&EPA
            United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
             Office of Research and
             Development
             Washington, DC 20460
EPA/600/R-92/096
June 1992
Potential Reuse of
Petroleum-Contaminated
Soil
           A Directory of Permitted
           Recycling Facilities

-------

-------
                                     EPA/600/R-92/096
                                     June 1992 .
                 POTENTIAL REUSE
                         OF
         PETROLEUM-CONTAMINATED SOIL:
A DIRECTORY OF PERMITTED RECYCLING FACILITIES
                         by
                    James H. Nash
                    Chapman, Inc.
        Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey 07716-1034

                        and

                  Seymour Rosenthal
                     George Wolf
                     Marilyn Avery
            Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
             Edison, New Jersey 08837-3679
                Contract No. 68-C9-0033
                    Project Officer

                    Chien T. Chen
       Superfund Technology Demonstration Division
          Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
             Edison, New Jersey 08837-3679
      RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
       OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
       U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
                                       Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                      DISCLAIMER
    The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under Contract 68-C9-0033 to Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc. it has been subjected
to the Agency's peer and administrative  review, and it 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 resources 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.

    The health impacts associated with uncontrolled releases of petroleum hydrocarbons from underground
storage  tanks present an area of major concern.  The responsible parties, whether large corporations or
small businessmen must find an appropriate means of remediating any soil contaminated by such releases.
This document will assist them in finding solutions that will not only clean the soil contaminated by such
tanks, but also reuse it in an environmentally safe method. It identifies facilities that have, at this date, been
approved in the United States as recyclers of petroleum-contaminated soil.
                                                   E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
                                                   Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
                                               HI

-------
                                         ABSTRACT
    Soil contaminated by virgin petroleum products leaking from underground storage tanks is a pervasive
problem in the United States.  Economically feasible disposal of such soil concerns the responsible party
(RP), whether the RP is one individual  small businessman, a group of owners, or a  large multinational
corporation. They may need a starting point in their search for an appropriate solution, such as recycling.

    This report provides initial assistance iatwo important sections: a clear discussion of the potential
recycling technologies and a user-friendly, quick-reference table listing the names and locations of recycling
companies in each state that allows such services, supplemented by a detailed directory of specific contacts
for further information.

    Four types of technologies manufacture marketable products from recycled petroleum-contaminated
soil: hot asphalt processes, cold mix asphalt systems, brick (vitrification) techniques, and cement-production.

    Table 3, which forms the core of this report, lists recycling facilities alphabetically by location within
each state, organized by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region.  The facilities shown have
each reported that they are operating either under a permit or another required vehicle of formal state
approval, at the time of the survey (Status: A); that they have temporarily ceased previously approved
operations (Status: I); or that they are in the final stages of the permit/approval cycle and expect to shortly
begin operations (Status: P).

    Table 4 is an alphabetical directory of these companies, providing detailed address, recycling location,
telephone number, and contact for the RP who may wish to gather even more specific information.

    The scope of the survey project and report concern only fixed facilities or small mobile facility owners
that recycle soil contaminated by virgin petroleum products into marketable commodities.  This project does
not address site-specific remediation facilities. Other EPA documents address such recycling for commercial
hazardous waste facilities  [1,2].

    This  report was  submitted  in fulfillment of Contract  Number  68-C9-0033 by Foster  Wheeler
Enviresponse, Inc. under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  This report covers
a period from 1990 to 1991, and work was completed as of February, 1992.
                                                IV

-------
                                        CONTENTS
Disclaimer	       ii
Foreword  .	       iii
Abstract	       iv
Tables	       vi
Figures		       vi
Abbreviations and Symbols  	      vii
Acknowledgements	       ix


        1.     Introduction  . .	       1
                 The problem of petroleum-contaminated soil 	       1
                 Levels of regulation  	       1
                 Survey methodology and report preparation  	       2
                    Stage I   	       2
                    Stage II  	       3

        2.     Recycling Technologies 	       5
                 Technologies addressed in this report   	       5
                 Hot-mix asphalt plants 	       6
                 Cold mix asphalt	       7
                 Cement manufacturing facilities	      11
                 Brick manufacturing plants  	:	      13
                 Other technologies	      14

        3.     A Directory of Permitted Recycling Facilities  	      16
                 Using the table and directory  	      16
                 U.S. EPA Regions   	      17
                 List of Permitted Facilities   	      19
                 Directory of Recycling Facilities-	      29


        4.     Conclusions  . .	      35

        References	      36

-------
                                        TABLES

Number                                                                              Page
    1     Telephone Survey Form  	       4
    2    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regions	      17
    3    List of Permitted Facilities 	      19
    4    Directory of Recycling Facilities	      29


                                         FIGURES
Number                                                                              Elige
    1     Batch hot-mix asphalt plant	       8
    2    Cold-mix asphalt process	      10
    3    A basic cement kiln process	      12
    4    The brick  manufacturing process  	      15
    5    U.S. EPA  Regions	      18
                                            vi

-------
                           ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
A
ASTM
BTEX
COLIS
D
dia
EPA
G
I
K
Ib
LUST
NA
P
RP
RCRA
t/d
t/h
t/m
t/yr
TCLP
TPH
TSDs
VOC
UST
$/t
#2
#4
#6

ADEM
DEDNR
FLDER
KS DH&E
MADEP
MEDEP
MDE
MPCA
NC DEM, AQP
NH ARD
NJ DEP
NY DEC
Active (recycling facility)
American Society for Testing and Materials
Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, xylene (combined analysis)
Computerized On-Line Information System
Diesel
Diameter
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Gasoline
Inactive  (recycling facility)
Kerosene
Pound (weight)
Leaking  underground storage tank
Not available
Permitting (application being processed for the recycling facility)
Responsible Party
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Tons per day
Tons per hour
Tons per month
Tons per year
Toxicity  characteristic leaching procedure
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
Transportation/storage/disposal facilities (for hazardous waste)
Volatile organic compounds
Underground storage tank
Dollars per ton
Number  2 fuel oil
Number  4 fuel oil
Number  6 fuel oil

Alabama Department of Environmental  Management
Delaware Department of Natural Resources
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
Kansas Department of Health & Environment
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Maine Department of Environmental Protection
Maryland Department of the Environment
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Air Quality Permitting
New Hampshire Air Resources Division
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
New York Department of Environmental Conservation
                                            VII

-------
PADER
RIDEM
SO GW Div.
VA DAPC
WADE
W1DNR
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
South Carolina Ground Water Division
Virginia Division of Air Pollution Control
State of Washington,  Department of Ecology
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
                                            VIII

-------
                                ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    More than three hundred individuals provided information for this report. It is impossible to thank them
individually for their contributions.  However, some significant contributors must be acknowledged:

    Andy Bodnarik, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Air Resources Division
    Pat Bologna, New York Facility Management Bureau
    Lynn Coleman, State of Washington, Department of Ecology
    Bob Dullinger,  Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
    Laurie Egre, State of Wisconsin, Department of Natural Resources, Tank Response Unit
    Don Ehlenbeck, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
    Doug Fine, Massachusetts DEP
    Jessie Schnell, California Department of Health Services, Alternative Technology Division

    Special mention should go to Paul Kostecki of the University of Massachusetts and Bruce Bauman of
the American Petroleum Institute for their technical assistance. Also, the authors wish to acknowledge EPA
Peer Reviewers Robert Hillger, and Chi-Yuan Fan for their contribution to the report. They also express their
appreciation to James Yezzi, EPA Physical Scientist, for his assistance.

