)
unit. The WAO unit will regenerate the PAC
and destroy organics remaining in the biomass.
This unit (Figure 2) will receive solids from the
thickener and provide regenerated PAC for the
aeration basin.
JUA COUPftCSSOR
Figure 2 Wet air oxidation flow scheme.
65
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
applicable to both municipal and industrial was-
tewater containing organic pollutants. It has
been applied to industrial wastewater including:
chemical plant wastes, coke oven flushing liq-
uors, contaminated ground-water, dye produc-
tion wastewater, food processing wastes,
pharmaceutical wastes, and refinery and syn-
thetic fuel wastes.
STATUS: The demonstration project is still in
the site selection process although major por-
tions of the demonstration plan have already
been developed. The developer is ready to begin
treatability studies as soon as a site is identified.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
John F. Martin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7758
FTS: 684-7758
Technology Contact:
William M. Copa, Ph.D.
Zimpro/Passavant, Inc.
301 West Military Road
Rothschild, Wisconsin 54474
715-359-7211; TELEX 29-0495
FAX: 715-355-3219
66
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency November 1988
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE * * ** a
TECHNOLOGY EVALUA TION
The Emerging Technologies Program provides the framework to encourage further testing and
evaluation through pilot-scale of technologies already proven at bench-scale. Under the Emerging
Technologies Program, partial funding is provided by EPA. The availability of EPA-provided re-
sources is particularly important since some technology developers do not have the financial capa-
bilities to independently pursue testing and evaluation of their technologies for application to
hazardous waste cleanups. The instrument for funding technology developers under the Emerging
Technologies Program is the competitively-awarded Cooperative Agreement. Cooperative Agree-
ments are vehicles by which EPA can enter into jointly-funded projects with technology developers.
It is extremely important to note that Cooperative Agreements require cost sharing on the part of
the technology developer. The SITE Emerging Technologies Program participants are presented in
alphabetical order in Table 2.
67
-------
w
•+*
to
Q.
'o
"•E
(0
Q.
E
S
O)
o
.2
'5)
jo
o
o
.2
o>
0)
UJ
LU
UJ
_J
m
u
1
f
1
u
1
1
1
1
'g
a.
>-
«
c
"3
e
1
£
.u
§
o
.2
i
e1
i
.s
i
,_
' M
e
j-j
c
U
DC
_O
1
Q.
O
~
1
X
c/>
o 2
t*~' 3^
o £
'o >
ell
'3
.cr
C oo
S " P
J^t/i
— ^^
"o ^
M T
o-'K
82
Selected Removal of
Dissolved Toxic Metals
by Chemical Treatment/
Ultrafiltration
o
<— 5
c
-**1 O
oj ' iT oo
c 12 v oo
uj _j i 2
o ca i
c "° -^
o c ^ o
X
X
TJ
3
C
C
E
u
X ON
^00^7
s^s;
« O-N OO
J- vO ^
>— 1 Ca U«
nj
c3
jz
.33 oo
^ o
a "?
^ -4
-C \c
0
O
Development of the Elei
acoustic Soil Decontam-
ination (ESD) Process
for In-Situ Applications
Battelle Memoria
Institute
Columbus, OH
(EO1 - 1988)
Z
in
•
in J=
'3
cr
&
•? •*
Naomi P. Bai
513-569-7854
FTS: 684-785
"cfl
C
QOO
00
^ "^
al
A ®
_e -n
AlgaSORB: A New Tecl
nology for Removal am
Recovery of Metal Ions
from Groundwaters
s y £l
I - §-
*I65
o £ O
CQ^J&
Z
in
o 2
<4- t)
iS
'S §
wl
':3
g-
0
rt t
'a^P:
«f=5
•ssl
<& i/~) . ,
•g = P
W u-> U,
C
rt
s
T3 ^
> 3
r*^
IP
E (N
O '
H °
aj
^
C3
Constructed Wetlands-B
Treatment of Degraded
Waters for Toxic-
Metal Removal
o
o
-p "
O —
"rt C C 1
L~ •— QJ
_o ^ 2 ~
X
Z
'3
,cr
^
'^ ^
•J iv"i oo
p- " 4
i§ ^ t
aj
° 8
"T" "^
sl
E ri
ca —
i
Pilot-Scale System for t
Laser Stimulated Photo
chemical Oxidation of
Toxic Organics in Water
<
Energy and
Environmental
Engineering, Inc.
