9
&ERA
United States
EnvkwHTientel Protection
Office of Emenjency and
Office of
Research and Development
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Superfund
EPA/540/2-90/013
SeptembeM990
Engineering Bulletin
Purpose
Section 121(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) mandates
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to select remedies
that "utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum
extent practicable" and to prefer remedial actions in which
treatment "permanently and significantly reduces the volume,
toxicity, or mobility of hazardous substances, pollutants and
contaminants as a principal element." The Engineering Bulletins
are a series of documents that summarize the latest information
available on selected treatment and site remediation
technologies and related issues. They provide summaries of
and references for the latest information to help remedial
project managers, on-scene coordinators, contractors, and
other site cleanup managers understand the type of data and
site characteristics needed to evaluate a technology for potential
applicability to their Superfund or other hazardous waste site.
Those documents that describe individual treatment
technologies focus on remedial investigation scoping needs.
Addenda will be issued periodically to update the original
bulletins.
Abstract
Solvent extraction does not destroy wastes, but is a means
of separating hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges, and
sediments, thereby reducing the volume of the hazardous
waste that must be treated. Generally it is used as one in a series
of unit operations, and can reduce the overall costfor managing
a particular site. It is applicable to organic wastes and is
generally not used for treating inorganics and metals [15,
p.64].* The technology uses an organic chemical as a solvent
[14, p. 30], and differs from soil washing, which generally uses
water or water with wash improving additives. During 1989,
the technology was one of the selected remedies at six Superfund
sites. Commercial-scale units are in operation. There is no clear
solvent extraction technology leader by virtue of the solvent
employed, type of equipment used, or mode of operation. The
final determination of the lowest cost alternative will be more
site specific than process equipment dominated. Vendors should
be contacted to determine the availability of a unit for a
particular site. This bulletin provides information on the
technology applicability, the types of residuals produced, the
* [reference number, page number]
latest performance data, site requirements, the status of the
technology, and sources for further information.
Technology Applicability
Solvent extraction has been shown to be effective in
treating sediments, sludges, and soils containing primarily
organic contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls(PCB),
volatile organic compounds (VOC), halogenated solvents, and
petroleum wastes. The technology is generally not used for
extracting inorganics (i.e., acids, bases, salts, heavy metals).
Inorganics usually do not have a detrimental effect on the
extraction of the organic components, and sometimes metals
that pass through the process experience a beneficial effect by
changing the chemical compound to a less toxic or leachable
form. The process has been shown to be applicable for the
separation of the organic contaminants in paint wastes, synthetic
rubber process wastes, coal tar wastes, drilling muds, wood
treating wastes, separation sludges, pesticide/insecticide wastes,
and petroleum refinery oily wastes [3].
Table 1 lists the codes for the specific Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) wastes that have been treated by this
technology [3][1, p.11 ]. The effectiveness of solvent extraction
on general contaminant groups for various matrices is shown
in Table 2 [13, p.1 ] [ 15, p.10]. Examples of constituents within
contaminant groups are provided in Reference 15, "Technology
Screening Guide for Treatment of CERCLA Soils and Sludges."
This table is based on the current available information or
professional judgment where no information was available.
The proven effectiveness of the technology for a particular site
or waste does not ensure that it will be effective at all sites or that
the treatment efficiencies achieved will be acceptable at other
sites. For the ratings used for this table, demonstrated
effectiveness means that, at some scale treatability was tested
to show the technology was effective for that particular
contaminant and matrix. The ratings of potential effectiveness,
or no expected effectiveness are both based upon expert
judgment. Where potential effectiveness is indicated, the
technology is believed capable of successfully treating the
contaminant group in a particular matrix. When the technology
is not applicable or will probably not work for a particular
combination of contaminant group and matrix, a no-expected-
effectiveness rating is given.
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Limitations
Organically bound metals can co-extract with the target
organic pollutants and become a constituent of the concentrated
organic waste stream. This is an unfavorable occurrence
because the presence of metals can restrict both disposal and
recycle options.