    Stage I of this project report was conducted by Chapman,  Inc. for Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.,
which then conducted Stage II.  This work proceeded under the supervision and guidance of Anthony N.
Tafuri, Chief of the RGB Releases Technology Section and Chien T. Chen, Technical Project Monitor for the
Work Assignment No. 0-R032 under EPA Contract No. 68-C9-0033.
                                              ix

-------

-------
                                         SECTION 1
                                      INTRODUCTION
THE PROBLEM OF PETROLEUM-CONTAMINATED SOIL


     Soil contaminated by virgin petroleum products leaking from underground storage tanks is a pervasive
problem in the United States.  Economically feasible disposal of such soil concerns the responsible party
(RP), whether the RP  is an individual small businessman, a group of owners, or a large multinational
corporation. Disposal of such soil is costly, both in terms of money and landfill resources.

     Federal legislation makes the generator responsible for soil contaminated by chemical materials, even
if the contaminants are virgin products rather than processed waste [40 CFR 261.3(a)(92)]. In the case of
a large corporate site, the responsible party may need a starting point for a competent technical team that
can explore the appropriate remedies and implement them. At the other extreme, however, for a small
businessman, finding an economically feasible remedy may be more difficult.  A typical example is the
gasoline station owner who has arranged to have an old tank removed/replaced, but is left with a substantial
pile of contaminated soil, which has been excavated and covered by a tarpaulin pending cleanup.

     Regardless of cleanup volume, the RP should investigate environmentally and financially advantageous
recycling options.  This report will provide  initial assistance in finding an environmentally responsible
solution. It contains two key resources: a clear discussion of the potential recycling technologies (Section
2) and a user-friendly, quick-reference table listing the names and locations of recycling companies in each
state that allows such  services, supplemented by a detailed directory of specific  contacts for further
information (Section 3).
LEVELS OF REGULATION
    Public Law 98:616  (the reauthorization of thfr Resource Conservation  Recovery Act, called  RCRA,
published in 1984) mandates the development and implementation of an extensive  regulatory plan for
underground storage tanks (USTs)  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must promulgate the
agency regulations that protect human health and the environment. Therefore, EPA must define long-term
corrective actions for the treatment of petroleum-contaminated soils at UST sites regulated under RCRA
Subtitle I.

    Under the federal  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), soil contaminated by virgin
petroleum product is not considered a hazardous waste.  However, the individual  states - and even
individual communities - have the right to legislate standards that are more restrictive than federal statutes.
Such regulations, peculiar to a particular state or community, can - and do - change rapidly.  Past trends
indicate that the future may bring even more restrictive statutes on a state-by-state basis, or even on the
federal level [42 USC  6901 et  seq.. RCRA  Section 3006(a)].   Therefore, the persons  or  companies

                                               1

-------
responsible  for the disposal  or recycling of petroleum-contaminated soil must  periodically familiarize
themselves with any applicable legislation, and  any changes to such legislation,  on the  national, state,
county, and municipal level.

     Due to  differing statutes and random changes, the concept of a permitted facility cannot be uniform.
For the purposes of this report, "permitted" will mean that the facility operates with formal governmental
authorization. This may take the form of an air permit, a RCRA permit, certification, or some other vehicle
from the appropriate governing body which formally authorizes the facility's operation. In some cases the
permitting is required for the manufacturing process, regardless of whether petroleum-contaminated soil is
part of the raw material.

    This report summarizes information on  fixed recycling facilities that are authorized to accept soils
contaminated by virgin petroleum products.  It does not address facilities that handle hazardous wastes.
Similar documents address recycling at commercial hazardous waste facilities [1,2]. Since  most states
consider petroleum-contaminated soil only a solid waste, these recycling facilities neither require RCRA Part
B permitting nor listing in RCRA data bases as TSDs.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND REPORT PREPARATION

    The project survey contacted authorities and private companies in each state to identify its facilities for
recycling petroleum-contaminated soil into a marketable product (e.g., asphalt, bricks, and cement).  It
progressed in two stages: Stage I, during 1991, established initial parameters and contacts; Stage II refined
the scope of the survey, supplemented the listings, and reviewed some of the earlier information.

Stage I

    This stage contained four segments:

    1.  A brief review of  some extant listings of treatment facilities,  including the EiPA COLIS LUST
        Corrective Action  Case Histories  Data Base, to determine whether  they  address the survey
        requirement,

    2.  Telephone interviews of selected permit personnel in EPA regional offices to identify region-specific
        facilities and knowledgeable state contacts,

    3.  Requests to each state UST and LUST office for information on facilities,

    4.  A telephone survey of recycling operators to gather basic information about their operations.

    The first two segments provided limited information and verified the need for the project.  Even sources
such as the Asphalt Recycling and Reclaiming Association and the EPA Regional Offices did not have a
specific list of facilities that are permitted to recycle petroleum-contaminated soil.

    The third  segment provided additional information from the following offices and the contacts they
provided:  state UST Program offices, Air Quality Management Branch, Solid Waste Management Branch,
and regional or county counterparts to state offices.

    The fourth segment provided the first'draft of Table 3, which forms the core of this document.

    fNote:  Information provided  by the permitted facilities was not verified by site inspection, copy

-------
    of permit,  or performance testing.
    require proof of permit/approval.]
Any reader planning to let contracts for future work must
     Information from the Stage I survey provided sufficient material for a first draft of trie report and its core
table.  A review of this draft revealed that, while it contained valuable information, it required revision to
become a user-friendly document.  It also identified needs for a refined definition of recycling facilities and
a more comprehensive listing.

     The concept of a marketable product (e.g., asphalt, brick, or cement) received added attention because
it lowers the recycling cost and increases the environmental value of the selection.  Also, the targeted
application (i.e., universal assistance to RPs with widely varying volumes of contaminated soil) eliminated
the relevance of site-specific remediation facilities. To clarify the scope of the report, the governing definition
of "recycling" in the report  was limited to the reuse of petroleum-contaminated soil  for another purpose.
Therefore, it also precluded the listing of on-site "treat and dispose" operations.

Stage II

     The Stage II plan evolved from the Stage I review and ensuing discussions. It outlined the preparation
of the revised report and the continuation of the survey in 5 areas:

     1. A more streamlined table, divided not only by EPA Region,  but also by state, would pinpoint for
       ready access the primary user's first  concerns: location and identity.  It would then tabulate the
       capacity, cost,  product, and contaminant issues that would help the  RP  make a "first cut" of
       potential resources. This streamlined format would also provide a better overview for a researcher
       seeking a general understanding of recycling opportunities.

     2. A detailed directory  would follow the table, enabling the user to easily find all the necessary
       information for follow-up inquiries after initial identification.

     3. These better-defined needs would in turn determine the form of a new telephone survey form to
       elicit information from recyclers. (See Table 1.)  This form would be further adapted to fashion the
       more streamlined table (Table 3).

     4. Additional telephone surveying would verify and  supplement the original  information due to the
       volatility of the regulatory scene and the rapid emergence of new recyclers.

     5. A more thorough discussion of the four targeted products, supplemented with additional illustrations
       would aid the RP in better  understanding the potential of recycling technologies.

-------
                    I
DC
O
        
        s
        I
CO
III
O
X
Q_
UJ
III
                   s
111
m
        u.
        at
        "S
        2
        1C
                  "
                   
-------
                                         SECTION 2
                              RECYCLING TECHNOLOGIES
TECHNOLOGIES ADDRESSED IN THIS REPORT
    Under the scope of this report, four technologies recycle petroleum-contaminated soil into marketable
products: hot mix asphalt processes, cold mix asphalt systems, cement-production, and brick .manufacturing
techniques.

