&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Technical Approaches to
Characterizing and
Cleaning up
Brownfields Sites
-------
-------
EPA/625/R-00/009
November 2O01
Technical Approaches to
Characterizing and Cleaning up
Brownfields Sites
11/O6/O1
Technology Transfer and Support Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with vegetable-based ink on
paper that contains a minimum of
50% post-consumer fiber content
processed chlorine free.
-------
Notice
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ^.through its Office of Research and Development funded and
managed the research described here under Contract No. 68-C7-0011 to Science Applications International
Corporation (SAIC). It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has been
approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air,
and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and
implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural
systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program is providing data and
technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science knowledge base
necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and
prevent or reduce risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the
environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods for the prevention and control
of pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public water
systems, remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and prevention and control of indoor air
pollution. The goal of this research is to catalyze development and implementation of innovative, cost-
effective environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to
support regulatory and policy decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure
effective implementation of environmental regulations and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It is
published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user community
and to link researchers with their clients.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
ill
-------
Acknowledgments
This document was prepared by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Technology Transfer and Support Division (TTSD) in the Office of Research and Development.
Susan Schock of TTSD served as Work Assignment Manager. Tena Meadows O'Rear served as
SAIC's Project Manager. Participating in this effort were Arvin Wu, Joel Wolf, and Karyn Sper.
The reviewers of this document include Eletha Brady-Roberts of the National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Margaret Aycock of the Gulf Coast Hazardous Substance Research
Center at Lamar University, Jan Brodmerkl of the US Army Corps of Engineers, members of the
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, Alison Benjamin of the
Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, and Emery Bayley of ECOSS, Seattle.
Appreciation is given to EPA's Office of Special Programs for guidance on the Brownfields
Initiative.
IV
-------
Contents
Notice ii
Foreword iii
Acknowledgments iv
Contents v
Chapter 1. Introduction 1
Background 1
Purpose 1
, Chapter 2. Characterization of Brownfields Sites 4
Low-Risk and High-Risk Sites 4
Types of Brownfields Sites , 4
Other Resources 7
Chapter 3. Site Assessment and Due Diligence 8
Role of EPA and State Government 8
Performing A Site Assessment 10
Due Diligence 15
Conclusion 18
Chapter 4. Site Investigation 20
Background 20
Setting Data Quality Objectives 22
Establish Screening Levels 22
Conduct Environmental Sampling and Data Analysis 23
Chapter 5. Contaminant Management 26
Background 26
Evaluate Remedial Alternatives 27
Screening and Selection of Best Remedial Option 29
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan 30
Remedy Implementation 31
Chapter 6. Conclusion 33
Appendix A. Acronyms 34
Appendix B. Glossary • 35
Appendix C. Testing Technologies • 44
Appendix D. Cleanup Technologies 50
Appendix E. Works Cited 65
Appendix F. Other Useful References 66
-------
-------
Chapter 1
Introduction
Background
Many communities across the country have brownfields
sites, which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) defines as abandoned, idle, and under-used
industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or
redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived
environmental contamination. Concerns about liability,
cost, and potential health risks associated with
brownfields sites may prompt businesses to migrate to
"greenfields" outside the city. Left behind are
communities burdened with environmental
contamination, declining property values, and increased
unemployment. The EPA established the Brownfields
Economic Redevelopment Initiative to enable states, site
planners, and other community stakeholders to work
together in a timely manner to assess, safely clean up,
and sustainably reuse brownfields sites.
The cornerstone of EPA's Brownfields Initiative is the
Brownfields Pilot Program. Under this program, EPA is
funding more than 200 brownfields assessment pilot
projects in states, cities, towns, counties, and tribal lands
across the country. The pilots, each funded at up to
$200,000 over two years, are bringing together
community groups, investors, lenders, developers, and
other affected parties to address the issues associated
with assessing and cleaning up contaminated
brownfields sites and returning them to appropriate,
productive use. Information about Brownfields Pilot
funding can be found at www.epa.gov/brownfields. In
addition to the hundreds of brownfields sites being
addressed by these pilots, many states have established
voluntary cleanup programs to encourage municipalities
and private sector organizations to assess, clean up, and
redevelop brownfields sites.
Purpose
EPA has developed a set of technical guides, including
this document, to assist communities, states,
municipalities, and the private sector to better address
issues related to brownfields sites. Currently, three
guides in the series are available:
>*• Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning up Iron and Steel Mill Sites under the
Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/007,
December 1998.
>- Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning up Automotive Repair Sites under the
Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/008,
December 1999.
>• Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning Metal Finishing Sites under the
Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/006,
December, 1999.
These guides cover the key steps to redeveloping
brownfields sites for their respective industrial sector.
In addition, a supplementary guide contains information
on cost-estimating tools and resources for brownfields
sites (Cost Estimating Tools and Resources for
Addressing Sites Under the Brownfields Initiative,
EPA/625/R-99-001, January 1999).
In an effort to streamline this series of guides, EPA
developed this guide to provide decision-makers, such
as city planners, private sector developers, and others
involved in redeveloping brownfields, with a better
understanding of the common technical issues involved
in assessing and cleaning up brownfields sites.1 This
guide will be supplemented with industry specific
profiles that provide information on specific types of
brownfields sites. Together, the guide and the site-
specific profiles provide an integrated approach to
addressing brownfields sites.
Because parts of this document are technical in nature,
planners may want to refer to additional EPA guides for further
information. The Tool Kit of Technology Information Resources for
Brownfields Sites, published by EPA's Technology Innovation Office
(TIO), contains a comprehensive list of relevant technical guidance
documents (available from NTIS, No. PB97144828). EPA's Road
Map to Understanding Innovative Technology Options for
Brownfields Investigation and Cleanup, also by EPA's TIO, provides
an introduction to site assessment and cleanup (EPA Order No.
EPA/542/B-97/002).
-------
Select Brownfield Site
4-
Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence
Obtain background information of site to determine extent of contamination and
legal and financial risks
» If there appears to be no contamination, begin redevelopment activities
> If there is high level of contamination, reassess the viability of project
1 '••'.-• Chapters
V [, ' ' ' -.",
Phase II Site Investigation
Sample the site to identify the type, quantity, and extent of the contamination
> If the contamination does not pose health or environmental risk, begin
redevelopment activities
* If there is high level of contamination, reassess the viability of project
i Chapiter*
V
Evaluate Remedial Options
Compile and assess possible remedial alternatives
» If the remedial alternatives do not appear to be feasible, determine
whether redevelopment is a viable option
• Chapter 5
t
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan
Coordinate with stakeholders to design a remedy implementation plan
• Chapter 5
f
Remedy Implementation
» If additional contamination is discovered during the remedy
implementation process, return to the site assessment phase to determine
the extent of the contamination
. Chapters
T
Begin Redevelopment Activities
Exhibit 1-1. Flow Chart of the Brownfields Redevelopment Process
-------
This overview of the brownfields redevelopment
process can help planners make decisions at various
stages of the project. An understanding of key
industrial processes once used at a brownfields site
can help the planner identify likely areas of
contamination and common management approaches.
Where appropriate, this overview also points to
information sources on specific processes or
technologies.
The purpose of this guide is to provide decision-
makers with:
5s- An understanding of common industrial processes
formerly used at brownfields sites and the general
relationship between such processes and potential
releases of contaminants to the environment.
>** Information on the general types of contaminants
likely to be present at brownfields sites.
>• A discussion of the common steps involved in
brownfields redevelopment: Phase I site
assessment, due diligence, Phase II site
investigation, remedial alternative evaluation,
remedy implementation plan development, and
remedy implementation.
Typical Brownfield Redevelopment Process
The typical brownfields redevelopment process begins
with a Phase I site assessment and due diligence, as
shown in Exhibit 1-1. The site assessment and due
diligence process provides an initial screening to
determine the extent of the contamination and possible
legal and financial risks. If the site assessment and
due diligence process reveals no apparent
contamination and no significant health or
environmental risks, redevelopment activities may
begin immediately. If the site seems to contain
unacceptably high levels of contamination, a
reassessment of the project',8 viability may be
appropriate.
A Phase II site investigation samples the site to
provide a comprehensive understanding of the
contamination. If this investigation reveals no
significant sources of contamination, redevelopment
activities may commence. Again, if the sampling
reveals unacceptably high levels of contamination, the
viability of the project should be reassessed.
Should the Phase II site investigation reveal a
manageable level of contamination, the next step is to
evaluate possible remedial alternatives. If no feasible
remedial alternatives are found, the project viability
would have to be reassessed. Otherwise, the next step
would be to select an appropriate remedy and develop
a remedy implementation plan. , Following remedy
implementation, if additional contamination is
discovered, the entire process is repeated.
This document is organized as follows:
>• Chapter 2- Characterization of Brownfields Sites
>* Chapter 3 - Phase I Site Assessment Due Diligence
>• Chapter 4 - Phase n Site Investigation
>• Chapter 5 - Contaminant Management
>- Chapter 6- Conclusion
>" Appendix A - Acronyms
>*• Appendix B - Glossary
>" Appendix C - Testing Technologies
>- Appendix D - Cleanup Technologies
>- Appendix E-Works Cited
^ Appendix F - Other Useful Resources
Astoria, Oregon
A Brownfields Success Story:
The City of Astoria, Oregon, EPA, the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality,
ECOTRUST and the community partnered
together to cleanup the City's abandoned mill
sites along the waterfront. One of these sites,
Astoria's Plywood Mill, will house a public
promenade, shops, and residential housing.
EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Brownfields. http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/html-
doc/ss orgml.htm
-------
Chapter 2
Typical Brownfields Sites
This section provides an overview of typical
brownfields sites. An understanding of the industrial
processes that caused the contamination at the site can
help guide planners and decision-makers in the
brownfields redevelopment process. Decision-makers
should consult the industry specific guides as listed in
Chapter 1 of this document, for information on
facility-specific strategies. In many cases, sites may
have housed a sequence of different industrial practices
in the past, complicating the assessment process. Not all
sites are appropriate candidates for brownfields
redevelopment due to the extent of the contamination,
and in some cases, only portions of a site are targeted for
brownfields redevelopment.
For more information pertaining to ongoing and
completed brownfields redevelopment projects, contact
Regional and Headquarters EPA brownfields
Coordinators, and state brownfields coordinators. A
complete list of contacts is provided in "Road Map to
Understanding Innovative Technology Options for
Brownfields Investigation and Cleanup," EPA545-B-97-
002. A current list of state and Regional contacts is
available at EPA's Brownfields Homepage
. In addition to
listing contacts in and links to each state and Region,
this website provides an index of related publications
and brownfields tools, information on pilots and other
activities under the Brownfields Initiative, and links to
other related Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER) and EPA web sites.
Types of Brownfields Sites
There are a wide variety of potential brownfields site,s.