E. Cambridge, IV
(EO1 - 1988)
. in
a .H
3 c
Si -
'3 J3 "S
D..2P'C
Z
^
1
ca
.0
3 t^
c S ^7-
9 "7 •*
|^s
c
ra
o
—
• m
oo
III
14
E
2
o
U
o
DO
c
f" •" O Q\
— £ 2 i
c .a S _
'> > ^ o
Ja .y
£§a
o 0 0
S -c oo
a.SP'S
Z
T3
1
to
t rs
UH r^ .4
4J «/^t . .
t3 £ t
(U
c
c5 —
CQ ^
UJ **!*
fri5
li
o
Contained Recovery of
Wastes - CROW
o
c3 > ^,
5? C oo
4> ^ OO
C ^ .— ' "~
|||i
Applicable
c
Z
II
Z
= Applicable
X
68
-------
vxEPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
ATOMIC ENERGY OF
CANADA LTD.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The com
bination chemical-ultrafiltration treatment
process is intended for use on toxic metals in
groundwater. The process creates two streams:
permeate and retentate. Permeate, the bulk of
the treated water, is cleaned and released with-
out further processing. The retentate which
constitutes less than 5 percent of the feed vol-
ume, requires further attention. The retentate
contains the separated heavy metal ions and can
be handled in a couple of ways. It may be so-
lidified to prevent the release of toxic metals
back to the environment, or it may be recycled
through the treatment process for further vol-
ume reduction. Eventually, however, the reten-
tate must be removed for ultimate disposal.
Ultrafiltration can be applied in combination
with chemical treatment to selectively remove
dissolved metal ions from dilute aqueous solu-
tions. A high molecular weight chelating agent
is added to the incoming waste solution to form
complexes with the metal ions to be removed.
l/i fluent
Chemical
Additions
Usually, each chelating polymer has a marked
selectivity for one metal cation or for a group
of similar cations. The solution is then processed
through an ultrafiltration membrane system
that retains the macromolecular complexes (re-
tentate), while allowing uncomplexed ions such
as sodium, potassium, calcium, chloride, sul-
fate, nitrate, etc. to pass through with the fil-
tered water (permeate). The filtered water can
be recycled or discharged depending upon the
metal removal requirements. A removal effi-
ciency approaching 100 percent can be achieved
for metal ions that have been complexed.
Since many of the simple and non-toxic ions are
allowed to pass through the membrane, they are
not concentrated together with the metal ions.
The retentate, which may be solidified for per-
manent disposal, will have a smaller volume and
be more resistant to leaching due to its smaller
salt content and the presence of chemicals that
retard migration of the toxic metals.
Hollow-fibre
Ultra filtration
Cartridges
FT
1
1
Permeate
CK>-
V T V r
Figure 1. Mobile ultrafiltration unit
69
-------
WASTE APPLICABILITY: Even though ul-
trafiltration has been applied exclusively to the
removal of colloidal solids and fairly large mol-
ecules, this technology may be applicable to sep-
aration of toxic heavy metal ions such as arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium,
silver and barium (as an in-situ formed precip-
itate) from leachates generated at Superfund
sites. Other inorganic and organic materials
present as suspended and colloidal solids may
also be removed.
STATUS: This technology has not been applied
outside of the laboratory setting. However,
work on a pilot-scale mobile unit [consisting of
different types of hollow-fiber ultrafiltration
cartridges connected in parallel (Figure 1)] is
proposed. Bench-scale experiments will be per-
formed first to establish optimal operating con-
ditions. These tests are expected to begin in Fall
1988, at a site in Ontario, Canada.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
John F. Martin
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7758
FTS: 684-7758
Technology Contact:
Leo P. Buckley
Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
Waste Management Technology Division
Chalk River Nuclear Labs
Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1JO
Canada
613-584-3311
70
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
BATTELLE
MEMORIAL INSTITUTE
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The elec-
troacoustic soil decontamination (ESD) tech-
nology is based on the application of a direct
current electric field and an acoustic field to
facilitate transport of liquids through soils. The
components of this process consist of elec-
trodes, an anode and a cathode, and an acoustic
source. Increased transport of liquids through
the soil is obtained from the synergistic effect
of these two fields.
The double layer boundary theory plays an im-
portant role when an electric potential is applied
to soils. For soil particles (Figure 1), the double
layer consists of a fixed layer of negative ions
that are firmly held to the solid phase and a
diffuse layer of positive and negative ions that
are more loosely held. Application of an electric
potential on the double layer results in the dis-
placement of the loosely held ions to their re-
spective electrodes; i.e., the positively charged
layer to the cathode and the negatively charged
layer to the anode. The ions drag water along
with them as they move toward the electrodes.