Table 1
RCRA Codes for Wastes Treated
by Solvent Extraction
Wood Treating Wastes K001
Water Treatment Sludges K044
Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF) Float K048
Slop Oil Emulsion Solids K049
Heat Exchanger Bundles Cleaning Sludge K050
American Petroleum Institute (API)
Separator Sludge K051
Tank Bottoms (leaded) K052
Ammonia Still Sludge K060
Pharmaceutical Sludge K084
Decanter Tar Sludge K089
Distillation Residues K101
Table 2
Effectiveness of Solvent Extraction on
General Contaminant Groups for
Soil, Sludge, and Sediments
Treatability Croups
§
?
0
^
|
p
j
Halogenated volatiles
Halogenated semivolatiles
Nonhalogenated volatiles
Nonhalogenated semivolatiles
PCBs
Pesticides
Dioxins/Furans
Organic cyanides
Organic corrosives
Volatile metals
Nonvolatile metals
Asbestos
Radioactive materials
Inorganic corrosives
Inorganic cyanides
Oxidizers
Effectiveness
Soil Sludge Sediments
V
V
V
V
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
T
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
V
V
V
T
V
V
V
V
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
Demonstrated Effectiveness: Successful treatability test at
some scale completed
T Potential Effectiveness: Expert opinion thai technology will work
Q No Expected Effectiveness: Expert opinion that technology will not work
The presence of detergents and emulsifiers can unfavorably
influence extraction performance and materials throughput.
Water-soluble detergents, found in some raw wastes (particularly
municipal), will dissolve and retain organic pollutants in
competition with the extraction solvent. This can impede a
system's ability to achieve low concentration treatment levels.
Detergents and emulsifiers can promote the evolution of foam,
which hinders separation and settling characteristics and
generally decreases materials throughput. Although methods
exist to combat these problems, they will add to the process
cost.
When treated solids leave the extraction subsystem, traces
of extraction solvent will be present [8, p. 125]. The typical
extraction solvents used in currently available systems either
volatilize quickly from the treated solids or biodegrade easily.
Ambient air monitoring can be employed to determine if the
volatilizing solvents present a problem.
The types of organic pollutants that can be extracted
successfully depends, in part, on the nature of the extraction
solvent. Invariably, treatability tests should be conducted to
determine which solvent or combination of solvents is best
suited to the site-specific vagaries of a particular parameter/
matrix mix. In general, solvent extraction is least effective on
very high molecular weight organics and very hydrophilic
substances.
Some commercially available extraction systems use
solvents that are either flammable or mildly toxic or both [20,
p. 2]. However, there are long-standing standard procedures
used by chemical companies, gasoline stations, etc., that can
be used to greatly reduce the potential for accidents.
Technology Description
Figure 1 is a general schematic of the solvent extraction
process [3][15, p. 65][4, p. 3].
Waste preparation (1) includes excavation and/or moving
the waste material to the process where it is normally screened
to remove debris and large objects. Depending upon the
process vendor and whether the process is semibatch or
continuous, the waste may need to be made pumpable by the
addition of solvent or water.
In the extractor (2), the waste and solvent mix, resulting in
the organic contaminant dissolving into the solvent. The
extraction behavior exhibited by this technology is typical of a
mass transfer controlled process, although equilibrium
considerations often become limiting factors. It is important to
have a competent source conduct a laboratory-scale treatability
test to determine whether mass transfer or equilibrium will be
controlling. The controlling factor is critical to the design of the
unit and to the determination of whether the technology is
appropriate for the waste.
The extracted organics are removed from the extractor
with the solvent and go to the separator (3), where the pressure
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
or temperature is changed, causing the organic contaminants
to separate from the solvent [9, p. 4-2].
The solvent is recycled (4) to the extractor and the
concentrated contaminants (5) are removed from the separator
[11, P- 6].
Process Residuals
There are three main product streams generated by this
technology: the concentrated contaminants, the treated soil or
sludge, and the separated water. The extract contains solvent-
free contaminants, concentrated into a smaller volume, for post
treatment. The recovered contaminants may require analysis
to determine their suitability for recycle, reuse, or further
treatment before disposal.