Almost any former manufacturing, distribution, or
recycling facility that used, produced, or reclaimed
chemicals is a potential brownfields site. Common
types of brownfields sites include:
Agri-Business - Feed supply and other agricultural
chemical distribution points may be contaminated with
fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Such products are
stored and'transferred on site. Groundwater, drainage
area sediments, and nearby surface waters, may be
contaminated with pesticide and herbicides and could
exhibit elevated levels of nitrate from fertilizer runoff
which can be leached to groundwater.
Asbestos Piles - Asbestos piles result from mining
operations, ship building and similar activities, and waste
disposal of industrial and domestic debris. In certain
areas, naturally occurring asbestos may result from
mining operations and building foundation excavation.
Asbestos was once commonly used as an insulator in ship
building, steam pipes, and other hot surfaces. It was also
commonly used in floor tiles and other building products
found in homes and commercial buildings. Asbestos
presents a potential health concern when it is airborne
and can be inhaled. Fiber release is more likely to occur
when asbestos containing materials (ACM) are "friable"
(can be crumbled by hand pressure) and damaged. An
example of friable ACM is fluffy, spray-applied asbestos
fireproofing material. "Non-friable" ACM, such as
vinyl-asbestos floor tile, can also release fibers when
sanded, sawed or otherwise aggressively disturbed.
Auto Salvage/Metal Recyclers - Auto salvage yards
recover usable parts, scrap metal, and other recyclable
materials from old or wrecked automobiles. Non-
recyclable materials are stored onsite or sent to a
municipal landfill.. Metal recyclers purchase metal from
a variety of sources - typically from industry,
commercial salvage yards, and individuals - and sort and
process the scrap metal for resale. Metals commonly
traded by these facilities include iron, steel, copper,
brass, and aluminum. Depending on the type of recycling
operations, the surrounding soils may be contaminated by
heavy metals, asbestos, PCB oils, hydraulic fluids and
lubricating oils, fuels, and solvents.
Chemical/Dye Manufacturing Facilities - A wide range of
chemicals are used in facilities that manufacture,
reformulate, and package various chemicals and dyes for
commercial and industrial use. These chemical products
include acids and bases, dyes and pigments, polymers,
plastics, surfactants, solvents, soaps, and waxes. These
-------
manufacturing processes are highly variable, depending
on the product being produced. .There are, however,
certain types of process components that are frequently
encountered in these facilities, including bulk storage
(both above and below ground) tanks for gaseous,
liquid, and solid materials; blending and packaging
equipment; storage areas for drums, bags, carboys, tote
bins, and other chemical containers; process piping and
conveyor systems (pneumatic or mechanical augers and
conveyors); and waste piles and disposal pits. In
addition, many larger facilities have rail spurs, industrial
wastewater treatment plants, and sludge lagoons or
settling ponds.
The contaminant type and the distribution of these
contaminants is highly specific to the process type.
Environmental problems resulting from chemical/dye
manufacturing may persist in nearby or downstream
surface waters or sediments long after operations have
ceased. Moreover, chemical operations can change over
time or involve multiple processes, therefore these sites
may be overlaid with several generations of wastes from
a variety of products or processes. Many chemical
facilities also have quality assurance and research
laboratories that use small quantities of toxic chemicals
that could contaminate isolated locations.
Drum Recycling - Drum recycling facilities clean used
drums for reuse. These facilities typically sort the
drums by chemical compatibility, then wash, rinse, and
leak-test the drums. As necessary, drum recycling
facilities repair the dents and repaint the drums. Soil
and groundwater contamination at these facilities may
result from the leaking and spilling of residual chemicals
and oils. The variety of chemicals stored in drums
makes characterizing the potential contaminants difficult
— these contaminants could include acids, bases,
corrosives, reactive chemicals, flammable materials, and
oils. Spillage of paint, paint thinners, and solvents can
also contaminate a drum recycling facility.
Gas Stations - Gas stations consist of pump islands,
underground storage tanks (UST) for storing the fuel,
small storage areas, and service areas (which typically
contain either hydraulic lifts or pits) for changing
automobile engine oil and other maintenance activities.
Gasoline and diesel fuel are transferred from bulk tank
trucks to large USTs. Spills at the transfer areas and
pumps, along with overfilling of and leakage from the
USTs, are likely, sources of site contamination at gas
stations. Many UST leaks are from the piping systems.
The primary contaminants of concern at gas stations
include petroleum hydrocarbons, benzene and other
BTEX compounds. Service areas typically have small
containers of ethylene glycol, hydraulic oils, lubricants,
automotive batteries (lead and acid), and compressed gas
cylinders from welding operations (especially acetylene
and oxygen). Surface soils may be contaminated from
historical spills or dumping of used lubricants, coolants,
and cleaning solvents from service activities. Subsurface
soils and groundwater, especially in the vicinity of USTs,
may also be contaminated from spills, overfilling, and
leaks.
Landfills/Dumps (Municipal/Industrial) - Landfills are
now restricted to household garbage, yard wastes,
construction debris, and office wastes. Prior to 1970,
however, landfills could accept industrial wastes.
Therefore, older landfills are likelier to be contaminated
by hazardous chemicals. Even modern landfills can
contain a host of chemicals from household wastes such
as oils, paints, solvents, corrosive cleaners, batteries, and
gardening products. Illegal dumping at landfills can also
cause serious contamination. Improperly designed
landfills can result in a higher likelihood of surface soil
and groundwater contamination as well as trap explosive
levels of methane gas and hydrogen sulfide in the soil. A
draft site profile has been developed for EPA, "Technical
Approach to Characterizing and Cleaning Up
Brownfields Sites: Municipal Landfills and Illegal
Dumps," February 2001
Manufactured Gas/Coal Facilities - Manufactured gas has
been produced as a fuel source from coal and oil since
the early 1800s. Typically, the coal or oil is heated and
the resulting volatilized gases are distilled to produce
natural gas. "Depending on the specific process design,
various byproducts can be recovered, including
anthracene, benzene, cresol, naphthalene, paraffin,
phenol, toluene, and xylenes. Waste products from
manufactured gas operations include coal fines, coal tar,
cyanide salts, hydrogen sulfide gas, and wastewater.
Leakage and spillage from storage drums or tanks may
contaminate surface and subsurface soils, sediments,
surface water, and groundwater.
-------
Metal Plating/Finishing - Metal plating operations
improve a product's performance (e.g. durability,
corrosion resistance) or appearance. Metal components
are first cleaned (using solvents and/or water-based
detergents) in degreaser units to remove dirt and oils
from manufacturing operations. The metal components
are subsequently etched, plated, and finished in a series
of vats or baths. Spillage from plating and cleaning
operations, and leakage or overfills from storage tanks
and process vats, may contaminate the concrete floors
and underlying soils. Groundwater may also be
contaminated by heavy metals, cyanide, and solvents.
For more detailed information, see "Technical
Approaches to Characterizing and Cleaning Up Metal
Finishing Sites under the Brownfields Initiative,"
EPA/625/R-98/006, December, 1999.
Oil Production/Distribution/Recvcling 'Facilities - Oil
production facilities consist of oil drilling, refining,
storing, transferring, transporting, and recycling
facilities. Typical raw materials inputs at these facilities
include crude, fuel, and motor oils, as well as waste oils.
The production processes at these facilities may
contaminate soils with oil sludges, acids, and waste oil
additives and co-contaminants such as PCBs. In some
cases, disposal pits may contain thick tarry sludges with
very high pH values. Groundwater and deeper soil may
be contaminated with metals and lighter oil fractions
such as BTEX. The location and severity of
contamination depend on the processes used and the age
of the facility.
Ordnance Sites - Ordnance sites typically include
facilities that manufacture, assemble, store, or dispose a
variety of military munitions such as bombs, shells,
grenades, mines, rifle rounds, and specialty explosives.
In some cases, these facilities are not clearly identified
and may be located in isolated areas. Some sites date to
before World War I. Many of these sites were highly
specialized; correspondingly, the chemicals used were
highly specialized. Raw materials, chemical
intermediates, final products, and waste materials are
common contaminants at such sites. Potential
contaminants include di- and tri-nitro substituted
phenols and benzenes, nitroglycerin, metals, ethers,
formaldehyde, and ammoniated compounds.
Unexploded ordnance (UXO) may also be buried along
with other waste materials. Groundwater may be
contaminated with solvents such as formaldehyde and
toluene. Furthermore, due to the age of some of these
facilities, asbestos-containing materials may be found in
abandoned buildings and demolition debris.
Paint Shops/Auto Body Repair - Paint shops and auto
body repair shops fix truck and automobile body parts or
paint various plastic and metal products. Damaged auto
body parts are replaced or repaired with fillers, then
sanded, primed, and painted. These shops may also use
cutting torches, welding equipment, solvents and
cleaners, fiberglass, various polymers and epoxy
compounds, and sand or grit blasting operations.
Gasoline and diesel from vehicle fuel tanks, solvents,
cleaners, acids, and paints may leak or spill to
contaminate underlying soils and groundwater. Typical
contaminants include toluene, acetone,
perchloroethylene, xylene, gasoline and diesel fuel,
carbon tetrachloride, and hydrochloric and phosphoric
acid.
Rail Yards - Rail yards may consist of any combination
of track and switching areas, engine maintenance
buildings, engine fueling areas, bulk and container
storage and transfer stations, and storage areas for
materials used in track and engine maintenance.
Materials used at rail yards include diesel fuel, paint,
solvents and degreasing agents, PCB oils, and creosote.
Spills, leaks, or direct dumping to the soil of these
compounds may contaminate the soil and groundwater.
Chemical spills and leaks from loading and unloading
tanker and freight cars can also contaminate the rail yard.
Due to the variety of chemicals carried by railroads,
virtually any type of chemical could be present at a
former rail yard. A draft site profile has been developed
for EPA "Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning Up Brownfields Sites: Railroad Yards,"
February, 2001.
Wood Preservers - Wood preserver sites typically consist
of wood preparation facilities, chemical storage tanks,
chemical treatment areas (including high pressure vessels
in many cases), drip or drying areas, and wood storage
areas. The wood is treated with preservative chemicals
either by dipping the wood into a chemical bath or by
injecting the chemicals into the wood under pressure.
Storage tanks at wood preserver sites could contain
creosote, pentachlorophenol, or chrome-copper-arsenate
-------
(CCA) solutions for wood treatment, which could enter
the environment if these tanks were overfilled or leaked.
Contaminated water squeezed from the wood during
processing and retort sludge may have spilled on the
ground, causing soil and groundwater contamination.
As treated wood is transferred from the treatment area to
the drying areas, chemicals may drip onto the soil and
contaminate the soil and groundwater. Likewise,
drippage at drying areas, especially in older operations
where pressure treatment may not have been used, could
result in soil contamination. Runoff from site soils
could also contaminate nearby surface waters.