    Asphalt is a bituminous material which occurs naturally or derives from the separation of petroleum
fractions.  It is categorized as asphalt cement or liquid asphalt. Asphalt contains aliphatic, mononuclear
aromatic, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Asphalt cement is the heaviest fraction. Liquid asphalts
are lighter fractions, which are graded by viscosity. Liquid asphalts may also be produced by dissolving
asphalt cements in solvent or emulsifying asphalt cements in water [10]. There are two groups of asphalt-
producing technologies:  hot and cold mix processes.

    o Hot mix asphalt processes use asphalt cement and can incorporate petroleum-contaminated soils.
       Aggregate, also marketable, is an intermediate product in this process. It consists of crushed stone,
       crushed slag, crushed gravel or sand (natural or manufactured) that conforms to the quality and
       crushed particle  requirements of the appropriate ASTM specifications.

    o Cold mix asphalt processes use liquid asphalts and can incorporate petroleum-contaminated soil.
       Cold mix plants blend liquid asphalts with aggregate to produce patching material or a lower grade
       pavement which may be suitable for light duty  use.

    Unlike asphalt, cement and brick products consist of non-bituminous materials that include clay, shale,
and other ingredients, based on their respective product specifications and manufacturing processes.

    o Hydraulic cement is the basic  binding agent in concrete and masonry construction.  Portland
       cement accounts for approximately 95% of the total hydraulic cement production.  It is a finely
       ground mixture of calcium aluminates and silicates, capable of setting and hardening by chemical
       reaction with water [25].

    o Brick manufacturing processes blend clay and shale into plasticized mixtures,  which are then
    .  extruded and molded into green bricks,  which are later fired. A typical ASTM-defined-brick is a
       ceramic product. It is a solid masonry unit of clay or shale, usually formed into a rectarigular prism
       (while plastic) and burned or fired in a  kiln [22]:

-------
HOT-MIX ASPHALT PLANTS
    The hot mix process employs both mixing and heating to make the pavement material. It blends and
dries mineral aggregates like sand, gravel, and crushed stone (with a diameter as large as 3/4-in), heating
them to 300-350F. Mixing hot asphalt (5-10% by weight) with the hot aggregate produces paving material.

    A hot  mix temperature of 300-350F does not destroy the hydrocarbons vaporizing from the soil.
Secondary  combustion chambers have modified the process in some hot asphalt plants used for recycling.
The recycling of petroleum-contaminated soil takes place in the aggregate preparation process.  Exhaust
treatment by  cloth filters (baghouses) provide a means of controlling paniculate emissions.  Two plants
report high-temperature destruction prior to either a baghouse or a secondary combustion chamber.

Theory

    A dryer  heats the petroleum-contaminated soil and  aggregate prior to  mixture with the asphalt.
Volatilization and low temperature thermal destruction of the organic compounds occur in the dryer [12].
The process incorporates the remaining  heavy-hydrocarbon contaminants into the asphalt/aggregate mix,
which may then be utilized for construction purposes such as road building.

Equipment

    A typical batch  mixing process requires the storage of aggregate material, held in cold bins. An
additional cold bin holds the  petroleum-contaminated soil. Metered amounts of contaminated soil and
aggregate travel  by cold elevator to the dryer, where the temperature can range from 500 to 800F. When
the aggregate mix is heated in the dryer for a period up  to five minutes, the lighter organic contaminants
volatilize.  A dust collector and exhaust treatment system, such as a  baghouse, treats the gases from the
dryer [9].

    The mixture leaves the dryer at a temperature of approximately SOOT.  A hot elevator conveys it to a
screening unit for size separation and subsequent storage in hot bins according to aggregate size . The
process formula specifies a measured amount of each size fraction which is weighed and then dropped into
the mixing unit containing hot asphalt.   After mixing, the process carries the asphalt to heated storage
containers  or to trucks for immediate use [5,9].

Product

     Atypical hot asphalt mix contains the following components[11]:               !

     o  50%  coarse aggregate or gravel (size range from 1.5" to U.S. Sieve #4)

     o  40%  fine aggregate or sand (size range from U.S. Sieve #200)

     o  5% mineral fill, such as crushed  stone dust or lime (size 
-------
    o  5% asphalt cement

    Asphalt cements used in the hot mix technology typically contain high concentrations of aromatics
(both monoriuclear and polynuclear rings), nitrogen, sulfur, oxygen, and trace amounts of metals or organo-
metallic compounds.

    The  hot asphalt mix is used in paving roads.  To maintain product quality, the recycler adds only a
small percentage of petroleum-contaminated soil to the aggregate feed. This also minimizes air emissions
resulting from volatilization of organics in the dryer.  Asphalt plants limit the clay and silt content in soil feed
to 15-20%. However, some plants produce road bedding aggregate and daily landfill cover in addition to
asphalt.  In addition, the aggregate formed during hot mix asphalt production (described above) is also a
marketable product.  Some companies produce this intermediate product and, rather than making asphalt,
sell it to other enterprises that use it for road base or an asphalt component.  Some prepare the recycled
aggregate in one location and ship it to another (asphalt-producing) facility.

Application

    The  feasibility of using asphalt incorporation as a recycling technology depends on the physical and
chemical characteristics of the contaminated soil. The soil must be free from large rocks, wood, and debris.
Since the strength and durability of the asphalt mix depend on the aggregate size, type, and volume, soil
particle size may also influence the application. The contaminated soil particle size must be compatible with
the asphalt mix requirements. This usually limits the fine material to a small percentage (normally 2-10%)
of the mixture. Weather can potentially limit this application; most asphalt plants do not operate during cold
weather.

    The  lighter contaminant fractions - fuel oil, kerosene, or gasoline - that are not burned off in the dryer
can act as solvents, softening the final  asphalt mix and affecting curing time. The heavier fractions, which
are chemically similar to asphalt, will not damage the product.

    The  cost to retrofit an asphalt batch plant for the incorporation of petroleum-contaminated soil would
range from $10,000 to $100,000.  The capital costs cover soil storage,  feed, conveying, and metering
systems.   These costs would be offset by the fees paid by RPs.

    The  average cost of asphalt incorporation has been estimated at $80/yd3 of soil (Kostecki et al. 1989)
exclusive of excavation and transportation costs. Operators contacted in the survey quoted a range of costs
from $ 40 to $ 100 per ton, excluding transportation and storage.

    Data from tests on asphalt plant and modified asphalt plant efficiency in recycling soil are limited.  One
study shows increases in hydrocarbon emissions for a feed mixture of clean aggregate and contaminated
soil [3]. This particular approach is not recommended since the petroleum volatilizes and leaves the system
prior to combustion. (See Figure 1.) Volatile emissions rose from 20 Ib/hr to 64 and 67 Ib/hr for mixtures
of soil contaminated by diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively.
COLD MIX ASPHALT PLANTS
     Cold mix plants blend liquid asphalt with aggregate in small open pugmills or revolving drums.  It is
normally compacted and spread at the job-site where the mixture is at or near ambient temperature.  The
cold mix asphalt process produces a lower grade pavement which  may be suitable for light duty use.

-------
CO
MM



I
s
     lii
     O
     CO

-------
Theory

    The cold process mixes aggregate and liquid asphalt to form the paving material. It uses surfactant
to emulsify asphalt cement in water. Anionic, cationic, and nohpolar asphalt emulsions are available.  These
materials may contain polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, depending on the grade of asphalt cement from.
which they are derived.  The resulting emulsions are relatively nonvolatile [10]. The asphalt particles are
suspended in the liquid  and separated from each other (and the aggregate) by  a film of water.  During
paving, pressure expels the film of  water, bringing the asphalt particles  together in contact with the
aggregate [9]. (See Figure 2.)