The cleaned soil and solidsfrom treated sludge or sediments
may need to be dewatered, forming a dry solid and a separate
water stream. The volume of product water depends on the
inherent dewatering capability of the individual process, as well
as the process-specific requirements for feed slurrying. Since
the solvent is an organic material, some residue may remain in
the soil matrix. This can be mitigated by solvent selection, and
if necessary, an additional separation stage. Depending on the
extent of metal or other inorganic contaminants, treatment of
the cleaned solids by some other technique (i.e., stabilization)
may be necessary. Since the organic component has been
separated, additional solids treatment should be simplified.
The water produced should be analyzed to determine if
treatment is necessary before discharge.
Solvent extraction units are designed to operate without
air emissions. However, volatile air emissions could occur
during waste preparation.
Site Requirements
Solvent extraction units are transported by trailers.
Therefore, adequate access roads are required to get the unit to
the site. Typical commercial-scale units, 50-70 tons per day
(tpd), require a setup area of up to 3,600 square feet.
Standard 440V three-phase electrical service is needed.
Water must be available at the site [3]. The quantity of water
needed is vendor and site specific.
Contaminated soils or other waste materials are hazardous
and their handling requires that a site safety plan be developed
to provide for personnel protection and special handling
measures. Storage should be provided to hold the process
product streams until they have been tested to determine their
acceptability for disposal or release. Depending upon the site,
a method to store waste that has been prepared for treatment
may be necessary. Storage capacity will depend on waste
volume.
Onsite analytical equipment for conducting oil and grease
analyses and a gas chromatograph capable of determining site-
specific organic compounds for performance assessment make
the operation more efficient and provide better information for
process control.
Performance Data
The performance data currently available are mostly from
two vendors, CF Systems and Resource Conservation Company
(RCC).
CF Systems' full-scale 50-tpd commercial unit (PCU 200),
which is treating refinery sludge at Port Arthur, Texas, meets or
Figure 1. Solvent Extraction Process
Treated Emissions
Organic 1
Contaminants '^
^»~
Concentrated
Contaminants (5)
Solids
Water
Oversized Rejects
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
exceeds the EPA's Best Demonstrated Available Technology
(BOAT) standards for a number of organic contaminants (Table
3) [3].
Table 3
API Separator Sludge Results*
(Concentrations in mg/kg)
Treated
Products for
Feed BDAT Land
Concentrations Target Disposal
Benzene 30.2 9.5 0.18
Toluene 16.6 9.5 0.18
Ethylbenzene 30.4 67.0 0.23
Xylenes (Total) 13.2 Reserved 0.98
Anthracene 28.3 6.2 0.12
Benzo(a)anthracene BMDL** 1.4 0.18
Benzo(a)pyrene 1.9 0.84 0.33
Bis-(2-ethylhexy)phthalate 4.1 37.0 1.04
Chrysene 6.3 2.2 0.69
Di-n-butyl phthalate BMDL 4.2 0.11
Naphthalene 42.2 Reserved 0.66
Phenanthrene 28.6 7.7 1.01
Phenol BMDL 2.7 BMDL
Pyrene 7.7 2.0 1.08
* This information is from vendor-published literature;
therefore, quality assurance has not been evaluated.
** Below Minimum Detection Limits (different values in Feed
and Treated products).
Source: [3], CF Systems, 50 tpd
Under the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
(SITE) program, as shown in Table 4, CF Systems demonstrated
an overall PCB reduction of more than 90% for harbor sediments
with inlet concentrations up to 2,575 ppm [11, p. 6].
A mobile demonstration unit processed different feed
types including clay pit material, ditch skimmer sludge, and
drainage basin soil. The wastes were contaminated with oil and
grease and aromatic priority pollutants. The oil and grease
were separated and their concentrations were reduced to
between 89% and 94% of the original amount. For the most
part, the aromatic compounds were reduced to nondetectable
levels [6, p. 10].
A treatability study completed at the Conroe, Texas,
Superfund site with the mobile demonstration unit showed
that polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations
in the soil were reduced 95% from 2,879 ppm to 122 ppm [12,
p. 3-12].
The only available data for the on-line operational availability
were from CF Systems, which they estimated to be 85%
(corresponding to a treatment process downtime of 15%). This
can be verified and possibly improved with increased operating
experience.