©?©
After the basic mechanism of electroosmotic
transport of water through wet soils under the
influence of a direct current occurs, other ef-
fects (such as ion exchange, development of pH
gradients, electrolysis, gas generation, oxidation
and reduction, and heat generation) are pro-
duced. The heavy metals present in contami-
nated soils can be leached out or precipitated
out of solution by electrolysis, oxidation and
reduction reactions, or ionic migration. The
contaminants in the soil may be cations, such
as cadium, chromium, lead, and anions, such
as cyanide, chrornate, and dichromate. Also,
the existence of these ions in their respective
oxidation states depends upon the local pH and
concentration gradients existing in the soil. Ap-
plication of an electric field is expected to in-
crease the leaching rate and precipitate the
respective heavy metals out of solution by es-
tablishing appropriate pH and osmotic
gradients.
When properly applied in conjunction with an
electric field and water flow, an acoustic field
h^l
£)W
i&y ^ii%^
©@© ©e©@_ncatl
Water © tS
Jrofi;.151 © ©
© © @®@®@©
Figure 1 Electroosmosu principle.
71
-------
enhances dewatering or leaching of wastes such
as sludges. The phenomena that augment de-
watering of wastes when using the combined
technique are not fully understood. Since more
contaminated particles are driven to the recov-
ery well, the pores and interstitial spaces can
become plugged. Therefore, another potential
application of an acoustic field is for clearing
the skin in the recovery well.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology is
in the evaluation stage and can be applied to the
in-situ cleanup of contaminated soils. Since the
technology is dependent upon surface charge,
fine grained clay soils are ideal. The technolo-
gy's potential for improving non-aqueous phase
liquid (NAPL) contaminant recovery and heavy
metal removal in-situ in clay soils could be cost
effective for a site remediation if proven prac-
tical on the pilot scale.
STATUS: To date, the ESD technology has not
been applied to in-situ site remediation. Further
evaluation of the technology began in October
1988, in cooperation with Battelle Memorial
Institute.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Jonathan G. Herrmann
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7839
FTS: 684-7839
Technology Contact:
H.S. Muralidhara
Battelle Memorial Institute
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
614-424-5018
72
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
BIO-RECOVERY SYSTEMS, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION:
The AlgaSORB™ sorption process is designed
to remove heavy metal ions from aqueous so-
lutions and is based upon the natural, very
strong affinity of the cell walls of algae for
heavy metal ions. AlgaSORB™ is comprised of
immobilized algal cells in a silica gel polymer.
The algae are killed in the process of
immobilization.
The pores of the polymer are apparently large
enough to allow free diffusion of ions to the
algal cells, since similar quantities of metal ions
are bound by free and immobilized cells. The
immobilization process serves two purposes: (1)
it protects the algal cells from decomposition by
other microorganisms, and (2) it produces a
hard material which can be packed into chro-
matographic columns, which when pressurized,
still exhibit good flow characteristics.
AlgaSORB™ functions as a "biological" ion-
exchange resin to bind both metallic cations and
metallic oxoanions (large, complex, oxygen-
containing ions with a negative charge), but an-
ions such as chlorides or sulfates are only weakly
bound or not bound at all. Like ion-exchange
resins, the algae-silica system can be recycled.
However, in contrast to current ion-exchange
technology, the components of hard water
(Ca + 2, Mg + 2) or monovalent cations (Na+,
K + ) do not significantly interfere with the
binding of toxic, heavy metal ions to the algae-
silica matrix. As shown in Figure 1, a prototype
portable effluent treatment equipment (PETE)
unit, consisting of two columns operated in se-
ries, was developed. Each column contains a
quarter cubic foot of AlgaSORB™. The unit is
capable of treating flows of approximately one
gallon per minute. Thus, AlgaSORB™, useful
for removing metal ions from groundwaters or
leachates that are "hard" or contain high levels
of dissolved solids, can also be used to remove
aluminum, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, cop-
per, gold, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, mo-
lybdenum, nickel, platinum, silver, uranium,
vanadium, and zinc.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: AlgaSORB™ will
remove only heavy metal ions from aqueous so-
lutions. Once AlgaSORB™ is saturated with
metal ions, the metals are stripped from the
algae using acids, bases, or other suitable re-
agents, thereby producing a small volume of
very concentrated metal-containing solutions
which must be further treated in order to de-
toxify them.