Equipment

    The equipment used in the cold  process varies from a small open pugmill or revolving drum to a
complete plant.  The pugmill or drum blends the aggregate, the petroleum-contaminated soil, and the
asphalt emulsion. The selected asphalt viscosity controls the viscosity of the asphalt mix, its curing time,
and its application.

Product

    Asphalt from the cold  process is suitable for jobs where a considerable interval of time may elapse
between its manufacture and  use.  The selection of the proper  liquid asphalt can adjust the curing time.
Therefore, these  mixtures can be effective for patching and spreading over small areas.  They also provide
the surface course of pavements carrying medium or low volume of traffic.

    In addition, the aggregate formed during asphalt production (as described in  the preceding pages) is
also a  marketable product.  Some companies produce this intermediate product and, rather than making
asphalt, sell it to other enterprises that use it for road base or an asphalt component.

    Preliminary tests have been conducted on the environmental effects of asphalt  paving [26]. These tests
confirmed that the petroleum contamination in the soil is combined with the asphalt in the emulsion to
produce a mixture that will not separate.   The researcher concluded that the incorporation of soils
contaminated with petroleum  products  as  aggregate in a cold-mix-emulsion bituminous paving is  an
environmentally benign method of recycling the contaminated soil.

Application

    The cold process is an application suited to the heavier petroleum-contaminated soils, such as those
containing Numbers 2 to 6 fuel oil and most lubricating oils.  The heavier fractions,  chemically similar in
nature to asphalt, do not damage the asphalt mix [14].  Soils contaminated with lighter petroleum products,
such as kerosene and gasoline, can emit hydrocarbon vapors when they are mixed  with asphalt and applied
in hot ambient conditions.  They have limited application for winter-service cold patch.

    the liquid asphalt binder works best when the aggregate has been wetted with asphalt. If a particle
has been coated with water or a clay film prior to mixing, the asphalt may not adhere to it.  As a result, this
technology has limited application for treating petroleum-contaminated soils with high clay fractions and with
a high  capacity for water retention [10].

-------
cc

LU
CO
CO
0)
o
                                                       x
                                                               o
                                                               CM

                                                                0)
                                                                O)
                                     10

-------
CEMENT MANUFACTURING FACBLITIES
     Hydraulic cement is the basic binding agent in concrete and masonry construction. Approximately 95%
of the cement produced in the United States is Portland cement - a product of high temperature burning
of calcareous material (e:g., limestone, oyster shells), argillaceous material (e.g., clay), and siliceous material
(e.g., sand, shale) to produce clinker.  Portland cement consists of pulverized clinker blended with water
and/or untreated calcium sulfate (gypsum).

Theory

     The cement manufacturing process employs raw materials such as limestone, clay, and sand which
are usually fed to a rotary kiln. The raw materials enter the raised end of the kiln and travel down the incline
to the lower end, which is heated by coal, oil, or gas.  Petroleum-contaminated soils may enter the process
as part of the raw  material or drop into the hot part of the kiln.  As the raw materials move through the
inclined, rotating kiln, they heat to extremely high temperatures - up to 2,700F. These temperatures cause
physical and chemical reactions such as evaporation of free water, evolution of combined water, evolution
of carbon dioxide from carbonates, and combination of lime with silica, alumina, and iron to form the desired
compounds in the clinker. The petroleum-contaminated soil also breaks apart chemically.  At extremely high
temperatures,  the  organic compounds burn,  producing heat,  carbon dioxide,  and water vapor.  The
inorganic components recombine with the raw materials and are incorporated with the clinker. The clinker
leaves the kiln in golf-ball-sized  lumps. The rapidly cooled clinker, mixed with gypsum and ground to a fine
powder, produces  Portland cement. (See Figure 3.)

Equipment

     There are three major types of cement-manufacturing processes: the wet process, the dry  process,
and the dry process with preheating and/or precalcining.

     in the wet process, finely ground raw materials, mixed with water, form a slurry feed containing 30 to
40% moisture.

     The dry process uses raw materials that are typically quarried and crushed to an approximately 5-in
diameter.  The materials travel through direct-contact rotary driers to a rotating  raw  mill where  they are
ground to approximately 200-mesh.  In the preheater,  this dry powder  passes through a series of heat
exchangers before it  enters the kiln. The precalcining system uses a secondary firing process within the
preheater to increase thermal preparation of the feed.

     In each process, the ground and blended  raw materials travel through a rotary kiln. The kiln is a large,
inclined, rotating cylindrical furnace from 10 to 20 ft in diameter and from 350 to 760 ft long. Raw materials
enter the raised end of the kiln and travel down  the incline to the other end, which is heated by burning fuel.
The retention time in the kiln spans roughly 1 to 4 hours; the temperature at the hot end ranges from 2,500
to3,500F.

     The  kiln produces dark,  hard nodules called clinker. The temperature of these 3/4-inch (or smaller)
nodules is reduced by air in a clinker cooler. The air from the clinker cooler, along with combustion gases
and water vapor, rises through the high (cool) end of the kiln to a dust collection system and out the stack.

     An open or closed circuit  mill grinds the clinker, adding about 3 to 6% gypsum  (calcium sulfate) to
retard the cement's setting time. Other additives may include air-entraining, dispersing, and waterproofing
                                               11

-------
I

                                                                                        8
                                                                                       .0
                                                                                        m
                                                                                       2
                                                                                       n

                                                                                       I
                                                                                       o>
                                                                                       il
                                                                                 CD
                                                                                 co
                                                                                 OJ
                                                                                 HI

                                                                                 lii
                                                                                 O
                                 12

-------
agents.  The final product measures about 10 microns in diameter.

    The dry process system may use a suspension preheater upstream of the kiln.  The preheater consists
of a series of cyclones connected by pipes, through which gases from the kiln pass upward and counter-
current to the dry raw material flowing down and around the cyclones.  Suspension preheaters transfer the
heat from the gas into the raw material feed dust. This leads to roughly 40% calcination of the feed before
it enters the kiln.  Some new  preheater systems use a small direct-fired furnace located between the air
suspension preheater and the kiln.  This system can calcinate roughly 90% of the raw materials.  Such
systems can reduce the size of the  rotary kiln required or increase the  production capacity of an existing
kiln.

Product

    According to ASTM Specification C150-139, Portland cement is:

       A hydraulic cement produced by pulverizing clinker consisting  essentially of hydraulic
       calcium silicates, usually containing one or more of the forms of calcium sulfate as an
       interground addition.

    The five basic types of Portland cement vary according to their strength and hardening time; they
comprise the basic binding agents used in concrete and masonry construction.

    Industrial  process rotary  kilns,  which are located throughout the United States, manufacture cement
and lime.  Based on survey results, the petroleum-contaminated soil treated in these kilns can be used for
daily cover in landfills.  (See Figure 3.)

Application

    Cement kilns can recycle  petroleum-contaminated soil as solid material in various ways. Solid material
suspended in  liquids can  be  pumped into the hot end of the kiln. In another process, the solids are
repackaged and injected into the kiln area where gas temperatures range from 1,800 to 2,150F. In a third
process, preprocessed solids and sludges are dried, ground into powder, and conveyed by air into the hot
end of the kiln. Cement manufacturers have a wide choice of raw materials.  Lime, silica, and alumina are
the most important ingredients.  Any materials that will supply these components can be used in cement
manufacture, provided that they do not contain excessive amounts of other oxides [25].