Some other types of brownfields sites include:
>• Automobile Repair
>• Cement Plants
>- Dry Cleaners
^" Electronics Manufacturing
^- Iron and Steel Manufacturing
5s* Machine Tool Industry
>• Meat Packaging Plants
^ Mining Sites/Mining Wastes
>• Pesticide Facilities
>• Plastics
>" Power Generating Facilities/Utilities
>• Print Shops
>• Pulp and Paper Mills
>- Quarries
>• Radiation (mining/refining and research facilities)
>" Tanning
>- Textile Mills
>" Tire Reclamation
The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) is available online at
EPA's homepage - www.epa.gov/tri. TRI data is a
database tabulating the release of chemicals into the
environment; including the volume of toxic chemicals
used at sites and the types of emissions and wastes
generated. TRI data can be searched online, obtained on
CDs, or reports can be downloaded.
The next chapter describes the initial process of site
assessment and due diligence.
Low-Risk and High-Risk Sites
EPA has developed guidelines (Federal Register
97-23831) that determine whether a site contains
contaminants that pose high or low risks to nearby
populations and environments.
A high-risk site is one that is found to be highly
contaminated and poses a significant risk to human health
or the environment. Generally, these sites are not feasible
candidates for a brownfields redevelopment project.
Instead these sites may be addressed through Superfund
clean-up activities.
Low-risk sites contain lower levels of contamination and
thus pose a significantly lower risk to surrounding
populations and the environment. Most brownfields sites
are considered low risk sites.
Other Resources
The descriptions of the various processes associated
with brownfields sites are intended to provide only an
overview. Industry specific profiles listed in Chapter 1
of this document, provide further information for some
specific brownfields sites.
Additional information for certain industrial processes,
chemical usage, and waste generation can be found in
the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA) Sector Notebooks. These documents are
available at OECA's web page - epa.gov/oeca/sector.
-------
Chapters
Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence
Site assessment and due diligence provide initial
information regarding the feasibility of a brownfields
redevelopment project. A site assessment evaluates the
health and environmental risks of a site and the due
diligence process examines the legal and financial risks.
These two assessments help the planner build a
conceptual framework of the site, which will develop
into the foundation for the next steps in the
redevelopment process.
Site assessment and due diligence are necessary to fully
address issues regarding the environmental liabilities
associated with property ownership. Several federal and
state programs exist to minimize owner liability at
brownfields sites and facilitate cleanup and
redevelopment. Planners and decision-makers should
contact their state environmental or regional EPA office
for further information.
The Phase I site assessment is generally performed by an
environmental professional. Cost for this service
depends upon size and location of the site, and is usually
around $2,500. A site assessment typically identifies:
>" Potential contaminants that remain in and around a
site;
5s- Likely pathways that the contaminants may move;
and
^" Potential risks to the environment and human health
that exist along the migration pathways.
Due diligence typically identifies:
5*- Potential legal and regulatory requirements and
risks; ,
5*- Preliminary cost estimates for property purchase,
engineering, taxation and risk management; and
>• Market viability of redevelopment project.
This chapter begins with background information on the
role of the EPA and state government in brownfields
redevelopment. The remainder of the chapter provides a
description of the components of site assessment and the
due diligence process.
Perform
Phase II Site
Investigation
Evaluate
Remedial
Options
Develop
Remedy
Implementation
Plan
Remedy
Implementation
Role of EPA and State Government
A brownfields redevelopment project is a partnership
between planners and decision-makers (both in the
private and public sector), state and local officials, and
the local community. State environmental agencies are
often key decision-makers and a primary source of
information for brownfields projects. In most cases,
planners and decision-makers need to work closely with
state program managers to determine their particular
state's requirements for brownfields development.
Planners may also need to meet additional federal
-------
requirements. While state roles in brownfields programs
vary widely, key state functions include:
>*• Overseeing the brownfields site assessment and
cleanup process, including the management of
voluntary cleanup programs;
>- Providing guidance on contaminant screening levels;
and
>- Serving as a source of site information, as well as
legal and technical guidance.
The EPA works closely with state and local
governments to develop state Voluntary Cleanup
Programs (VCP) to encourage, assist, and expedite
brownfields redevelopment. The purpose of a state VCP
is to streamline brownfields redevelopment, reduce
transaction costs, and provide liability protection for
past contamination. Planners and decision-makers
should be aware that state cleanup requirements vary
significantly; brownfields managers from state agencies
should be able to clarify how their state requirements
relate to federal requirements.
EPA encourages all states to have their VCPs approved
via a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), whereby
EPA transfers control over a brownfields site to that
state (Federal Register 97-23831). Under such an
arrangement, the EPA does not anticipate becoming
involved with private cleanup efforts that are approved
by federally recognized state VCPs (unless the agency
determines that a given cleanup poses an imminent and
substantial threat to public health, welfare or the
environment). EPA may, however, provide states with
technical assistance to support state VCP efforts.
To receive federal certification, state VCPs must:
>•Provide for meaningful community involvement.
This requirement is intended to ensure that the
public is informed of and, if interested, involved in
brownfields planning. While states have discretion
regarding how they provide such opportunities, at a
minimum they must notify the public of a proposed
contaminant management plan by directly
contacting local governments and community groups
and publishing or airing legal notices in local media.
Ensure that voluntary response actions protect
human health and the environment. Examples of
ways to determine protectiveness include:
conducting site-specific risk assessments to
determine background contaminant concentrations;
determining maximum contaminant levels for
groundwater; and determining the human health risk
range for known or suspected carcinogens. Even if
the state VCP does not require the state to monitor a
site after approving the final voluntary contaminant
management plan, the state may still reserve the
right to revoke the cleanup certification if there is an
unsatisfactory change in the site's use or additional
contamination is discovered.
Penobscot River, Old Town, Maine
A Brownfields Success Story:
A contaminated site where a Lily-Tulip
Company paper plate and cup plant used to
be located will soon be a recreational area
with a playground, bandstand, running and
biking paths and a winter skating rink.
EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Brownfields. http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/html-
doc/ss oldtn.htm
^ Provide resources needed to ensure that voluntary
response actions are conducted in an appropriate
and timely manner. State VCPs must have adequate
financial, legal, and technical resources to ensure
that voluntary cleanups meet these goals. Most state
VCPs are intended to be self-sustaining. Generally,
state VCPs obtain then- funding in one of two ways:
planners pay an hourly oversight charge to the state
environmental agency, in addition to all cleanup
costs; or planners pay an application fee that can be
applied against oversight costs.
>-
Provide mechanisms for the written approval of
voluntary response action plans and certify the
completion of the response in writing for submission to
the EPA and the voluntary party.
-------
>"• Ensure safe completion of voluntary response
actions through oversight and enforcement of the
cleanup process.
>" Oversee the completion of the cleanup and
long-term site monitoring. In the event that the use
of the site changes or is found to have additional
contamination, states must demonstrate their ability
to enforce cleanup efforts via the removal of cleanup
certification or other means.
Performing A Phase I Site Assessment
The purpose of a Phase I site assessment is to identify
the type, quantity, and extent of possible contamination
at a brownfields site. Financial institutions typically
require a site assessment prior to lending money to
potential property buyers to protect the institution's role
as mortgage holder. In addition, parties involved in the
transfer, foreclosure, leasing, or marketing of properties
recommend some form of site evaluation. A site
assessment should include:2
5s- A review of readily available records, such as
former site use, building plans, records of any prior
contamination events;
5s- A site visit to observe the areas used for various
industrial processes and the condition of the
property;
>- Interviews with knowledgeable people, such as site
owners, operators, and occupants; neighbors; local
government officials; and
5*" A report that includes an assessment of the
likelihood that contaminants are present at the site.
>^
A site assessment should be conducted by an
environmental professional, and may take three to four
weeks to complete. Information on how to review
records, conduct site visits and interviews, and develop a
report during a site assessment is provided below.
Exhibit 3-1 shows a flow chart representing the site
assessment process. A clear division of tasks for the
environmental professional and oversight groups should
be determined at the outset of the project.
Review Records
A review of readily available records helps identify
likely contaminants and their locations. This review
provides a general overview of the brownfields site,
likely contaminant pathways, and related health and
environmental concerns.
Facility Information
Facility records are often the best source of information
on former site activities. If past owners are not initially
known, a local records office should have deed books
that contain ownership history. Generally, records
pertaining specifically to the site in question are
adequate for site assessment review purposes. In some
cases, however, records of adjacent properties may also
need to be reviewed to assess the possibility of
contaminants migrating from or to the site, based on
geologic or hydrogeologic conditions. If the brownfields
property resides in a low-lying area, in close proximity
to other industrial facilities or formerly industrialized
sites, or downgradient from current or former
industrialized sites, an investigation of adjacent
properties is warranted.
In addition to facility records, American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard 1527 identifies
other useful sources of information such as historical
aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, property tax
files, recorded land title records, topographic maps,
local street directories, building department records,
zoning/land use records, maps and newspaper archives
(ASTM, 1997).
State and federal environmental offices are also possible
sources of information. These offices may provide
information such as facility maps that identify activities
and disposal areas, lists of stored pollutants, and the
types and levels of pollutants released. State and federal
offices may provide the following types of facility level
data:
>• The state offices responsible for industrial waste
management and hazardous waste should have a
record of any emergency removal actions at the site
(e.g., the removal of leaking drums that posed an
"imminent threat" to local residents); any Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permits
issued at the site; notices of violations issued; and
any environmental investigations.
The elements of a site assessment presented here are based
in part on ASTM Standards 1527 and 1528.
10
-------
Review Records
Review readily available records to help identify likely
contaminants and locations, such as:
» Facility Information- e.g., building plans, deed
books, state and federal permitting records, prior
audits/assessments, compliance records
» Contaminant Migration Pathways-e.g.,
topographic information, soil and subsurface data,
groundwater information
o- Environmental and Health Record Databases and
Public Records, e.g., state and local health
departments, ATSDR health assessments, aerial
photographs, deed and title records
Conduct Site Visit
Conduct a site visit to observe use and condition of the
property and to identify areas that may warrant further
investigation. Note features such as:
» Odors
•• Wells
> Pits, ponds, and lagoons
•• Drums or storage containers
» Stained soil or pavement, distressed vegetation
» Waste storage areas, tank piping
Conduct Interviews
Conduct interviews to obtain additional information on
prior and/or current uses and conditions of the
property. Interview individuals such as:
» Site owner and/or site manager
> Site occupants
> Government officials
» Neighbors
Write Report
Write report to document findings from record reviews,
site visits, and interviews. Trie report should discuss:
» Presence and potential impact of contaminants
' Necessity for site investigation or no further action
recommendation
Exhibit 3-1. Flow Chart of the Site Assessment Process.
11
-------
>• The state office responsible for discharges of
wastewater to water bodies under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program will have a record of any permits issued for
discharges into surface water at or near the site. The
local publicly owned treatment works (POTW) will
have records for permits issued for indirect
discharges into sewers (e.g., floor drain discharges
into sanitary drains).
5s" The state office responsible for underground storage
tanks may also have records of tanks located at the
site, as well as records of any past releases.
>• The state office responsible for air emissions may be
able to provide information on potential air
pollutants associated with particular types of onsite
contamination.