STATUS: Experiments to determine optimum
flow rates, binding capacities of AlgaSORB™
and efficiency of stripping agents will be fol-
lowed by field testing of this technology on
mercury-contaminated groundwaters in the fall
of 1988.
Figure 1. The PETE unit.
73
-------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Naomi P. Barkley
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7854
FTS: 684-7854
Technology Contact:
Dennis W. Darnall
Bio-Recovery Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 3982, UPB
Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003
505-646-5888
74
-------
oEPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
COLORADO
SCHOOL OF MINES
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The con-
structed wetlands-based treatment technology
is predicated on the concept of using natural
geochemical and biological processes inherent
in a man-made wetland ecosystem (Figure 1) to
remove and accumulate metals from influent
waters. The constructed treatment system in-
corporates principal ecosystem components
found in wetlands, including organic soils, mi-
crobial fauna, algae, and vascular plants.
Dam
Figure 1. Typical wetland ecosystem.
In the constructed wetlands treatment system,
influent waters, which contain high metal con-
centrations and have low pH, flow through the
aerobic and anaerobic zones of the wetland eco-
system. The processes that play a role in the
removal of metals by wetlands include filtration,
ion exchange, adsorption, absorption accumu-
lation by plants and microbes, and precipitation
through geochemical and microbial oxidation
and reduction. Metal flocculates and metals that
are adsorbed onto fine sediment particles settle
out in quiescent ponds, or are filtered out as the
water percolates through the soil or the plant
canopy. Cation exchange occurs as metals in the
water come into contact with humic or other
organic substances in the soil medium. Many
metals are adsorbed by plants and microbes,
and accumulated in their cells. These include
lead, copper, nickel, molybdenum, zinc, man-
ganese, iron and aluminum, as well as cyanide,
with some retained in portions of the plant tis-
sues after death. Oxidation/reduction reactions
that occur in the aerobic/anaerobic zones, re-
spectively, will likely play the major role in
removing metals as hydroxides and sulfides.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: The wetlands-
based treatment process is suitable for acid mine
drainage from metal or coal mining activities.
These wastes typically contain high metals con-
centrations and are acidic in nature. Sites iden-
tified as possible candidates for this technology
include California Gulch and Clear Creek/
Central City in Colorado and the New Jersey
zinc mine near Minturn, Colorado. Wetlands
treatment has been applied with some success
on similar waste water in the eastern regions of
the United States. However, the differences in
geology, terrain, trace metal composition, and
climate may require changes in constructed wet-
lands treatment for mine discharges from metal
mining regions of the western United States.
STATUS: To date, a pilot plant system has been
built to assess the effectiveness of constructed
wetlands in treating the effluent from the Big
Five Tunnel near Idaho Springs, Colorado. If
successful, the results may be applicable to all
constructed wetlands-based treatments, not just
metal mine applications.
75
-------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Edward R. Bates
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7774
FTS: 684-7774
Technology Contact:
Thomas Wildeman
Colorado School of Mines
Golden, Colorado 80401
303-273-3642
76
-------
4»EPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
ENERGY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: This tech-
nology is designed to photochemically oxidize
organic compounds in wastewater into non-
toxic compounds through the application of
ultraviolet radiation supplied by an Argon-
Fluorine laser. The photochemical reactor is ca-
pable of essentially completely destroying very
low concentrations of organic molecules. The
process is envisioned as the last step in the treat-
ment of organic contamination in groundwater
drawn from a hazardous waste site or of indus-
trial wastewater prior to discharge to the envi-
ronment. In this process, the energy absorbed
is sufficient to fragment the aromatic ring of an
organic compound promoting the oxidation of
the fragments, but the radiation is not absorbed
to any significant extent by the water molecules
present in the solution.
The process equipment design (10 GPM capac-
ity) consists of a filtration unit and the photo-
lysis reactor which could be scaled up for direct
use in the field with the hardware components
skid-mounted and stationed at a site (Figure 1).
The exact makeup of the process will depend
on the chemical composition of the groundwater
being treated and, therefore, be site specific;
i.e., as a pretreatment, chemical precipitation
of heavy metals may be required and carbon
adsorption may also be required, if the water
contains high concentrations of organics.