    The contaminated soils  must  be characterized and then blended to  meet  process specifications
covering organic makeup, energy value, and compatibility with  cement-making.  Cement costs vary
according to the types of soil and contaminants;  producers reported costs from $30 to $100 per ton,
exclusive of transportation and storage.


BRICK MANUFACTURING PLANTS


    The brick manufacturing process blends clay and shale  into a plasticized mixture,  which is then
extruded and molded into green brick.  It dries and fires the green brick  in a kiln where temperatures  reach
approximately 2,000F during  a three-day residence period.

Theory

    The brick-making process blends the petroleum-contaminated  soil with the clay and shale.  It molds

                                          13

-------
this raw material into a green brick. Once the green brick is dried and preheated, the kiln fires it at 1,700
to 2,000F for approximately 12 hours.  The temperature and residence time in the kiln destroy the organics,
incorporating the inorganics in the vitrified bribk product. (See Figure 4.)

Equipment

     The Wending of mined clay and  shale with contaminated soil occurs  in large stockpiles. Grinders
reduce this raw material to particles of  an acceptable size for brick formation. The raw material, mixed with
water in a pugmill, increases  in plasticity. The pugmill extrudes a continuous ribbon of clay which is cut
into green bricks. These bricks are stacked oh rail cars that travel through a tunnel kiln. The green bricks
first dry out at a temperature  of 600F. The next temperature stage (1,200 to 1,600F) preheats them. At
the peak temperature of 1,700 to 2,000F, theMIn fires them for a period of  12 hours. The kiln travel time
is approximately 2-1/2 days.  After cooling,  the bricks are ready for shipment.

Product

     In order to provide the strength  and durability requirements of a brick product,  the manufacturing
process must develop a fired bond between the  paniculate  constituents. These requirements will vary,
depending on the intended product use and the applicable ASTM specification.  The study identified brick-
manufacturing facilities in Virginia,  North Carolina, and South Carolina. One brick manufacturer has five
facilities in North Carolina that recycle petroleum-contaminated soil.

Application

     The brick manufacturing  process  can recycle various petroleum-contaminated soil fractions including
silts, sands, loams, and clays.  This process can reuse highly plastic clays that are difficult: to treat with other
methods.  Sand reduces firing shrink and improves moisture absorption from  mortar (important during brick
laying).  Some shales  and sedimentary rock are also  appropriate feedstock.   Soils that contain large
quantities of debris, concrete, stone, or asphalt require prescreening.

     The cost to the RP of sending petroleum-contaminated soil to a brick-manufacturing recycler depends
on the contamination level,  the blendability of the soil, and the debris  content.  Cost estimates range from
$30 to $45 per ton, exclusive  of transportation and storage.
OTHER TECHNOLOGIES
     This report contains a summary of information on certain types of facilities that are permitted, where
permits are required, to accept soils contaminated by virgin petroleum products.  It concerns only fixed
facilities or small mobile facility owners that recycle soil contaminated by virgin petroleum products into
marketable commodities. There are other technologies that can treat petroleum-contaminated soil at large
sites and dispose of the cleaned soil in the areas from which it was excavated or in an on-site landfill.
Technologies such as low temperature thermal desorption, incineration, extraction, and bioremediation are
the subjects of intensive reports for the RP seeking a large-scale remediation of a site.  EPA's Center for
Research  Information at the  Risk Reduction; Engineering  Laboratory in Cincinnati can provide further
information on such documents and lists them  in the Office  of Research and Development (ORD)
Publications-Announcement Quarterly.
                                          14

-------
a-:

z

5

LU
               13
               H-
a:-'.-'.-:-'.-.-'
               o
               cc
               m
               LLI
               cc
               o
                                          (0
                                          (0
                                          0)
                                          o
                                          O
                            O

                           .2

                            C
                            re



                           .o
                           'JH
                           JQ

                            0)
                                          0)
                                          k.

                                          D)
               cc
               o
               u.
               a
               z
               Q
               Z'
               CC
               a
             15

-------
                                         SECTION 3
               A DIRECTORY OF PERMITTED RECYCLING FACILITIES
USING THE TABLE AND DIRECTORY
    Table 3 lists permitted, or otherwise formally state-approved, recycling facilities. It is organized by U.S.
EPA Region.   (See Table 2 for a list of states in each region.)   Within the region,  it lists facilities
alphabetically by location within each state.

    The facilities shown have each reported that they are operating either under a permit or another
required vehicle of formal state approval, at the time of the survey (Status: A); that they have temporarily
ceased previously approved operations (Status: I); or that they are in the final stages of the permit/approval
cycle and expect to shortly begin operations (Status: P).

    Once an RP has selected potential recycling locations from Table 3, they can find all the  details
necessary to obtain further information in Table 4 - the Directory of Recycling Facilities.  This Directory
provides specific address, recycling location, telephone number, and contact for the RP who may wish to
follow up with individual queries.

Each facility has  its  own  analytical requirements,.  Because these requirements  (total  hydrocarbons,
flashpoint, pH, etc.) respond to the local state regulations as well as an individual permit, they are subject
to change.  During the follow-up query, the RP should  request a written  list of requirements that apply at
that time from the selected facility.
                                              16

-------
TABLE 2.  U.S. EPA REGIONS
Region
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
State
code
CT
ME
MA
NH
Rl
VT
NJ
NY
DE
DC
MD
PA
VA
WV
AL
FL
GA
KY
MS
NC
SC
TN
IL
IN
Ml
MN
OH
Wl
State name
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
New Jersey
New York
Delaware
District of Columbia
Maryland
Pennsylvania .
Virginia
West Virginia
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Region
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10





State
code
AR
LA
NM
OK
TX
IA
KS
Ml
NE
CO
MT
ND
SD
UT
WY
AZ
CA
HI
NV
AK
ID
OR
WA





State name
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Arizona
California
Hawaii
Nevada
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington





           17

-------
                                  CO
                                  c
                                  o
                                 'oj
                                  0)
                                 DC
                                 Q.
                                 LU
                                 in

                                  o>
                                  u.
                                  =3
                                  OJ
18

-------
UJ
I-
o
S
Q
HI
ocz
mo
o-5
LL UJ
O
UJ

m
1
|
i
1
c
i
1
1
|
, <
9l*nd
W ln=l
WHHy
(era
UMOJ.M
u||oO
ws
iu.tu*o
**eq/i0.iB6v
Hi|dsvp|oo
14BqdvioH
ii
|f
Recycling FacllHlM
nms
Company
Recycling
Location
ems
MEDEP
No clays or fines
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
i
1
-
Harry Crooker & Sons, Inc.
Brunswick
LU
ME DEP

X
X
X
X
X
X




X
S3
1
<
J
i-
1
LU
MEDEP

X
X
X
X
X
X




X
8
1
<
jj
1
5
LU
MEDEP
No maximum TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X


X



1
<
Aggregate Mecyciing
z.
ijj
:s
MEDEP
No clay or debris
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
8
t
<
I"
o
|
|
LU
MEDEP
No clay or debris
X
X
X
X
X
X


X


9
8
<
5
Washington
LU











MADEP

X
X
X
X
X
X



X
X
8
15

<
S
"i

1

<0
1
5
i
MADEP
<60,000 ppm TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X



X

1
1
<
American Reclamation Corp.
6
1
MADEP
<50,000ppm TPH
$250.00 minimum
X
X
X
X
X




X
X
1

<
CO
1
j
I
MADEP
V


X
X
X
X




X
!