The ability of RCC's full- scale B.E.S.T. process to separate
oily feedstock into product fractions was evaluated by the EPA
at the General Refining Superfund site near Savannah, Georgia,
in February 1987. It is an abandoned waste oil re-refining
facility that contained four acidic oily sludge ponds with high
levels of heavy metals (Pb=200-10,000 ppm, Cu=83-l 90 ppm)
and detectable PCBs (2.9-5 ppm). The average composition of
the sludge from the four lagoons was 10% oil, 20% solids, and
70% water by weight [16, p. 13]. The transportable 70 tons/
day B.E.S.T. unit processed approximately 3,700 tons of
sludge at the General Refining Site. The treated solids from this
unit were back filled to the site, product oil was recycled as a fuel
oil blend, and the recovered water was pH adjusted and
transported to a local industrial wastewater treatment facility.
Test results (Table 5) showed that the heavy metals were
mostly concentrated in the solids product fraction. TCLP test
results showed heavy metals to be in stable forms that resisted
leaching, illustrating a potential beneficial side effect when
metals are treated by the process [1, p. 13].
RCC has bench-scale treatability data on a variety of
wastes, including steel mill wastewater treatment sludge and
oil refinery sludge (Table 6) [1, p. 12], that will illustrate the
degree of separation possible among the oil, water, and solids
Table 4
New Bedford Harbor Sediments Results
(Concentrations in ppm)
Test*
1
2
3
initial
PCB
Concentration
350
288
2,575
final
PCB
Concentration
8
47
200
Percent
Reduction
98
84
92
Number
of
Passes
Through
Extractor
9
1
6
Source: [11 ], CF Systems, 1.5 gpm
Table 5
EPA Data from the General Refining
Superfund Site, Savannah, GA
Metals
As
Ba
Cr
Pb
Se
Initial
Concentration
(mg/kg)
<0.6
239
6.2
3,200
<4.0
Product
Solids
Metal
(ppm)
<5.0
410
21
23,000
<5.0
TCLP
Levels
(ppm)
<0.0
<0.03
<0.05
5.2
0.008
Source: [1], RCC, 100 tpd
4
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
components of the waste. The separation of PCBs in
contaminated harbor sediments is shown in Table 7 and in a
variety of matrices in Table 8. Results of treatment of pesticide-
contaminated soils are shown in Table 9.
RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) that require
treatment of wastes to BOAT levels prior to land disposal may
sometimes be determined to be applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements (ARARs)for CERCLA response actions.
The solvent extraction technology can produce a treated waste
that meets treatment levels set by BOAT, but may not reach
these treatment levels in all cases. The ability to meet required
treatment levels is dependent upon the specific waste
constituents and the waste matrix. In cases where solvent
extraction does not meet these levels, it still may, in certain
situations, be selected for use at the site if a treatability variance
establishing alternative treatment levels is obtained. EPA has
Table 6
Oil and Grease Removal
Bench Scale
Original Sludge
Concentration
Oil%
Water %
Solids %
Product Stream
Oil
Water %
Solvent (ppm)
Water
Oil & Crease (ppm)
Solvent (ppm)
Solid
Oil & Crease (ppm)
Solvent (ppm)
Steel Mill
Sludge
11
33
56
<2
<100
<100
11
0.2
34
Refinery
Sludge
8
77
15
<1
<150
<100
12
0.9
N/A
Source: RCC, 6 kg Batch
Table 7
Harbor Sediments
PCB Extraction Bench Scale
Original Sediments
Product Stream
Oil
Water
Solid
% Removal
4,500 ppm
75,000 ppm
10 ppb
<1 ppm
>99%
Source: RCC, 6 kg Batch
made the treatability variance process available in order to
ensure that LDRs do not unnecessarily restrict the use of
alternative and innovative treatment technologies. Treatability
variances may be justified for handling complex soil and debris
matrices. The following guides describe when and how to seek
a treatability variance for soil and debris: Superfund LDR Guide
#6A, "Obtaining a Soil and Debris Treatability Variance for
Remedial Actions" (OSWER Directive 9347.3-06FS) [17], and
Superfund LDR Guide #6B, "Obtaining a Soil and Debris
Treatability Variance for Removal Actions" (OSWER Directive
9347.3-07FS) [18]. Another approach could be to use other
treatment techniques in series with solvent extraction to obtain
desired treatment levels.