5s* EPA's Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) of potentially contaminated sites should
have a record of any previously reported
contamination at or near the site. For information,
contact the Superfund Hotline (800-424-9346).
>• EPA Regional Offices can provide records of sites
that have released hazardous substances.
Information is available from the Federal National
Priorities List (NPL); lists of treatment, storage, and
disposal (TSD) facilities subject to corrective action
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA); RCRA generators; and the Emergency
Response Notification System (ERNS). Contact
EPA Regional Offices for more information.
>* State environmental records and local library
archives may indicate permit violations or
significant contamination releases from or near the
site.
>• Residents who were former employees may be able
to provide information on waste management
practices. These reports should be substantiated.
5s" Local fire departments may have responded to
emergency events at the facility. Fire departments or
city halls may have fire insurance maps3 or other
historical maps or data that indicate the location of
hazardous waste storage areas at the site.
>• Local waste haulers may have records of the
facility's disposal of hazardous or other wastes.
^-, Utility records.
^ Local building permits.
Requests for federal regulatory information are
governed by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),
and the fulfilling of such requests generally takes a
minimum of four to eight weeks. Similar freedom of
information legislation does not uniformly exist on the
state level; one can expect a minimum waiting period of
four weeks to receive requested information (ASTM,
1997).
Identifying Contaminant Migration Pathways
Offsite migration of contaminants may pose a risk to
human health and the environment. A site assessment
should gather as much readily available information on
the physical characteristics of the site as possible.
Migration pathways, such as through soil, groundwater,
and air, depend on site-specific characteristics such as
geology and the physical characteristics and chemical
properties of the individual contaminants (e.g., mobility,
solubility, and density). Information on the physical
characteristics of the general area can play an important
role in identifying potential migration pathways and
focusing on the environmental sampling activities, if
needed.
Topographic, soil and subsurface, and groundwater data
are particularly important:
Topographic Data. Topographic information helps
determine whether the site may be subject to
contamination from or the source of contamination to
adjoining properties. Topographic information will help
identify low-lying areas of the facility where rain and
snowmelt (and any contaminants in them) may collect
Fire insurance maps show, for a specific property, the
locations of such items as UST's, buildings, and areas where
chemicals have been used for certain industrial processes.
12
-------
and contribute both water and contaminants to the
underlying aquifer or surface runoff to nearby areas. The
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) of the Department of
the Interior has topographic maps for nearly every part
of the country. These maps are inexpensive and
available through the following address:
USGS Information Services
Box 25286
Denver, CO 80225
[http://www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/to order.hmtll
Local USGS offices may also have topographic maps.
Soil and Subsurface Data. Soil and subsurface soil
characteristics determine how contaminants move in the
environment. For example, clay soils limit downward
movement of pollutants into underlying groundwater but
facilitate surface runoff. Sandy soils, on the other hand,
can promote rapid infiltration into the water table while
inhibiting surface runoff. Soil information can be
obtained through a number of sources: ;
>• The Natural Resource Conservation Service and
Cooperative Extension Service offices of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) are also likely to
have soil maps.
>- Local planning agencies should have soil maps to
support land ,use planning activities. These maps
provide a general description of the soil types
present within a county (or sometimes a smaller
administrative unit, such as a township).
>• Well-water companies are likely to be familiar with
local subsurface conditions, and local water districts
and state water divisions may have well-logging and
water testing information.
>- Local health departments may be familiar with
subsurface conditions because of their interest in
septic drain fields.
>• Local construction contractors are likely to be
familiar with subsurface conditions from their work
with foundations.
Soil characteristics can vary widely within a relatively
small area, and it is common to find that the top layer of
soil in urban areas is composed of fill materials, not
native soils. Geotechnical survey reports are often
required by local authorities prior to construction.
While the purpose of such surveys is to test soils for
compaction, bedrock, and water table, general
information gleaned from such reports can support the
environmental site assessment process. Though local
soil maps and other general soil information can be used
for screening purposes such as in a site assessment,
site-specific information will be needed in the event that
cleanup is necessary.
Groundwater Data. Professionals should obtain general
groundwater information about the site area, including:
>• State classifications of underlying aquifers;
>• Depth to the groundwater tables;
>- Groundwater flow direction and rate;
->- Location of nearby drinking water and agricultural
wells; and
>- Groundwater recharge zones in the vicinity of the
site.
This information can be obtained from several local
sources, including water authorities, well drilling
companies, health departments, and Agricultural
Extension and Natural Resource Conservation Service
offices.
Identifying Potential Environmental and Human
Health Concerns
Identifying possible environmental and human health
risks early in the process can influence decisions
regarding the viability of a site for cleanup and the
choice of cleanup methods used. A visual inspection of
the area will usually suffice to identify onsite or nearby
wetlands and water bodies that may be particularly
sensitive to releases of contaminants during
characterization or cleanup activities. Professionals
should also review available information from state and
local.environmental agencies to ascertain the proximity
of residential dwellings, industrial/commercial
activities, or wetlands/water bodies, and to identify
people, animals, or plants that might receive migrating
contamination; any particularly sensitive populations in
the area (e.g., children; endangered species); and
whether any major contamination events have occurred
previously in the area (e.g., drinking water problems;
groundwater contamination).
13
-------
Such general environmental information may be
obtained by contacting the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, state environmental agencies, local planning
and conservation authorities, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and the USDA Natural Resource Conservation
Service. State and local agencies and organizations can
usually provide information on local fauna and the
habitats of any sensitive and/or endangered species.
For human health information, professionals can
contact:
>• State and local health assessment organizations.
Organizations such as health departments, should
have data on the quality of local well water used as a
drinking water source as well as any human health
risk studies that have been conducted. In addition,
these groups may have other relevant information,
such as how certain types of contaminants might
pose a health risk during site characterization.
Information on exposures to particular contaminants
and associated health risks can also be found in
health profile documents developed by the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR). In addition, ATSDR may have conducted
a health consultation or health assessment in the
area if an environmental contamination event
occurred in the past. Such an event and assessment
should have been identified in the site assessment
records review of prior contamination incidents at
the site. For information, contact ATSDR's Division
of Toxicology (404-639-6300).
>~ Local water and health departments. During the site
visit (described below), when visually inspecting the
area around the facility, professionals should
identify any residential dwellings or commercial
activities near the facility and evaluate whether
people there may come into contact with
contamination along one of the migration pathways.
Where groundwater contamination may pose a
problem, professionals should identify any nearby
waterways or aquifers that may be impacted by
groundwater discharge of contaminated water,
including any drinking water wells downgradient of
the site, such as a municipal well field. Local water
departments will have a count of well connections to
the public water supply. Professionals should also
pay particular attention to information on private
wells in the area downgradient of the facility
because they may be vulnerable to contaminants
migrating offsite even when the public municipal
drinking water supply is not vulnerable. Local health
departments often have information on the locations
of private wells.
Both groundwater pathways and surface water pathways
should be evaluated because contaminants in
groundwater can eventually migrate to surface waters
and contaminants in surface waters can migrate to
groundwater.
Conducting a Site Visit
In addition to collecting and reviewing available
records, a site visit can provide important information
about the uses and conditions of the property and
identify areas that warrant further investigation (ASTM,
1997). During a visual inspection, the following should
be noted:
Current or past uses of abutting properties that may
affect the property being evaluated;
Evidence of hazardous substances migrating on- or
off-site;
Odors;
Wells;
Pits, ponds, or lagoons;
Surface pools of liquids;
Drums or storage containers;
Stained soil or pavements;
Corrosion;
Stressed vegetation;
Solid waste;
Drains, sewers, sumps, or pathways for off-site
migration; and
Roads, water supplies, and sewage systems;
Pipes, vents, or utilities suggesting underground
storage tanks.
>•
^
>•
5"
>•
>-
5s-
>-
>•'
>•
Conducting Interviews
Interviewing the site owner, site occupants, and local
officials can help identify and clarify the prior and
current uses and conditions of the property. They may
also provide information on other documents or
references regarding the property. Such documents
include environmental audit reports, environmental
14
-------
permits, registrations for storage tanks, material safety
data sheets, community right-to-know plans, safety
plans, government agency notices or correspondence,
hazardous waste generator reports or notices,
geotechnical studies, or any proceedings involving the
property (ASTM, 1997). Personnel from the following
local government agencies should be interviewed: the
fire department, health agency, and the agency with
authority for hazardous waste disposal or other
environmental matters. Interviews can be conducted in
person, by telephone, or in writing.
ASTM Standard 1528 provides a questionnaire that may
be appropriate for use in interviews for certain sites.
ASTM suggests that this questionnaire be posed to the
current property owner, any major occupant of the
property (or at least 10 percent of the occupants of the
property if no major occupant exists), or "any occupant
likely to be using, treating, generating, storing, or
disposing of hazardous substances, or petroleum
products on or from the property" (ASTM, 1996). A
user's guide accompanies the ASTM questionnaire to
assist the investigator in conducting interviews, as well
as researching records and making site visits. ,
Developing a Report
Toward the end of the site assessment, professionals
should develop a report that includes all of the important
information obtained during record reviews, the site
visit, and interviews. Documentation, such as references
and important exhibits, should be included, as well as
the credentials of the environmental professional who
conducted the environmental site assessment. The report
should include all information regarding the presence or
likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum
products on the property and any conditions that
indicate an existing, past, or potential release of such
substances into property structures or into the ground,
groundwater, or surface water of the property (ASTM,
1997). The report should include the environmental
professional's opinion of the impact of the presence or
likely presence of any contaminants, and a findings and
conclusion section that either indicates that the
environmental site assessment revealed no evidence of
contaminants in connection with the property, or
discusses what evidence of contamination was found
(ASTM, 1997).
Additional sections of the report might include a
recommendations section for a site investigation, if
appropriate. Some states or financial institutions may
require information on specific substances such as lead
in drinking water or asbestos.
Due Diligence
The purpose of the due diligence process is to determine
the financial viability and extent of legal risk related to a
particular brownfields project. The concept of financial
viability can be explored from two perspectives, the
marketability of the intended redevelopment use and the
accuracy of the financial analysis for redevelopment
work. Legal risk is determined through a legal liability
analysis. Exhibit 3-2 represents the three-stage due
diligence process.
Market Analysis
To gain an understanding of the marketability of any
given project, it is critical to relate envisioned use(s) of
a redeveloped brownfields site to the state and local
communities in which it is located. Knowing the role of
the projected use of the redevelopment project in the
larger picture of economic and social trends helps the
planner determine the likelihood of the project's
success. For example, many metropolitan areas are
adopting a profile of economic activity that parallels the
profile of the Detroit area dominated by the auto
manufacturing industry. New York, Northern Virginia
and Washington, DC, for example, are becoming known
as telecommunications hubs (Brownfields
Redevelopment: A Guidebook for Local Governments &
Communities, International City/County Management
Association, 1997). Ohio is asserting itself as a plastics
research and development center, and even smaller
communities, such as Frederick, Maryland, a growing
center for biomedical research and technology are
marketing themselves with a specific economic niche in
mind.