<
1
o
North Adams
I
MA DEP |

X
X
X
X
X
X



X
X
s
1
<
I
Shrewsbury
I
MA DEP 1

X
X
X
X
X
X



X
X
8
I
<
1
c
f
S













-


NHARD

X
X
X
X
X
X



X

!
1
<
s.
1
i

x .
NHARD 1
<3,000 ppm TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X



X

i
i
<
Merrimack Timber Service
Chichester
X
NH ARD 1
<30,000 ppm TPH
X
X .
X
X
X
X




X
1

<
Brox- Industries
i
(0
1
X
                               19

-------
CO
Ul
o



Sf

El

II
LL1 *-*
Q. *-
U. Z
O O
H 5

2 E
CO

111

CD
R


          o 5
          WS
                X

Pa
erry
G
S
                     I

                    il
<3,
                        20

-------
(A
LJJ
O
Q
ILI
    CM
DC z
LU O
-5
11. HI
O a
 LLI

 m
                      i
ment
                UMOJ*))
ng Facll
                    ws
                                        o o-
to transpo
A facility
                                               21

-------



V)
UJ
b
_j
O~

Q
UJ
U
jjg CO
o: z
in o

H
C0
_J
CO
ULJ
CO




"c
S
i

i
8
*


M*q/
H<
111




i


i
i
9* pod
WPU
am
1 KI
U~OJM
.UHOMO
j(opg
(UMIWO
>l*fi*jD6v
^VP10
tudtviou

u
11
mms
Company
Recycling
Location
ms
ut
DNREC |
L
Q.
1
1
1
r
x
x
X
x
t
X


X



>
I
<
Clean Earth of New Castle
Newcastle
Ul
Q




















i
i
<25, 000 ppm TPH
X
X
x
X
X
X


X



in
eo
in"
<
Soil Safe, Inc.
Baltimore
Q


x
x
x
x
x
X
X





1
1
<
Cherokee Sanford
Beltsville
a
jj
i

X
x
X
X
X
X
X





in
T
1
a.

-------
LU
O

s

Q
LU



i*
CC  Z
UJ  O
OLtO|jg
tuauMO
t)6*J66v
<**VW*3
iqd*VOH
II
If
nms
Company.
Recycling
Location
1*18
i
i

X
X
X
X
X
X




X
$

Q.

1
Birmingham
^



















D

X
X
X
X
X
X


X


8
I
<
M&M Chemical & Equipment
Company -
Green Cove Springs
uf
]
No maximum TPH |
<2" diameter particles
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
8
i
<
Anderson-Columbia
Environmental
Jaeksop.viHe
c!
\



X
X
X
X
X
X
X


8
5
CM"
<
Rinker Materials Corporation
.g
uf
CC
Ll
Q
L.
No maximum TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X





in

<
C.A. Meyer Paving
Orlando
LU
u


X
X
X
X
X




X
8
!
<
Sonas Systems of Florida, Ltd.
Tallahassee
u!



















3
j

X
X
X
X
X
X


X


8
1
<
M&M Chemical & Equipment
Company
I
i
H-
n



















j

X
X
X
X
X
X

X



8
1
<
M&M Chemical & Equipment
Company
i




















NCDEM

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




in
3
evf
<

1
g
s
6
o
O
j
o

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




in
I
i.
<
CL
1
O
1
1
6
Moncure
o
3
Q
O

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




!
of
<
Cherokee Sanford Group
Norwood
o
I
3

X
X
X
X
X
X


X


8
!
<
M&M Chemical & Equipment
Comoanv
Norwood
O
j
O

X
X
X
X
X
X
X




in
I
c\f
<
Cherokee Sanford Group
1
^
                                               23

-------
(0
111
O

S Q
_ III


il
2 o
u.
O z
H g
J2 5
LU

CQ


i -

|
|
fr



*q/
Mt
M



u.
1


1
|
i
9* (MM
fr#ly
":!
iM*ta
UMOJ.X
.U|,0>
I^MS
IIMUWQ
|C*jCBv

-------
UJ

H
_J
O


Q
UJ


I-
QC Z
uj g

U. UJ
CO

UJ
_1
CD



|
e
i
|
3
a
<



M
tl



Deling FacllHlM
1

1

Comment*
ttpnj
ttpnd
WJ-id
I*MKI
UMOJ.*
UHOMQ
nojjg
UMUMO
|06*jfifiV
HdVPtoO
MdvtH
11
oS
II
nWS
Company
Recycling
Location
WS
8
^
<30,000 ppm TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X


X

X
1
i
<
McCrosaan
a
1
z
3
:>











X
i
i
<
Johnson Blacktop
Rochester
z






















<20,000 ppm TPH
X
X
X
X
X
X


X

X
I
1
<
Qennaro Paving
LowellviHe
0




















a:
5
No maximum TPH on app-
lications approved by DNR
X
X
X
X
X
X




X
9
1
<
Eau Clair Asphalt Corp.
Eau Clair
i
i
Q
$











X
8
1
<
Payne & Dolan
i
i
DC
Q












X
53

8
<
American Asphalt of Wisconsin.
Plant #8
Lake Delton
i
DC
Q
$












I
1
<
Payne & Dolan
|
i
DC
a
5
<2* particle diameter










X
Si
|f
<
American Asphalt of Wisconsin
Plants #2 and #22
Mosinee
5
oc

Maximum TPH subject to
Wl DNR approval
X
X
X
X
X
X



X
X
8
i
!
<
Mathy Construction Co.
Onalaska
i
DC












X
1
1
<
Clark County highway Dept.
Neillsville
5
o
$









X

X
CO
S
<
"a
c
Q.
a

I
b
I
f
cr
Q
$











X
8
i
<
i
&
08
!
X
3
f
DC
a
$
No maximum TPH










X
8
5?
<
American Asphalt of Wisconsin
Plant#5
Wausau j
f




















                              25

-------
CD
UJ
O

Ul
F PERM
REGION 6
S
              II
BLE 3
ecll
Rec
Fort
              WS
                                26

-------

>

UJ

_J
g
Q
UJ

s'-
DC -Z.
UJ O
Q- 7n
O
UL Ul
O DC
I]
CO
UJ
_J
QQ
?




1
s
:J

i
<


q/
M*
H



1
1
a


1
Comment*
OfflMId
t*l*nd
Z#fn=l
I*MKI
euMOJ.*
auiiomg
*o|jg
IIMUMQ
l6*jB6v
i)d*vpto0
it|d*v|OH
II
H
(31
nrs ,
Company
Recycling
Location
ms
1
i
i
i
>







X



I

<
I
|
^
1
Q
< 2' diameter,
no heaw clavs










X
1
1
<
Ritchie Paving Co.
Witchita
$




















Soil must contain calcium,
silica, alumina, or Iron
X
X
X
X
X
X

X



1
1
<
Risdsl Corporation
Hannibal
O













' *-*





27

-------
O tt

of Ecolo
                                            -> 8
                                            t it
CO
UJ
o



Q
HI
me
!
                  (MM
                                            3
 CO

 UJ


 CQ
            1
        nvns
Company
                    WS
on
erstate Const
Sand & Gravel
                                    01
                                            < a <
Sterling As
Kenmore
                                            3
                                            CO
& Co.
Wood
                                               28

-------
            TABLE 4.  DIRECTORY OF RECYCLING FACILITIES
 Recycling company
 Facility
 location/3
 Contact
Telephone
Aggregate Recycling
100 Middle St.
Portland, ME 04101

Alaska interstate Construction
649 West 54th Avenue
Anchorage, AK  99518

American Reclamation Corp.
P.O. Box 263
Ashland, MA  01721

AmRec New Hampshire
RFD1
Box 330
Haverhill, NH 03765

American Asphalt of Wisconsin
P.O. Box 1726
Wausau, Wl 54402

Anderson-Columbia
Environmental
P.O. Box 1386
Lake City, FL 32056-1386

Bardon Trimount
70 Blanchard  Road
Burlington, MA 01894

Beede Waste Oil
P.O. Box 127
Plaistow, NH  03865

Brox Industries
85 G^eety St.
Hudson, NH
Norridgewock, ME
Anchorage, AK
 Bill Mitchell
Dave Thomas
Chartton, MA           George Camougis
Albany, NY            Frank Perry
(See also AmRec New Hampshire.)