Technology Status
During 1989, solvent extraction technology was selected
as the remedial action to clean up 2,000-2,200 cubic yards of
soil contaminated with PCBs and organics at the Pinette
Salvage Superfund site in Washburn, Maine [13, p. 2]. In 1989,
solvent extraction was also selected as the source control
remedy in the following Records of Decision: F. O'Connor
Superfund site in Augusta, Maine; the Norwood PCBs Superfund
site in Norwood, Massachusetts; the Ewan Property Superfund
site in Shamong, New Jersey; United Creosoting in Conroe,
Texas; and Outboard Marine, State of Illinois [19].
The most significant factors influencing costs are the waste
volume, the number of extraction stages, and the operating
parameters such as labor, maintenance, setup, decontamination,
demobilization, and lost time resulting from equipment
operating delays. Extraction efficiency can be influenced by
process parameters such as solvent used, solvent/waste ratio,
throughput rate, extractor residence time, and number of
extraction stages. Thus, variation of these parameters in a
particular hardware design and/or configuration will influence
the treatment unit cost component, but should not be a
significant contributor to the overall site costs.
Cost estimates for this technology range from $100 to
$500 per ton.
Solvent Extraction Systems
Solvent extraction systems are at various stages of
development. The following is a brief discussion of six systems
that have been identified.
CF Systems uses liquefied hydrocarbon gases such as
propane and butane as solvents for separating organic
contaminants from soils, sludges, and sediments. The extraction
units are liquid-filled systems that employ pumps to move the
material through the system. As such, the feed material is
pretreated, through the addition of water, to ensure the
"pumpability" of tne material [10, p. 12]. The pH of the feed
may be adjusted, through the addition of lime or a similar
material, to maintain the metallurgical integrity of the system.
Typically, the feed material is screened to remove particles of
greater than 1 /8" diameter. Depending upon the nature of the
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
Tabled
PCB Samples Tested In RCC's Laboratory (1/87 through 7/98)
Client
SLUDGES
GRI
GRI
GRI
Superfund Site Sh
Superfund Site CO "A"
Superfund Site CO "B"
Superfund Site CO "C"
SEDIMENTS
River Sediment "B"
Superfund B (#1 3)
Harbor Sediment "B"
Harbor Sediment "C"
Harbor Sediment "D"
Harbor Sediment NB-A
Harbor Sediment NB-B
SOILS
Industrial Soil A
Industrial Soil B
Industrial Soil D
Industrial Soil j
As Received
PCB
(mg/kg)
5.9
4.7
5.3
106
51
21
11
960
83
20,000
30,000
430
5,800
16,500
250
120
5,300
19
Raw Sample Phase Composition
Oil % Water % Solids %
27 66 7
10 58 32
13 57 30
35 44 21
49 28 23
23 24 53
15 16 69
26 17 83
44 40 16
3 22 75
5.6 62 32
0.38 47 53
1.9 69 29
4.3 51.6 44.1
0.06 9.4 91
0.06 1 3 87
1.0 19 80
.09 16 84
PCBs in Product fraction
Oil Water Solids % Removal
(mg/kg) (mgAg) (mg/kg)
9.3 <.005 <.01 99.9%
N/A <.01 0.015 99.9%
N/A <.01 0.14 99.2%
270 N/A 1.0 99.8%
80 N/A 0.44 99.8%
71 N/A 0.08 99.8%
52 N/A 0.06 99.6%
N/A N/A 40 96.5%
N/A N/A 1.0 99.8%
970,000 <.006 27 99.9%
550,000 N/A 94 99.9%
N/A N/A 32 96.0%
280,000 <.005 35 99.4%
360,000 <.005 75 99.8%
120,000 N/A 2.2 99.1%
280,000 N/A 6.4 94.7%
370,000 N/A 11 99.8%
10,000 N/A 0.7 96.3%
Source: RCC, .6 kg Batch
oversize material, the large particles may be reduced in size and
then returned to the extraction unit for processing.
CF Systems' extraction technology has been demonstrated
in the field at two Superfund sites and approximately 10
refineries and treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities
to date.