The benefits of co-locating similar and/or
complementary business activities can be seen in
business and industrial parks, where collaboration
occurs in such areas as facility use, joint business
ventures, employee support services such as on-site
childcare, waste recycling and disposal, and others. For
the brownfields redevelopment planner, this contextual
15
-------
Conduct Due Diligence
Minimize the Legal • Developing and analyzing the community profile to assess
public consensus for the market viability of the project
>• Identifying economic trends that may influence the project
at various levels or scales
»• Determining possible marketing strategies
»• Defining the target market
> Observing proximity to amenities for location attractions
and value
> Assessing historic characteristics of the site that may
influence the project
Financial Analysis
Assess the financial risks of the project by:
> Estimating cost of engineering, zoning, environmental
consultant, legal ownership, taxation, and risk management
>• Estimating property values before and after project devlpmt.
»• Determining affordability, financing potential and services
>• Identifying lending institutions and other funding
mechanisms .
> Understanding projected investment return and strategy
Legal Liability Analysis
Minimize the legal liability of the project by:
>• Reviewing the municipal planning and zoning ordinances to
determine requirements, options, limitations on uses, and
need for variances
*• Clarifying property ownership and owner cooperation
* Assessing the political climate of the community and the
political context of the stakeholders
>• Reviewing federal and local environmental requirements to
assess not only risks, but ongoing regulatory/permitting
requirements
>• Evaluating need and availability for environmental insurance
policies that can be streamlined to satisfy a wide range of
issues
>• Ensuring that historical liability insurance policies have been
retained
> Evaluating federal and local financial and/or tax incentives
»• Understanding tax implications (deductibility or
capitalization) of environmental remediation costs
Exhibit 3-2. Flow Chart of the Due Diligence Process
16
-------
information provides opportunities for creative thinking
and direction for collaborative planning related to
various possible uses for a particular site and their
likelihood of success.
The long-term zoning plan of the jurisdiction in which
the brownfields site is located provides an important
source of information. Location of existing and planned
transportation systems is a key question for any
redevelopment activity. Observing the site's proximity
to other amenities will flesh out the picture of the;
attraction potential for any given use.
Assessing the historic characteristics of the site that may
influence the project is an important consideration at the
neighborhood level. Gaining an understanding of the
historic significance of a particular building might lead
the community developer toward rehabilitation, rather
than new construction on the site. Sensitivity regarding
local affinities toward existing structures can go far to
win a community's support of a redevelopment project.
Understanding what exists and what is planned provides
part of the marketability picture. Particularly for smaller
brownfields projects, knowing what is missing from the
local community fabric can be an equally important
aspect of the market analysis. Whether the "hub" of the
area's economic life is light industry or an office
complex or a recreational facility, numerous other
services are needed to support the fabric of community.
Restaurants and delicatessens, for instance, complement
many larger, more central attractions, as do many other
retail, service and recreational endeavors. A survey of
local residents will inform the planner of local needs.
Financial Analysis
The goal of a financial analysis is to assess the financial
risks of the redevelopment project. A Phase I Site
Assessment will give the planner some indication of the
possible extent of environmental contamination to the
site. Financial information continues to unfold with a
Phase n Site Investigation. The process of establishing
remedial goals and screening remedial alternatives
requires an understanding of associated costs.
Throughout these processes increasingly specific cost
information informs the planner's decision-making
process. The planner's financial analysis should,
therefore, serve as an ongoing "conversation" with
development plans, providing an informed basis for the
planner to determine whether or not to pursue the
project. Ultimately the plan for remediation and use
should contain as few financial unknowns as possible.
While costs related to the environmental aspects of the
project need to be considered throughout the process,
other cost information is also critical, including the price
of purchase and establishment of legal ownership of the
site, planning costs, engineering and architectural costs,
hurdling zoning issues, environmental consultation,
taxation, infrastructure upgrades, and legal consultation
and insurance, to help mitigate and manage associated
risks.
In a property development initiative, where "time is
money," scheduling is a critical factor influencing the
financial feasibility of any development project. The
timeframe over which to project costs, the expected
turnaround time for attaining necessary permit
approvals, and the schedule for site assessment, site
investigation and actual cleanup of the site, are some
aspects of the overall schedule of the project.
Throughout the life of the project, the questions of,
'how much will it cost," and, "how long will it take,"
must be tracked as key interacting variables.
Financing brownfields redevelopment projects presents
unique difficulties. Many property purchase
transactions use the proposed purchase as collateral for
financing, depending upon an appraiser's estimate of the
property's current and projected value. In the case of a
brownfields site, however, a lending institution is likely
to hesitate or simply close the door on such an
arrangement due to the uncertain value and limited
resale potential of the property. Another problem that
the developer may face in seeking financing is that
banks fear the risk of additional contamination that
might be discovered later in the development process,
such as an underground plume of groundwater
contamination that travels unexpectedly into a
neighboring property. Finally, though recent legislative
changes may soften these concerns, many banks fear
that their connection with a brownfields project will put
them in the "chain of title" and make them potentially
liable for cleanup costs (Brownfields Redevelopment: A
Guidebook for Local Governments & Communities,
17
-------
International City/County Management Association,
1997).
A local appraiser can assist with estimation of property
values before and after completion of the project, as
well as evaluation of resale potential.
Some of the more notable brownfields redevelopment
successes have been financed through consortiums of
lenders who agree to spread the risk. Public/private
financing partnerships may also be organized to finance
brownfields redevelopment through grants, loans, loan
guarantees, or bonds. Examples of projects employing
unique revenue streams, financing avenues, and tax
incentives related to brownfields redevelopment are
available in Lessons from the Field, Unlocking
Economic Potential with an Environmental Key, by
Edith Perrer, Northeast Midwest Institute, 1997. Certain
states, such as New Jersey, have placed a high priority
on brownfields redevelopment, and are dedicating
significant state funding to support such initiatives. By
contacting the appropriate state department of
environmental protection, developers can learn about
opportunities related to their particular proposal.
Legal Liability Analysis
The purpose of legal analysis is to minimize the legal
liability associated with the redevelopment process. The
application and parameters of zoning ordinances, as well
as options and limitations on use need to be clear to the
developer. The need for a zoning variance and the
political climate regarding granting of variances can be
generally ascertained through discussions with the local
real estate community. Legal counsel can help the
developer clarify property ownership, and any legal
encumbrances on the property, e.g. rights-of-way,
easements. An environmental attorney can also assist
the planner/developer to identify applicable regulatory
and permitting requirements, as well as offer general
predictions regarding the tune frames for attaining these
milestones throughout the development process. All of
the above legal concerns are relevant to any land
purchase.
Special legal concerns arise from the process of
redeveloping a brownfields site. Those concerns
include reviewing federal and local environmental
requirements to assess not only risks, but ongoing
regulatory/permitting requirements. In recent years,
several changes have occurred in the law defining
liability related to brownfields site contamination and
cleanup. New legislation has generally been directed to
mitigating the strict assignment of liability established
by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or
"Superfund"), enacted by Congress in 1980. While
CERCLA has had numerous positive effects, it also
represents barriers to redeveloping brownfields, most
importantly the unknown liability costs related to
uncertainty over the extent of contamination present at a
site. Several successful CERCLA liability defenses
have evolved and the EPA has reformed its
administrative policy in support of increased
brownfields redevelopment. In addition to legislative
attempts to deal with the disincentives created by
CERCLA, most states have developed Voluntary
Cleanup or similar Programs with liability assurances
documented in agreements with the EPA (Brownfields
Redevelopment: A Guidebook for Local Governments &
Communities, International City/County Management
Association, 1997).
Another opportunity for risk protection for the developer
is environmental insurance. Evaluation of the need and
availability of environmental insurance policies that can
be streamlined to satisfy a wide range of issues should
be part of the analysis of legal liability. Understanding
whether historical insurance policies have been retained,
as well as the applicability of such policies, is also a
dimension of the legal analysis.
Understanding tax implications, including deducibility
or capitalization of environmental remediation costs, is a
feature of legal liability analysis. Also, federal, state or
local tax or other financial incentives may be available
to support the developer's financing capacity.
Conclusion
If the Phase I site assessment and due diligence
adequately informs state and local officials, planners,
community representatives, and other stakeholders that
no contamination exists at the site, or that contamination
is so minimal that it does not pose a health or
environmental risk, those involved may decide that
adequate site assessment has been accomplished and the
process of redevelopment may proceed.
18
-------
In some cases where evidence of contamination exists,
stakeholders may decide that enough information is
available from the site assessment and due diligence to
characterize the site and determine an appropriate
approach for site cleanup of the contamination. In other
cases, stakeholders may decide that additional testing is
warranted, and a Phase n site investigation should be
conducted, as described in the next chapter.
19
-------
Chapter 4
Phase II Site Investigation
Background
Data collected during the Phase I site assessment may
conclude that contaminant(s) exist at the site and/or that
further study is necessary to determine the extent of
contamination. The purpose of a Phase II site
investigation is to give planners and decision-makers
objective and credible data about the contamination at a
brownfields site to help them develop an appropriate
contaminant management strategy. A site investigation
is typically conducted by an environmental professional.
This process evaluates the following types of data:
5s- Types of contamination present;
>• Cleanup and land reuse goals;
>• Length of time required to reach cleanup goals;
>- Post-treatment care needed; and
>• Costs.
A site investigation involves setting appropriate data
quality objectives based upon brownfields
redevelopment goals, using appropriate screening levels
for the contaminants, and conducting environmental
sampling and analysis.
Data gathering in a site investigation may typically
include soil, water, and air sampling to identify the
types, quantity, and extent of contamination in these
various environmental media. The types of data used in
a site investigation can vary from compiling existing site
data (if adequate), to conducting limited sampling of the
site, to mounting an extensive contaminant-specific or
site-specific sampling effort. Professionals should use
knowledge of past facility operations whenever possible
to focus the site evaluation on those process areas where
pollutants were stored, handled, used, or disposed.
These will be the areas where potential contamination
will be most readily identified. Generally, to minimize
costs, a site investigation begins with limited sampling
(assuming readily available data does not adequately
characterize the type and extent of contamination on the
site) and proceed to more comprehensive sampling if
needed (e.g., if the initial sampling could not identify the
geographical limits of contamination). Exhibit 4-1
shows a flow chart of the site investigation process.
Perform Phase I
Site Assessment
and Due Diligence
Evaluate
Remedial
Alternatives
Develop
Remedy
Implementation
Plan
Remedy
Implementation
Various environmental companies provide site
investigation services. Additional information regarding
selection of a site investigation service can be found in
Assessing Contractor Capabilities for Streamlined Site
Investigations (EPA/542-R-00-001, January 2000).
This chapter provides a general approach to site
investigation; planners and decision-makers should
expand and refine this approach for site-specific use at
their own facilities.