Collected, contaminated groundwater is
pumped from a feed well through a filter unit
to remove suspended particles (Figure 1). The
filtrate is then fed to the photochemical reactor
and irradiated. Air is sprayed through the so-
lution in the reactor to maintain the dissolved
oxygen required for oxidation of the organic
fragments formed by photolysis.
Reinjection
Well
Figure 1.
Diagram of the pilot scale
laser-stimulated photolysis proce
The detoxified water (containing daughter
products including CO2, HC1 and some volatile
organics) is sent to a degassing unit where vol-
atile materials are released to the atmosphere.
Part of the detoxified groundwater is reinjected
into the ground, and the rest is recycled to wash
the paniculate matter separated in the filtration
unit. This washing procedure may be required
since toxic organics in the groundwater will tend
to adsorb onto the paniculate matter. Washing
with detoxified groundwater will cause desorp-
tion of organics from the paniculate matter,
reducing the equilibrium concentration on the
paniculate matter. The wash water is then com-
bined with the filtrate stream and returned to
the photochemical reactor for further destruc-
tion of the toxics. The cleaned paniculate matter
may be disposed of.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
can be applied to organic contamination of
groundwater drawn from a hazardous waste site
77
-------
or to industrial organic-containing waste-
waters, prior to discharge to the environment.
This process has been demonstrated effectively
in the laboratory in the destruction of single and
multiple chlorinated benzenes, phenol and
benzene.
STATUS: Further evaluation of this technology
was initiated in October 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager
Ronald F. Lewis, Ph.D.
U.S. EPA
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7856
FTS: 684-7856
Technology Contact:
James H. Porter
Energy and Environmental
Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 215
East Cambridge, Massachusetts 02141
617-666-5500
78
-------
5EPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
ENVIRITE FIELD
SERVICES, INC.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: Solvent
washing is a method of cleaning soils contami-
nated with heavy organic compounds, such as
PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) and chloro-
dibenzodioxins(dioxins), down to very low lev-
els. This method is based on a patented solvent
blend that has successfully removed PCBs from
soil down to <2 ppm, the level that allows the
soil to be placed at the site without containment.
The solvent used in soil washing is critical to the
success of the system. It should be immiscible
with water (so that the water naturally found
on the soil will be displaced), and it should be
able to cause the breakup of soil clods without
grinding or shredding. Because of the flexibility
in selecting a solvent, this technology can be
tailored to remove most organic constituents
from solid matrices.
Solvent washing is a simple process analogous
to the dry-cleaning of clothing (Figure 1). The
contaminated solid is mixed with a solvent in
which the organic contaminants are soluble
Soil/Solvent Contactor
Water Separator
Water
Figure I. Simplified process schematic.
within a soil/solvent contactor. The mixture is
agitated for an appropriate length of time (usu-
ally one hour), and then the solvent with the
dissolved organic contaminant is drawn off. As
is normal in a process of this type, a fraction
of the solvent containing the dissolved organic
contaminant remains with the solid. This is typ-
ically removed by subsequent washes until the
solid is sufficiently clean to satisfy the require-
ments of the decontamination. The solvent from
each wash goes to a reclamation system, where
it is distilled, and the contaminant is concen-
trated as a still-bottom. The still-bottom, a small
fraction of the volume of the original soil and
a pumpable liquid, can be further treated off-
or on-site depending on economics and other
considerations. Once the desired level of decon-
tamination is achieved, the residual solvent is
removed from the soil by steam stripping. To
facilitate this removal, a solvent with a high
vapor pressure should be used. Aqueous dis-
charges of this process are also limited to non-
contact cooling water and the water that is ini-
tially present in the soil. The latter discharge is
a very clean, low volume material, which typi-
cally does not require any additional treatment
prior to discharge.
Unlike high-temperature processes such as in-
cineration, this technology leaves the base ma-
trix unchanged. As a result, a contaminated soil
leaves this process as a clean soil suitable for
sustaining vegetation. This technology can also
be small enough to be "mobile", operates at
low temperatures, is totally enclosed (thereby
producing virtually no air emissions) and gen-
erates very few residuals.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
has been shown to successfully clean metal foil,
paper and sand, clay soils, high-organic soils,
79
-------
and soils mixed with organic matter (i.e.,
leaves). It can be applied to contaminated soil
laden with heavy organic compounds, especially
containing PCBs and dioxins. Even though the
work to date has emphasized PCBs, tests also
have been conducted which show that the tech-
nology can remove chlorodibenzofurans and
most types of petroleum products and oils from
soil.