CF Systems' solvent extraction technology is available in
several commercial sizes and the Mobile Demonstration Unit is
available for onsite treatability studies. To date, CF Systems has
supplied three commercial-scale extraction units for the
treatment of a variety of wastes [12, p. 3-12]. A 60-tpd
treatment system was designed to extract organic liquids from
a broad range of hazardous waste feeds at ENSCO's El Dorado,
Arkansas, incinerator facility. A commercial-scale extraction
unit is being installed at a facility in Baltimore, Maryland, to
remove organic contaminants from a 20-gpm wastewater
stream. A PCU-200 extraction unit is installed and operating at
the Star Enterprise (Texaco) refinery in Port Arthur, Texas. This
unit is designed to treat listed refinery wastes to meet or exceed
the EPA's BOAT standards. Performance data and the technology
status are explained in the body of this bulletin.
RCC's B.E.S.T. system uses aliphatic amines (typically
triethylamine) as the solvent to separate and recover
contaminants [1, p. 2]. It is applicable to soils, sludges, and
sediments, and in batch mode of operation does not need a
pumpable waste. Before the extraction process is begun, feed
materials are screened to remove particles of greater than 1"
diameter and pH adjusted to an alkaline condition. The process
operates at or near ambient temperature and pressure.
Triethylamine can be recycled from the recovered liquid phases
via steam stripping because of its high vapor pressure and low
boiling point azeotrope formation.
RCC has a transportable B.E.S.T. pilot-scale unit available
to treat soils and sludges. This pilot-scale equipment has been
used at a gulf coast refinery treating various refinery waste
streams and has treated PCB-contaminated soils at an industrial
site in Ohio in November 1989. A full-scale unit with a nominal
capacity of 70 tpd was used to clean up 3,700 tons of PCB-
contaminated petroleum sludge at the General Refining
Superfund Site in Savannah, Georgia, in 1987. Performance
data and the technology status are explained in the body of this
bulletin.
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
ENSR is in the process of developing a mobile solvent
extraction unit capable of decontaminating soils and sludges at
a rate of 5 to 10 cubic yards/hour [5, p. 1 ]. The ENSR system
uses a proprietary reagent and solvent. The company claims
that its solvent extraction system is designed to operate without
significant pretreatment of the soil/sludge and without the
addition or removal of water. Design of a pilot-scale unit is near
completion. Thus far, only performance data from earlier
bench-scale tests are available.
The Extraksol process was developed in 1984 by Sanivan
Group, Montreal, Canada [7, p. 35]. It is applicable to soils,
sludges, and sediments. Performance data on contaminated
soils and refinery wastes are available for a 1 ton per hour (tph)
mobile unit. The process uses a proprietary solvent that
reportedly achieved removal efficiencies up to 99% (depending
on the number of extraction cycles and the type of soil) on
PCBs, oil, grease, PAHs, and pentachlorophenol [7, p. 45]. The
1 -tph unit is suitable for small projects with a maximum of 300
tons of material to be treated. The Sanivan group is planning
to build a full-scale unit that can process 6-8 tph of waste [7, p.
41].
Harmon Environmental Services and Acurex
Corporation are involved in a cooperative joint venture to
develop a solvent soil washer/extraction system appropriate for
the onsite remediation of Superfund and RCRA sites. They have
completed EPA-sponsored bench-scale studies on different
types of soils contaminated with #2 fuel oil. The design of a pilot
plant unit is being considered.
The Low Energy Extraction Process (LEEP) is a patented
solvent extraction process that can be used onsite for
decontaminating soils, sludges, and sediments. LEEP uses
common hydrophilic and hydrophobic organic solvents to
extract and further concentrate organic pollutants such as PCBs
[2, p. 3]. Bench-scale studies are available. The design of the
pilot plant is completed, and the plant is scheduled for operation
at the beginning of 1990.