20
-------
Sdf
Phase II Site Investigation
Uple (he Site f& Ifentify the type;, gtetntify, a
Bxteni of the Cdntamiftafidn
Set Data Oualitv Objectives (DOO)
DQOs are qualitative and quantitative statements
specified to ensure that data of known and appropriate
quality are obtained. The DQO process is a series of
planning steps, typically as follows:
» State the problem
» Identify the decision
> Identify inputs to the decision
»• Define the study boundaries
» Develop a decision rule
> Specify limits on decision errors
•' -I .'••'"' '.':
Establish Screening Levels
Establish an appropriate set of screening levels for
contaminants in soil, water, and/or air using an
appropriate risk-based method, such as:
» EPA Soil Screening Guidance (EPA/R-96/128)
> Generic screening levels developed by states for
industrial and residential use
-•..*'
Conduct Environmental Sampling and
Analysis
Conduct environmental sampling and analysis.
Typically Site Investigation begins with limited
sampling, leading to a more comprehensive effort.
Sampling and analysis considerations include:
» A screening analysis tests for broad classes of
contaminants, while a contaminant-specific analysis
provides a more accurate, but more expensive,
assessment
•• A field analysis provides immediate results and
increased sampling flexibility, while laboratory
analysis provides greater accuracy and specificity
4-
Write Report
Write report to document sampling findings. The report
should discuss the DQOs, methodologies, limitations,
and possible cleanup technologies and goals
nd
'.•'•• ' ,'" - (
.•' ••:• '•' '' -"'
' ' f t '' • '
1 •
.;-<.'
Exhibit 4-1. Flow Chart of the Site Investigation Process
21
-------
Setting Data Quality Objectives
While it is not easy, and probably impossible, to
completely characterize the contamination at a site,
decisions still have to be made. EPA's Data Quality
Objectives (DQO) process provides a framework to
make decisions under circumstances of data uncertainty.
The DQO process uses a systematic approach that
defines the purpose, scope, and quality requirements for
the data collection effort. The DQO process consists of
the following seven steps (EPA 2000):
>- State the problem. Summarize the contamination
problem that will require new environmental data,
and identify the resources available to resolve the
problem and to develop the conceptual site model.
5s- Identify the decision that requires new
environmental data to address the contamination
problem.
5s- Identify the inputs to the decision. Identify the
information needed to support the decision and
specify which inputs require new environmental
measurements.
3*" Define the study boundaries. Specify the spatial and
temporal aspect of the environmental media that the
data must represent to support the decision.
3>- Develop a decision rule. Develop a logical "if
...then ..." statement that defines the conditions that
would cause the decision-maker to choose among
alternative actions.
5*" Specify limits on decision errors. Specify the
decision maker's acceptable limits on decision
errors, which are used to establish performance
goals for limiting uncertainty in the data.
5s- Optimize the design for obtaining data. Identify the
most resource-effective sampling and analysis
design for generating data that are expected to
satisfy the DQOs.
Please refer to Data Quality Objectives Process for
Hazardous Waste Site Investigations (EPA 2000) for
more detailed information on the DQO process.
Establish Screening Levels
During the initial stages of a site investigation,
professionals should establish an appropriate set of
screening levels for contaminants in soil, water, and/or
air. Screening levels are risk-based benchmarks that
represent concentrations of chemicals in environmental
media that do not pose an unacceptable risk. Sample
analyses of soils, water, and air at the facility can be
compared with these benchmarks. If onsite contaminant
levels exceed the screening levels, further investigation
will be needed to determine if and to what extent
cleanup is appropriate. If contaminant concentrations
are below the screening level, for the intended use, no
action is required.
Some states have developed generic screening levels
(e.g., for industrial and residential use), and EPA's Soil
Screening Guidance (EPA/540/R-96/128) includes
generic screening levels for many contaminants. Generic
screening levels may not account for site-specific factors
that affect the concentration or migration of
contaminants. Alternatively, screening levels can be
developed using site-specific factors. While site-specific
screening levels can more effectively incorporate
elements unique to the site, developing site-specific
standards is a time- and resource-intensive process.
Professionals should contact their state environmental
offices and/or EPA regional offices for assistance in
using screening levels and in developing site-specific
screening levels.
Risk-based screening levels are based on calculations
and models that determine the likelihood that exposure
of a particular organism or plant to a particular level of a
contaminant would result in a certain adverse effect.
Risk-based screening levels have been developed for tap
water, ambient air, fish, and soil. Some states or EPA
regions also use regional background levels (or ranges)
of contaminants in soil and Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCLs) in water established under the Safe
Drinking Water Act as screening levels for some
chemicals. In addition, some states and/or EPA regional
offices have developed equations for converting soil
screening levels to comparative levels for the analysis of
air and groundwater.
When a contaminant concentration exceeds a screening
level, further site assessment activities (such as sampling
the site at strategic locations and/or performing more
detailed analysis) are needed to determine whether: (1)
the concentration of the contaminant is relatively low
22
-------
and/or the extent of contamination is small and does not
warrant cleanup for that particular chemical, or (2) the
concentration or extent of contamination is high, and
that site cleanup is needed (See Chapter 5, Contaminant
Management, for more information.)
Using EPA's soil screening guidance for an initial
brownfields investigation may be beneficial if* no
industrial screening levels are available or if the site
may be used for residential purposes. However, it should
be noted that EPA's soil screening guidance was
designed for high-risk, Tier I sites, rather than
brownfields, and conservatively assumes that future
reuse will be residential. Using this guidance for a non-
residential land use project could result in overly
conservative screening levels.
Salt Lake City, Utah
A Brownfields Success Story:
A site that contained an abandoned gas station,
office space parking, and horse stable has been
transformed into the Utah Jazz's new stadium, the
.Delta Center. This site will be the location for the
2002 Winter Olympics figure skating competition.
The new arena employs 1,452 people and
generates approximately $1 million in tax
increment revenue annually.
United States Conference of Mayors, Recycling America's Land
A National Report on Brownfields Redevelopment - Volume 3.
February, 2000.
http://www.usmavors.orq/uscm/brownfields/full report rev3.pdf
In addition to screening levels, EPA regional offices and
some states have developed cleanup levels, known as
corrective action levels. If contaminant concentrations
are above corrective action levels, a cleanup action must
be pursued. Screening levels should not be confused
with corrective action levels; Chapter 5, Contaminant
Management, provides more information on corrective
action levels.
Conduct Environmental Sampling and Data
Analysis
Environmental sampling and data analysis are integral
parts of a site investigation process. Many different
technologies are available to perform these activities, as
discussed below.
Levels of Sampling and Analysis
There are two levels of sampling and analysis: screening
and contaminant-specific. Professionals are likely to use
both levels at different stages of the site investigation.
>- Screening. Screening sampling and analysis use
relatively low-cost technologies to take a limited
number of samples at the most likely points of
contamination and analyze them for a limited
number of parameters. Screening analyses often test
only for broad classes of contaminants, such as total
petroleum hydrocarbons, rather than for specific
contaminants, such as benzene or toluene. Screening
is used to narrow the range of areas of potential
contamination and reduce the number of samples
requiring further, more costly, analysis. Screening is
generally performed on site, with a small percentage
of samples (e.g., generally 10 percent) submitted to
a state-approved laboratory for a full organic and
inorganic screening analysis to validate or clarify
the results obtained.
Some geophysical methods are used in site
assessments because they are noninvasive (i.e., do
not disturb environmental media as sampling does).
Geophysical methods are commonly used to detect
underground objects that might exist at a site, such
as USTs, dry wells, and drums. The two most
common and cost-effective technologies used in
geophysical surveys are ground-penetrating radar
and electromagnetics. Table C-l in Appendix C
contains an overview of geophysical methods. For
more information on screening (including
geophysical) methods, please refer to Subsurface
Characterization and Monitoring Techniques: A
Desk Reference Guide (EPA/625/R-93003a).
5s* Contaminant-specific. For a more in-depth
understanding of contamination at a site (e.g., when
screening data are not detailed enough), it may be
necessary to analyze samples for specific
contaminants. With contaminant-specific sampling
and analysis, the number of parameters analyzed is
much greater than for screening-level sampling, and
analysis includes more accurate, higher-cost field
23
-------
and laboratory methods. Samples are sent to a
state-approved laboratory to be tested under rigorous
protocols to ensure high-quality results. Such
analyses may take several weeks. For some
contaminants, innovative field technologies are as
capable, or nearly as capable, of achieving the
accuracy of laboratory technologies, which allows
for a rapid turnaround of the results. The principal
benefit of contaminant-specific analysis is the high
quality and specificity of the analytical results.
Increasing the Certainty of Sampling Results
Statistical Sampling Plan. Statistical sampling plans use
statistical principles to determine the number of samples
needed to accurately represent the contamination
present. With the statistical sampling method, samples
are usually analyzed with highly accurate laboratory or
field technologies, which increase costs and take
additional time. Using this approach, professionals can
consult with regulators and determine in advance
specific measures of allowable uncertainty (e.g., an 80
percent level of confidence with a 25 percent allowable
error).
Use of Lower-cost Technologies -with Higher Detection
Limits to Collect a Greater Number of Samples. This
approach provides a more comprehensive picture of
contamination at the site, but with less detail regarding
the specific contamination. Such an approach would not
be recommended to identify the extent of contamination
by a specific contaminant, such as benzene, but may be
an excellent approach for defining the extent of
contamination by total organic compounds with a strong
degree of certainty.
Site Investigation Technologies
This section discusses the differences between using
field and laboratory technologies and provides an
overview of applicable site investigation technologies.
In recent years, several innovative technologies that
have been field-tested and applied to hazardous waste
problems have emerged. In many cases, innovative
technologies may cost less than conventional techniques
and can successfully provide the needed data. Operating
conditions may affect the cost and effectiveness of
individual technologies.
Field versus Laboratory Analysis
The principal advantages of performing field sampling
and field analysis are that results are immediately
available and more samples can be taken during the
same sampling event; also, sampling locations can be
adjusted immediately to clarify the first round of
sampling results, if warranted. This approach may
reduce costs associated with conducting additional
sampling events after receipt of laboratory analysis.
Field assessment methods have improved significantly
over recent years; however, while many field
technologies may be comparable to laboratory
technologies, some field technologies may not detect
contamination at levels as low as laboratory methods,
and may not be contaminant-specific. To validate the
field results or to gain more information on specific
contaminants, a small percentage of the samples can be
sent for laboratory analysis. The choice of sampling and
analytical procedures should be based on Data Quality
Objectives established earlier in the process, which
determine the quality (e.g., precision, level of detection)
of the data needed to adequately evaluate site conditions
and identify appropriate cleanup technologies.