Bath, NH              George Camougis
(See also American Reclamation Corp.)
Lake Delton, Wl
Mosinee, Wl
Wausaiu, Wl

Jacksonville, FL
Shrewsbury, MA
Stoughton, MA
Plaistow, NH
Hudson, NH
Dracut, MA
Marlboro, MA
Jim Tryba
Mike McRae
David Peter
Bob LaFlanne
George Hall
Erik Stevenson
 (207) 634-3652
(907)562-2792
                      (508)624-7006
                      (508) 624-7006
(715)693-5200
(904)752-7585
(617)221-8400
(603) 382-5761
(603) 886-8077
* Exclusive agent or'broker
                                         29

-------
                              TABLE 4.  (continued)
Recycling company
C.A. Meyer Paving
Facility
location/a
Orlando, FL
Contact
Frank Cox
Telephone
(407)849-0770
4978 McLeod Road
Orlando, FL 32805

Card! Construction Corp.
400 Lincoln Ave.
Warwick, Rl 02888

Cherokee Sanford Group, Inc.
1600 Colon Road
Sanford, NC  27330
Clark County Highway Dept.
801 Clay Street
Neillsville, Wl 54456

Clean Berkshires
86 S. Main St.
Lanesboro, MA 01237

Clean Earth of New Castle
P.O. Box 1049
Newcastle, DE 19720

Continental Paving
1 Continental Drive
Londonderry, NH 03053

Crocker's

Cunningham Brick Co., Inc.
Route 2
Thomasville, NC 27360
Warwick, Rl
Bettsville, MD
Gulf, NC
Moncure, NC
Norwood, NC
Sanford, NC

Neillsville, Wl
Steve Cardi, Jr.
Rocky Springer
Don Grigg
Randy Anderson
New Castle, DE
Londonderry, NH
George Dalphon
(401) 739-8300
(919)775-2121
(715)743-3680
North Adams, MA      John Anthony          (413)499-3050
(Permitted to transport soil from N.Y. State)
(302) 427-6633
Mark Charbonneau     (603)437-5387
Brunswick, ME         See Harry Crooker & Sons

Thomasville, NC       R.Cunningham         (919)472-6181
  Exclusive agent or broker
                                           30

-------
                               TABLE 4. (continued)
Recycling company
 Facility
location/s
Contact
Telephone
D'Ambra Construction
800 Jefferson Blvd.
Warwick, Rl 02887

DeCato Sand and Gravel
RFD15
Box 52
Concord, NH 03301

Earle Asphalt Corp.
P.O. Box 757
Farmingdale, NJ 07727

Eau Clair Asphalt Corp.
P.O. Box 326
Eau Clair, Wl 54702

Envirotech
P.O. Drawer 72
Chatham, VA 24531

Gennaro Pavers
1721 Pine St.
Warren, OH 44483

Giant Resources Recovery
P.O. Box 352
Harteyville, SC  29448

Harry Crooker & Sons, Inc.
Old Bath Rd.
RFD4
Box 4079
Brunswick, ME  04011

Johnson Blacktop
2320 14th Avenue, NW
Rochester, MN  55901
Warwick, Rl
Loudon, NH
Jackson, NJ
Eau Clair, Wl
Lowellville, OH
Harieyville, SC
Brunswick, ME
Rochester, MN
Jenny Parker
Roger DeCato
Walter Earle, Jr.
R. Czarnecki
Louie Thune
Fredericksburg, VA     Richard Harris
David Gennaro
Frank Naples
Al Asaro
Dick Morgan
Royal J. Johnson
(401)737-1300
(603)798-5452
(908)657-8551
(908)938-5038
(715) 835-4858
                       (804)432-1901
(216) 394-5557
(216)536-6825
(803)496-7676
(207)729-3331
(507)254-1854
* Exclusive agent or broker
                                           31

-------
                               TABLE 4. (continued)
Recycling company
 Facility
location/a
Contact
Telephone
Kary Asphalt, Inc.
Eden Road
Eden, MD 21822

Keystone Block Transport
P.O. Box 9
Temple, PA  19560

Lakehead Blacktop and
Materials of Superior
6327 Tower Avenue
Superior, Wl  54880

M&M Chemical & Equipment Co.
1229 Valley Drive
Attalia, AL 35954
Marriners, Inc.
P.O. Box 600
Rockport, ME  04856

Mathy Construction
915 Commercial Court
Onalaska, Wl 54650

McCrossan
7865 Jefferson Highway
Maple Grove MN 55369

Merrimack Timber Service
P.O. Box 359
Epsorn, NH 03234
Eden, MD
Sinking Springs, PA
Superior, Wl
Green Cove
 Springs, FL
Trenton, GA
Brooks, KY
Norwood, NC
Harleyville, SC
Santee, SC
Arvonia, VA
Cascade, VA

Washington, ME
Onalaska, Wl
Maple Grove, MN
Chichester, NH
Littleton, NH
Hartland, VT
Steve Lambrose
Laura Lubahn
Alice Brown
Joe Kimmes
D. Burds
David Andrus
Gilbert Marriner
Jim Kirschner
Gail Jensen
Bob Dongoske
Jim Langille
(301)543-0200
(215)926-691i5
(715)392-3844
(205)538-3800
(207)845-2313
(608)783-6411
(612)425-4167
(603) 798-4557
* Exclusive agent or broker
                                          32

-------
                               TABLE 4. (continued)
Recycling company
 Facility
iocation/s
Contact
Telephone
Meyer Paving

Payne & Dolan
P.O. Box 781
Waukesha, Wl 53187

Recycling Alternatives, Inc.*
P.O. Box 1896
Salisbury, MD 21802
Riedel Industrial Waste
Waste Management, Inc.
22 North Euclid, Suite 213
St. Louis, MO  63108

Rinker Materials Corp.
P. 0. Box 650679
Miami, FL 33265-0679

Ritchie Paving Co.
P.O. Box 4048
Wichita, KS  67204

Shotwell Precast Company
P.O. Box 2081
Port Angeles, WA 98362

Soil Reclaiming
P.O. Box 12248
Sanford, NC 27331-1248

Soil Recycling
Technologies, Inc.*
3300 Childs St.
Baltimore, MD 21226
Orlando, FL

Green Bay, Wl
Madison, Wl
Sussex, Wl

Birmingham, AL
Chestertown, MD
Exmore, VA
Richmond, VA
Fort Worth, TX

Hannibal, MO
Miami, FL
Wichita, KS
Port Angeles, WA
Sanford, NC
Finksburg, MD
See C.A. Meyer Paving.