STATUS: Laboratory and pilot-scale programs
began in October 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
S. Jackson Hubbard
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7507
FTS: 684-7507
Technology Contact:
Thomas F. McGowan
Envirite Field Services, Inc.
1447 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Suite 810
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
404-876-8300
80
-------
&EPA
Technology Profile
Emerging Technologies Program
SUPERFUHDINNOVA WE
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
November 1988
WESTERN
RESEARCH INSTITUTE
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION: The Con-
tained Recovery of Oily Wastes (CROW) proc-
ess uses an enhanced oil recovery technology,
presently used for secondary petroleum recovery
and for primary production of heavy oil and tar
sand bitumen. This technology employs the
same mobile equipment as required by conven-
tional petroleum production technology. In this
process, oily wastes in contaminated soil are
contained by using steam and hot water dis-
placement to move the accumulated oily wastes
and water to above ground treatment. However,
even though no single conventional technology
can both contain and clean up dense organic
liquids at hazardous waste sites, this technology
appears to remove a large portion of oily waste
accumulations in situ, to stop downward mi-
gration of organic contaminants, to immobilize
any residual saturation of oily wastes, and to
reduce the volume, mobility and toxicity of oily
wastes. It can be used to remediate shallow as
well as deep contaminated areas.
After injection and production wells are drilled
into the oily waste-laden soil (Figure 1), low-
quality steam is injected below the deepest pen-
etration of organic liquids and condenses, caus-
ing rising hot water to dislodge and sweep
buoyant organic liquids upward into the more
permeable soil regions. Hot water is injected
above the impermeable soil regions to heat and
mobilize the main accumulations of oily wastes,
which are recovered by hot-water displacement.
An oil bank is then formed because the oily
wastes' displacement increases the organic liquid
saturations in the subsurface pore space. Behind
Injection Well
Production Well
Steam-Stripped
Water
Low-Quality
Steam
Oily Wastes and
Water Production
Residual Oil
Saturation .'
.' .' Hot-Water
Flotation •
Steam
Injection
Figurel. CROW process schematic.
81
-------
the oil bank, the oil saturation is reduced to an
immobile residual saturation in the subsurface
pore space. After the hot water injection, the
oil bank is then displaced to the production well.
The oil and water produced would require fur-
ther treatment.
Site remediation is completed using in-situ bio-
logical treatment until groundwater contami-
nants are no longer detected in any water
samples from the site. During these in-situ
treatments, all mobilized organic liquids and
water soluble contaminants are contained within
the original boundaries of oily waste accumu-
lations. The subsurface environment is pro-
tected because the hazardous materials are
contained laterally by groundwater isolation and
vertically by organic liquid flotation. Excess
produced water is treated in compliance with
discharge regulations.
WASTE APPLICABILITY: This technology
could be applied to wood treating sites and other
sites with soils containing dense organic liquids,
such as coal tars, pentachlorophenol solutions
and creosote.
STATUS: Even though this technology has not
been laboratory tested, it is expected to closely
resemble the previous laboratory tests in tar
sand bitumen recovery using steamflood tech-
nology. Currently, this technology will be eval-
uated at bench and pilot scale in Laramie,
Wyoming, beginning in November 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
EPA Project Manager:
Eugene F. Harris
U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
513-569-7862
FTS: 684-7862
Technology Contact:
Wesley E. Barnes
Western Research Institute
P.O. Box 3395
University Station
Laramie, Wyoming 82071
307-721-2011
82
-------
INFORMATION REQUEST FORM
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory is responsible for testing and evaluation of
technologies applicable to Superfund site cleanups. To be put on the mailing list to
receive publications from these activities you should indicate your area of interest by
checking the appropriate boxes below and mail the top half of this sheet to the
following address:
Technical Information Manager
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
(Ma 15) D Superfund
(Ma 16) D Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program
Name
Address
City, State, Zip Code
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plans to issue two RFPs during the coming
year. A Request for Proposals will be issued in January 1989 for the Demonstration
Program and a Request for Preproposals will be issued in July 1989 for the Emerging
Technologies Program. To be put on the mailing list to receive these RFPs, you should
indicate your area of interest by checking the appropriate boxes below and mail the
bottom half of this sheet to the following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Attention: William Frietsch, III
(004) D Demonstration Program RFP
(E03) D Emerging Technologies Program RFP
Name
Address
City, State, Zip Code
83
-------
------- |