Sample Collection Technologies
Sample collection technologies vary widely, depending
on the medium being sampled and the type of analysis
required, based on the Data Quality Objectives (see the
section on this subject earlier in this document). For
example, soil samples are generally collected using
spoons, scoops, and shovels, while subsurface sampling
is more complex. The selection of a subsurface sample
collection technology depends on the subsurface
conditions (e.g., consolidated materials, bedrock), the
required sampling depth and level of analysis, and the
extent of sampling anticipated. If subsequent sampling
efforts are likely, installing semipermanent well casings
with a well-drilling rig may be appropriate. If limited
sampling is expected, direct push methods, such as cone
penetrometers, may be more cost-effective. The types of
contaminants will also play a key role in the selection of
sampling methods, devices, containers, and preservation
techniques.
Groundwater contamination should be assessed in all
areas, particularly where solvents or acids have been
used. Solvents can be very mobile in subsurface soils;
and acids, such as those used in finishing operations,
24
-------
increase the mobility of metal compounds.
Groundwater samples should be taken at and below the
water table in the surficial aquifer. Cone penetrometer
technology is a cost-effective approach for collecting
these samples. The samples then can be screened for
contaminants using field methods such as:
>• pH meters to screen for the presence of acids;
>- Colorimetric tubes to screen for volatile
organics; and
>• X-ray fluorescence to screen for metals.
Tables C-2 through C-4 in Appendix C list more
information on various sample collection technologies,
including a comparison of detection limits and costs.
The following chapter describes various contaminant
management strategies that are available to the
developer.
25
-------
Chapters
Contaminant Management
Background
The purpose of this chapter is to help planners and
decision-makers select an appropriate remedial
alternative. This section contains information on
developing a contaminant management plan and
discusses various contaminant management options,
from institutional controls and containment strategies,
through cleanup technologies. Finally, this chapter
provides an overview of post-construction isspes that
planners and decision-makers need to consider when
selecting alternatives.
The principal factors that will influence the selection of
a cleanup technology include:
• Types of contamination present;
• Cleanup and land reuse goals;
• Length of time required to reach cleanup goals;
• Post-treatment care needed; and
• Budget.
The selection of appropriate remedy options often
involves tradeoffs, particularly between time and cost.
A companion document, Cost Estimating Tools and
Resources for Addressing Sites Under the Brownfields
Initiative (EPA/625/R-99/001 April 1999), provides
information on cost factors and developing cost
estimates. In general, the more intensive the cleanup
approach, the more quickly the contamination will be
mitigated and the more costly the effort. In the case of
brownfields cleanup, both time and cost can be major
concerns, considering the planner's desire to return the
facility.to reuse as quickly as possible. Thus, the
planner may wish to explore a number of options and
weigh carefully the costs and benefits of each.
Selection of remedial alternatives is also likely to
involve the input of remediation professionals. The
overview of technologies cited in this chapter provides
the planner with a framework for seeking, interpreting,
and evaluating professional input.
The intended use of the brownfields site will drive the
level of cleanup needed to make the site safe for
redevelopment and reuse. Brownfields sites are by
Perform Phase I
Site Assessment
and Due Diligence
Perform
Phase II Site
Investigation
definition not Superfund sites; that is, brownfields sites
usually have lower levels of contamination present and,
therefore, generally require less extensive cleanup
efforts than Superfund sites. Nevertheless, all potential
pathways of exposure, based on the intended reuse of
the site, must be addressed in the site assessment and
cleanup; if no pathways of exposure exist, less cleanup
(or possibly none) may be required.
Some regional EPA and state offices have developed
corrective action levels (CALs) for different chemicals,
which may serve as guidelines or legal requirements for
cleanups. It is important to understand that screening
26
-------
levels (discussed in "Performing a Phase n Site
Assessment" above) are different from cleanup (or
corrective action) levels. Screening levels indicate
whether further site investigation is warranted for a
particular contaminant. CALs indicate whether cleanup
action is needed and how extensive it needs to be.
Planners should check with their state environmental
office for guidance and/or requirements for CALs.
Evaluate Remedial Alternatives
If the site investigation shows that there is an
unacceptable level of contamination, the problem will
have to be remedied. Exhibit 5-1 shows a flow chart of
the remedial alternative evaluation process.
Establishing Remedial Goals
The first step in evaluating remedial alternatives is to
articulate the remedial goals. Remedial goals relate very
specifically to the intended use of the redeveloped site.
A property to be used for a plastics factory may not need
to be cleaned up to the same level as a site that will be
used as a school. Future land use holds the key to
practical brownfields redevelopment plans. Knowledge
of federal, state, local or tribal requirements helps to
ensure realistic assumptions. Community surroundings,
as seen through a visual inspection will help provide a
context for future land uses, though many large
brownfields redevelopment projects have provided the
catalyst to overall neighborhood refurbishment.
Available funding and timeframe for the project are also
very significant factors in defining remedial goals.
Developing a List of Options
Developing a list of remedial options may begin with a
literature search of existing technologies, many of which
are listed in Exhibit D-l of this document. Analysis of
technical information on technology applicability
requires a professional remediation specialist. However,
general information is provided below for the
community planner/developer in order to support
informed interaction with the remediation professional.
Remedial alternatives fall under three categories,
institutional controls, containment technologies, and
cleanup technologies. In many cases, the final remedial
strategy will involve aspects of all three approaches.
Institutional Controls
Institutional controls are mechanisms that help control
the current and future use of, and access to, a site. They
are established, in the case of brownfields, to protect
people from possible contamination. Institutional
controls can range from a security fence prohibiting
access to certain portions of the site to deed restrictions
imposed on the future use of the facility. If the overall
management approach does not include the complete
cleanup of the facility (i.e., the complete removal or
destruction of onsite contamination), a deed restriction
will likely be required that clearly states that hazardous
waste is being left in place within the site boundaries.
Many state brownfields programs include institutional
controls.
Containment Technologies
The purpose of containment is to reduce the potential for
offsite migration of contaminants and possible
subsequent exposure to people and the environment.
Containment technologies include engineered barriers
such as caps and liners for landfills, slurry walls, and
hydraulic containment. Often, soils contaminated with
metals can be solidified by mixing them with
cement-like materials, and the resulting stabilized
material can be stored on site in a landfill. Like
institutional controls, containment technologies do not
remove the contamination, but rather mitigate potential
risk by limiting access to it.
For example, if contamination is found underneath the
floor slab at a facility, leaving the contaminated
materials in place and repairing any damage to the floor
slab may be justified. The likelihood that such an
approach will be acceptable to regulators depends on
whether potential risk can be mitigated and managed
effectively over the long term. In determining whether
containment is feasible, professionals should consider:
>- Depth to groundwater. Professionals should be
prepared to prove to regulators that groundwater
levels will not rise and contact contaminated soils.
>• Soil types. If contaminants are left in place, native
soils will be an important consideration. Sandy or
gravelly soils are highly porous, which enable
contaminants to migrate easily. Clay and fine silty
soils provide a much better barrier.
27
-------
e&tt
Evaluate Remedial Alternatives
iptte; attddSs^P&ssi&tg ^t^eMAlt^mtr
^rf(K$&^mm^Sit^
Establish Remedial Goals
Determine an appropriate and feasible remedy level
and compile preliminary list of potential contaminant
management strategies, based on:
>• Federal, state, local, or tribal requirements
>• Community surroundings
» Available tunding
> Timeframe
, V •;>': . : .
Develop List of Options
Compile list of potential remedial alternatives by:
> Conducting literature search of existing technologies
» Analyzing technical information on technology
applicability
' : . .,.•:.• }.. .-,.....•
. , . . • , !. *. . . , . . . '
Initial Screening of Options
Narrow the list of potential remedial alternatives by:
» Networking with other brownfields stakeholders
» Identifying the data needed to support evaluation of
options
»• Evaluating the options by assessing toxicity levels,
exposure pathways, risk, future land use, and
financial considerations
> Analyzing the applicability of an option to the
contamination.
* :;
Select Best Remedial Option
Select appropriate remedial option by:
> Integrating management alternatives with reuse
alternatives to identify potential constraints on
reuse, considering time schedules, cost, and risk
factors
> Balancing risk minimization with redevelopment
goals, future uses, and community needs
» Communicating information about the proposed
option to brownfields stakeholders
W'. '•':••--
' : • .'••>;:
Exhibit 5-1. Flow Chart of the Remedial Alternative Evaluation Process
28
-------
Surface -water control. Professionals should be prepared
to prove to regulators that stormwater cannot infiltrate
the floor slab and flush the contaminants downward.
>*• Volatilization of organic contaminants. Regulators
are likely to require that air monitors be placed
inside the building to monitor the level of organics
that may be escaping upward through the floor and
drains.
Cleanup Technologies
Cleanup technologies may be required to remove or
destroy onsite contamination if regulators are unwilling
to accept the levels of contamination present or if the
types of contamination are not conducive to the use of
institutional controls or containment technologies.
Cleanup technologies fall broadly into two
categories-ex situ and in situ, as described below.
>• Ex Situ. An ex situ technology treats contaminated
materials after they have been removed and
transported to another location. After treatment, if
the remaining materials, or residuals, meet cleanup
goals, they can be returned to the site. If the
residuals do not yet meet cleanup goals, they can be
subjected to further treatment, contained on site, or
moved to another location for storage or further
treatment. A cost-effective approach to cleaning up
a brownfields site may be the partial treatment of
contaminated soils or groundwater, followed by
containment, storage, or further treatment off site.
>- In Situ. In situ technologies treat contamination in
place and are often innovative technologies.
Examples of in situ technologies include
phytoremediation, bioremediation, soil flushing,
oxygen-releasing compounds, air sparging, and
treatment walls. In some cases, in situ technologies
are feasible, cost-effective choices for the types of
contamination that are likely at brownfields sites.
Planners, however, do need to be aware that cleanup
with in situ technologies is likely to take longer than
with ex situ technologies. Several innovative
technologies are available to address soils and
groundwater contaminated with organics, such as
solvents and some PAHs, which are common
problems at brownfields sites.
Maintenance requirements associated with in situ
technologies depend on the technology used and vary
widely in both effort and cost. For example,
containment technologies such as caps and liners will
require regular maintenance, such as maintaining the
vegetative cover and performing periodic inspections to
ensure the long-term integrity of the cover system.
Groundwater treatment systems will require varying
levels of post-cleanup care and verification testing. If an
in situ system is in use at the site, it will require regular
operations support and periodic maintenance to ensure
that the system is operating as designed.
Table D-l in Appendix D presents a comprehensive list
of various cleanup technologies that may be appropriate,
based on their capital and operating costs, for use at
brownfields sites. In addition to more conventional
technologies, a number of innovative technology options
are listed.
Screening and Selection of Best Remedial Option
When screening management approaches at brownfields
sites, planners and decision-makers should consider the
following:
>• Cleanup approaches can be formulated for specific
contaminant types; however, different contaminant
types are likely to be found together at brownfields
sites, and some contaminants can interfere with
certain cleanup techniques directed at other
contaminant types.
^ The large site areas typical of some brownfields can
be a great asset during cleanup because they
facilitate the use of land-based cleanup techniques
such as landfilling, landfarming, solidification, and
composting.