EPA Contact
Technology-specific questions regarding solvent extraction
may be directed to:
Michael Gruenfeld
U.S. EPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
GSA Raritan Depot
Wood bridge Avenue
Edison, New Jersey 08837
FTS 340-6625
(201)321-6625
Table 9
RCC B.E.S.T. Treated Pesticide-
Contaminated Soil Bench Scale
Anolyte
p,p'-DDT
p,p'-DDE
p,p'-DDD
Endosulfan-l
Endosulfan-ll
Endrin
Dieldrin
Toxaphene
BHC-Beta
BHC-Camma
(Lindane)
Pentachlorophenol
Feedstock
(ppm)
500
84
190
250
140
140
37
2,600
<30
<30
150
Product
Solids
(ppm)
0.2
0.5
0.05
<0.02
<0.02
0.02
<0.02
0.9
<0.13
<0.07
1.9
Removal
Efficiency %
99.96
99.4
99.97
>99.99
>99.99
99.99
>99.95
99.97
-
-
98.7
3.
4.
Source: RCC, .6 kg Batch
REFERENCES
Austin, Douglas A. The B.E.S.T. Process An
Innovative and Demonstrated Process for Treating
Hazardous Sludges and Contaminated Soils. Presented
at 81st Annual Meeting of APCA, Preprint 88-6B.7,
Dallas, Texas, 1988.
Blank, Z., B. Rugg, and W. Steiner. LEEP-Low Energy
Extraction Process: New Technology to Decontaminate
PCB-Contaminated Sites, EPA SITE E02 Emerging
Technologies Program. Applied Remediation
Technology, Inc., Randolph, New Jersey, 1989.
CF Systems Corporation, Marketing Brochures (no
dates).
Hall, Dorothy W., J.A. Sandrin, R.E. McBride. An
Overview of Solvent Extraction Treatment
Technologies. Presented at AICHE Meeting,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1989.
Massey, M.)., and S. Darian. ENSR Process for the
Extractive Decontamination of Soils and Sludges.
Presented at the PCB Forum, International Conference
for the Remediation of PCB Contamination, Houston,
Texas, 1989.
Engineering Bulletin: Solvent Extraction Treatment
-------
REFERENCES
6. Moses, John M., R. Abrishamian. Use of Liquified Gas
Solvent Extraction in Hazardous Waste Site Closures.
Presentation Paper No. 55D, Presented at AICHE
Summer National Meeting, Denver, Colorado, 1988.
7. Paquin,)., and D. Mourato. Soil Decontamination with
Extraksol. Sanivan Croup, Montreal, Canada (no date),
pp. 35-47.
8. Reilly, T.R., S. Sundaresan, and J.H. Highland. Cleanup
of PCB Contaminated Soils and Sludges By A Solvent
Extraction Process: A Case Study. Studies in
Environmental Science, 29: 125-139, 1986.
9. Rowe, G. Evaluation of Treatment Technologies for
Listed Petroleum Refinery Wastes, Chapter 4. API
Waste Technologies Task Force, Washington, DC,
1987. pp. 1-12.
10. Technology Evaluation Report CF Systems Organics
Extraction System, New Bedford, MA, Volume I.
Report to be published, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
11. Technology Evaluation Report CF Systems Organics
Extraction System, New Bedford, MA, Volume II.
Report to be published, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
12. Applications Analysis Report CF Systems Organics
Extraction System, New Bedford, MA, Report to be
published, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
13. Innovative Technology: B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction
Process. OSWER Directive 9200.5-253FS, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1989.
14. Raghavan, R., D.H. Dietz, and E. Coles. Cleaning
Excavated Soil Using Extraction Agents: A State-of-the-
art Review. EPA 600/2-89/034, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Releases Control Branch, Edison, NJ,
1988.
15. Technology Screening Guide for Treatment of CERCLA
Soils and Sludges. EPA/540/2-88/004, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1988.
16. Evaluation of the B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Sludge
Treatment Technology Twenty-Four Hour Test. EPA/
600/2-88/051, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1988.
17. Superfund LDR Guide #6A: Obtaining a Soil and Debris
Treatability Variance for Remedial Actions. OSWER
Directive 9347.3-06FS, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1989.
18. Superfund LDR Guide #6B: Obtaining a Soil and Debris
Treatability Variance for Removal Actions. OSWER
Directive 9347.3-07FS, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1989.
19. ROD Annual Report, FY 1989. EPA/540/8-90/006, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1990.
20. Weimer, L.D. The B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Process
Applications with Hazardous Sludges, Soils and
Sediments. Presented at the Third International
Conference, New Frontiers for Hazardous Waste
Management, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1989.
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1990-0-726-081
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
------- |