Kurt Bechthold         (414)524-1769
Don Mitchell
Jerry Turner
Robert Schreiber
Dave Marple
Jim Jordan
J. Shotwell
W. Wornom
Joe Connor
(301)860-0268
(314)361-3838
(305)221-7645
(316)838-9301
(206) 457-1417
(919) 774-3077
(301)526-6696
* Exclusive agent or broker
                                           33

-------
                                  TABLE 4. (continued)
Recycling company
 Facility
location/s
Contact
Telephone
Soil Recycling
Technologies, Inc.*
3300 Childs St.
Baltimore, MD 21226

Soil Safe, Inc.
4600 E. Fayette
Baltimore, MD 21224

Sonas Systems of Florida
P. O. Box 7387
Tallahassee, FL 32314

Southeastern Soil Recovery, Inc.
P.O. Box 70253
Charleston, SC 29415

Sterling Asphalt
6431  NE 175th
Kenmore, WA 98028
Tacoma, WA 98421

Tilcon Maine, Inc.
P.O. Box 209
Fairfield, ME  04937

Trimount
Woodworth & Company
1200 East D. St.
Tacoma, WA 98421
Finksburg, MD
Baltimore, MD
Tallahassee, FL
Charleston
Heights, SC
Kenmore, WA
Fairfield, ME
Medway, ME
Portland, ME

Shrewsbury, MA
Stoughton, MA

Tacoma, WA
Joe Connor
Walter Kennell
George Atkins
Bob Willms
Reid Banks
Sam Johnson
Rhaeto Pfister
Dave Bess
Jonathan Oaks

See Bardon Trimount.
Mike Tollkuehn
John Woodworth
(301)526-669)6
(301)1327-5753
(904)575-8102
(803)566-7065
(206)485-5667
(207)746-9381
(207) 746-562(6
(207)676-9973
(206)383-3585
  Exclusive agent or broker
                                           34

-------
                                  SECTION 4
                                CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THIS STUDY:

    o This study identified 77 facilities in the U.S. that recycle petroleum-contaminated
      soil into marketable products. They are not, however, evenly distributed among
      the 10 EPA regions or the 50 states.

    o More than half of the recycling facilities (41) are located in Region 1 and Region
      4 (22 and 19, respectively). Region 5 has thirteen approved facilities; Region 3,
      eleven; and Region 10, five. The remaining facilities are spread among the other
      five EPA regions.

    o Most facilities in this study accepted soil with all six typical contaminants (gasoline,
      kerosene, diesel, fuel oil #2, fuel oil #4, and fuel oil #6).

    o Hot mix asphalt appears to be the most commonly manufactured product at these
      facilities.  Other commonly used technologies  are cold mix asphalt, aggregate,
      hydraulic cement, and brick.

    o Regulations and requirements pertinent to recycling of petroleum-contaminated soil
      lie almost entirely within the jurisdiction of individual states.  They vary significantly
      among the various states.

    o The cost per ton  for recycling  petroleum-contaminated soil ranged from a low of
      $25/ton to a high of $100/ton.  The majority of the plants surveyed reported a high
      of$50/ton.
                                      35

-------
                                      REFERENCES
1.  U.S. EPA.  Directory of Commercial Hazardous Waste Treatment and Recycling Facilities, Available
    from NTIS PB86-178431, EPA/530-SW-85-019.

2.  U.S. EPA.  Directory of Hazardous Waste Management Facilities, EPA/530-SW-87-024, Office of Solid
    Waste, Washington, DC, August 1987.

3.  Barr Engineering Co. Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Treatment in Asphalt Plants Test Burn Results,
    prepared for Minnesota Pollution Control Agency - Underground Storage Tank Program, May 1990.

4.  U.S. EPA.  Permit Writers Guide to Test Burn Data - Hazardous Waste Incineration, EPA/625/6-86/012
    Center for Environmental Research  Information, Cincinnati, OH.

5.  The Asphalt Institute. "Asphalt  Plant Manual."   The Asphalt  Handbook.  Manual  Series No. 3.
       College Park, MD, March, 1967.

6.  Canadian Environmental Protection Service.  Experimental Burning of Waste Oil as Fuel in Cement
    Manufacturing. Canada.

7.  Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition. Facts About Cement Kilns Managing Waste-Derived Fuels.
    Washington, DC.

8.  Environmental Solutions, Inc.  Onsite Treatment of Soils 1989 Manual. Irvine, CA.  Under Contract by
    Western States Petroleum Association.

9  Kostecki, Paul T. and Edward J. Calabrese. Petroleum Contaminated Soils, Volume I.  Lewis
    Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Ml, 1989.

10.  Kostecki, Paul T. and Edward J. Calabrese, Ed. Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils and Groundwater.
    Analysis, Fate, Environmental, and Public Health Effects, Remediation.  Volume I.  Lewis Publishers,
    Inc., Chelsea, Ml, 1991.

11.  Meegoda, Namunv J. et al. "Use of Petroleum Contaminated Soils in Asphalt Concrete."  25pp.

12,  Newton, J.M. December 1990. "Remediation of Petroleum-Contaminated Soils." Pollution Engineering,
    December, 1990.

13.  P.C. Johnson et al. Soil Remediation Workshop. Shell Development. Houston, TX, September,  1991.

14.  Roy F. Weston, Inc. and University  of Massachusetts. 1990.  Remedial  Technologies for Leaking
    Underground Storage Tanks. Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea,  Ml, 1990.
                                             36

-------
15.  U.S. EPA.  Multimedia Assessment and Environmental Research Needs of the Cement Industry.
    EPA/600/2-79/111. Industrial Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, May,  1979.
                                                          ^
    American Society for Testing and Materials. Annual Book ofASTM Standards. 68 vols.  Philadelphia,
    PA, 1991. [Standards listed by reference  number below.]

       16.     D8-91.  Standard Terminology Relating to Materials for Roads and Pavements.

       17.     D4215-87.  Standard Specification for Cold-Mixed, Cold-Laid Bituminous Paving
               Mixtures.

       18.     D3515-89.   Standard Specification for Hot-Mixed,  Hot-Laid Bituminous Paving
               Mixtures.

       19.     C33-90.  Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates.

       20.     C150-89. Standard Specification for Portland Cement.

       21.     C125-88. Standard Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates.

      . 22.     C43-90.  Standard Terminology  of Structural Clay Products.

       23.     C62-89a. Standard Specification for Building Brick (Solid Masonry Units Made from
               Clay or Shale).

       24.     C55-85.  Standard Specification for Concrete Building Brick.

25.  Leighou, R et al.  Chemistry of Engineering Materials. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York,
    1942.

26.  Eklund, Karl. "Incorporation of Contaminated Soils into Bituminous Concrete." Petroleum Contaminated
    Soils, Vol. I.  Lewis  Publishers, Chelsea, Ml, 1989.
                                              37

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing!
 REPORT NO.
   EPA/6QO/R-92/096
                              2.
                                                             3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI*NO.
                                         PR92-173 780
 TITLE AND SUBTITLE

   Potential Reuse of Petroleum-Contaminated Soil:
   A Directory of Permitted Recycling  Facilities
                                       5. REPORT DATE
                                            June 1992
                                       6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 AUTHOR
-------

-------
                                             ss
                                              0> CO


                                              CD
       :t*
P


I
CD
m
              - 2 3
III   II

s 1    ^ ":

3 w o    a
(DO-,    3
r o     0
 < o    
 2j mc
                                                      O O Q.
                                                          a
                                                      O5"O
                                                       .

                                                      o>
                                                          a

                                                          33
                                                          s
                                                     m

                                                            m

-------