>- Consolidating similar contaminant materials at one
location and implementing a single, large-volume
cleanup approach is often more effective than using
several similar approaches in different areas of the
site. At iron and steel sites for example, metals
contamination from the blast furnace, the
ironmaking area, and the finishing shops can be
consolidated and cleaned up using
solidification/stabilization techniques, with the
residual placed in an appropriately designed landfill
29
-------
with an engineered cap. Professionals should
investigate the likelihood that such consolidation
may require prior regulatory approval.
5*- Some mixed contamination may require
multicomponent treatment trains for cleanup. A
cost-effective solution might be to combine
consolidation and treatment technologies with
containment where appropriate. For example, soil
washing techniques can be used to treat a mixed soil
matrix contaminated with metals compounds (which
may need further stabilization) and PAHs; the soil
can then be placed in a landfill. Any remaining
contaminated soils may be subjected to chemical
dehalogenation to destroy the polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon (PAH) contamination.
>• Groundwater contamination may contain multiple
constituents, including solvents, metals, and PAHs.
If this is the case, no in situ technologies can address
all contaminants; instead, groundwater must be
extracted and treated. The treatment train is likely
to be comprised of a chemical precipitation unit to
remove the metals compounds and an air stripper to
remove the organic contaminants.
Selection of the best remedial option results from
integrating management alternatives with reuse
alternatives to identify potential constraints on reuse.
Time schedules, cost, and risk factors must be
considered. Risk minimization is balanced against
redevelopment goals, future uses, and community needs.
The process of weighing alternatives rarely results in a
plan without compromises in one or several directions.
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan
The remedy implementation plan, as developed by a
professional environmental engineer, describes the
approach that will be used to contain and clean up
contamination. In developing this plan, planners and
decision-makers should incorporate stakeholder
concerns and consider a range of possible options, with
the intent of identifying the most cost-effective
approaches for cleaning up the site, considering time
and cost concerns. The remedy implementation plan
should include the following elements:
5s- A clear delineation of environmental concerns at the
site. Areas should be discussed separately if the
management approach for one area is different than
that for other areas of the site. Clear documentation
of existing conditions at the site and a summarized
assessment of the nature and scope of contamination
should be included.
^- A recommended management approach for each
environmental concern that takes into account
expected land reuse plans and the adequacy of the
technology selected.
>" A cost estimate that reflects both expected capital
and operating/maintenance costs.
>• Post-construction maintenance requirements for the
recommended approach.
>" A discussion of the assumptions made to support the
recommended management approach, as well as the
limitations of the approach.
Planners and decision-makers can use the framework
developed during the initial site evaluation (see the
section on "Site Assessment") and the controls and
technologies described below to compare the
effectiveness of the least costly approaches for meeting
the required management goals established in the Data
Quality Objectives. These goals should be established
at levels that are consistent with the expected reuse
plans. Exhibit 5-2 shows the remedy implementation
plan development process.
A remedy implementation plan should involve
stakeholders in the community in the development of the
plan. Some examples of various stakeholders are:
>- Industry;
>• City, county, state and federal governments;
>• Community groups, residents and leaders;
>• Developers and other private businesses;
>• Banks and lenders;
>• Environmental groups;
>• Educational institutes;
>" Community development organizations;
>" Environmental justice advocates;
>• Communities of color and low-income; and
>• Environmental regulatory agencies.
Community-based organizations represent a wide range
of issues, from environmental concerns to housing
30
-------
issues to economic development. These groups can often
be helpful in educating planners and decision-makers in
the community about local brownfields sites, which can
contribute to successful brownfields site assessment and
cleanup activities. In addition, state voluntary cleanup
programs require that local communities be adequately
informed about brownfields cleanup activities. Planners
can contact the local Chamber of Commerce, local
philanthropic organizations, local service organizations,
and neighborhood committees for community input.
Representatives from EPA regional offices and state and
local environmental groups may be able to supply
relevant information and identify other appropriate
community organizations. Involving the local
community in brownfields projects is a key component
in the success of such projects.
Remedy Implementation
Many of the management technologies that leave
contamination onsite, either in containment systems or
because of the long periods required to reach
management goals, will require long-term maintenance
and possibly operation. If waste is left onsite, regulators
will likely require long-term monitoring of applicable
media (e.g., soil, water, and/or air) to ensure that the
management approach selected is continuing to function
as planned (e.g., residual contamination, if any, remains
at acceptable levels and is not migrating). If long-term
monitoring is required (e.g., by the state) periodic
sampling, analysis, and reporting requirements will also
be involved. Planners and decision-makers should be
aware of these requirements and provide for them in
cleanup budgets. Post-construction sampling, analysis,
and reporting costs can be substantial and therefore need
to be addressed in cleanup budgets.
31
-------
Develop Remedy Implementation P1$H
Cowdinctie w^h&iM^^^l^m^ a
Review Records
Ensure compliance with applicable Federal, state, and
tribal regulatory guidelines by:
> Consulting with appropriate state, local, and tribal
regulatory agencies and including them in the
decisionmaking process as early as possible
»• Contacting the EPA regional Brownfields
coordinator to identify and determine the
availability of EPA support Programs
> Identifying all environmental requirements that
must be met
Develop Plan
Develop plan incorporating the selected remedial
alternative. Include the following considerations:
*• Schedule for completion of project
»• Available funds
* Developers, financiers, construction firms, and local
community concerns
> Procedures for community participation, such as
community advisory boards
> Contingency plans for possible discovery of
additional contaminants
1 >• Implementation of selected management option
Exhibit 5-2. Flow Chart of the Remedy Implementation Plan Development Process
32
-------
Chapter 6
Conclusion
Brownfields redevelopment contributes to the
revitalization of communities across the U.S. Reuse of
these abandoned, contaminated sites spurs economic
growth, builds community pride, protects public health,
and helps maintain our nation's "greenflelds," often at a
relatively low cost. This document provides brownfields
planners and decision-makers with an overview of the
issues likely to be encountered in brownfields
redevelopment and technical methods that can be used
to achieve successful site assessment and contaminant
management, which are two key components in the
brownfields redevelopment process.
While the general guidance provided in this document
will be applicable to many brownfields projects, it is
important to recognize that no two brownfields sites will
be identical, and planners and decision-makers will need
to base site assessment and contaminant management
activities on the conditions at their particular site. Some
of the conditions that may vary by site include: the type
of contaminants present, the geographic location and
extent of contamination, the availability of site records,
hydrogeological conditions, and state and local
regulatory requirements. Based on these factors, as well
as financial resources and desired timeframes, planners
and decision-makers will find different assessment and
contaminant management approaches appropriate.
Consultation with state and local environmental officials
and community leaders, as well as careful planning early
in the project, will assist planners and decision-makers
in developing the most appropriate site assessment and
contaminant management approaches. Planners will also
likely require the assistance of environmental engineers.
A site assessment strategy should be developed by
consensus with all stakeholders and address:
>• The type and extent of any contamination present at
the site;
^ The types of data needed to adequately assess the
site;
>• Appropriate sampling and analytical methods for
characterizing contamination; and
^- An acceptable level of data uncertainty .
When used appropriately, the process described in this
document will help to ensure that a good strategy is
developed and implemented effectively.
Once the site has been assessed and stakeholders agree
that cleanup is needed, planners, professionals and
decision-makers will need to determine a remedy option.
The guidance in this document provides a framework for
the planner to gain a general understanding of the
various remedy options. The remedy depends largely on
the type and level of contamination present, land reuse
goals, and the budget available. Certain cleanup
technologies are used onsite, while others require offsite
treatment. Also, in certain circumstances, containment
of contamination onsite and the use of institutional
controls may be important components of the cleanup
effort. Finally, planners will need to include budgetary
provisions and plans for post-cleanup and
post-construction care if it is required at the brownfields
site. By developing a technically sound site assessment
and cleanup approach that is based on site-specific
conditions and addresses the concerns of all project
stakeholders, planners and decision-makers can achieve
brownfields redevelopment and land reuse goals
effectively and safely.
33
-------
Appendix A
Acronyms
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylene ,
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
DQO Data Quality Objective
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O&M Operations and Maintenance
ORD Office of Research and Development
OS WER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
PAH Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PCP Pentachlorophenol
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SVE Soil Vapor Extraction
SVOC Semi-Volatile Organic Compound
TCE Trichloroethylene ,
TIO Technology Innovation Office
TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon
UST Underground Storage Tank
VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
34
-------
Appendix B
Glossary
Air Sparging In air sparging, air is injected into the ground
below a contaminated area, forming bubbles that rise and carry
trapped and dissolved contaminants to the surface where they
are captured by a soil vapor extraction system. Air sparging
may be a good choice of treatment technology at sites
contaminated with solvents and other volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). See also Volatile Organic Compound.
Air Stripping Air stripping is a treatment method that
removes or "strips" VOCs from contaminated groundwater or
surface water as air is forced through the water, causing the
compounds to evaporate. See also Volatile Organic
Compound.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) The
ASTM sets standards for many services, including methods of
sampling and testing of hazardous waste, and media
contaminated with hazardous waste.
Aquifer An aquifer is an underground rock formation
composed of such materials as sand, soil, or gravel that can
store groundwater and supply it to wells and springs.
Aromatics Aromatics are organic compounds that contain
6-carbon ring structures, such as creosote, toluene, and phenol,
that often are found at dry cleaning and electronic assembly
sites.
Baseline Risk Assessment A baseline risk assessment is an
assessment conducted before cleanup activities begin at a site
to identify and evaluate the threat to human health and the
environment. After cleanup has been completed, the
information obtained during a baseline risk assessment can be
used to determine whether the cleanup levels were reached.
Bedrock Bedrock is the rock that underlies the soil; it can be
permeable or non-permeable. See also Confining Layer and
Creosote.
Bioremediation Bioremediation refers to treatment processes
that use microorganisms (usually naturally occurring) such as
bacteria, yeast, or fungi to break down hazardous substances
into less toxic or nontoxic substances. Bioremediation can be
used to clean up contaminated soil and water. In situ
bioremediation treats the contaminated soil or groundwater in
the location in which it is found. For ex situ bioremediation
processes, contaminated soil must be excavated or
groundwater pumped before they can be treated.
Bioventing Bioventing is an in situ cleanup technology that
combines soil vapor extraction methods with bioremediation.
It uses vapor extraction wells that induce air flow in the
subsurface through air injection or through the use of a
vacuum. Bioventing can be effective in cleaning up releases of
petroleum products, such as gasoline, jet fuels, kerosene, and
diesel fuel. See also Bioremediation.
Borehole A borehole is a hole cut into the ground by means of
a drilling rig.
Borehole Geophysics Borehole geophysics are nuclear or
electric technologies used to identify the physical
characteristics of geologic formations that are intersected by a
borehole.
Brownfields Brownfields sites are abandoned, idled, or
under-used industrial and commercial facilities where
expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or
perceived environmental contamination.
BTEX BTEX is the term used for benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylene—volatile aromatic compounds
typically found in petroleum products, such as gasoline and
diesel fuel.
Cadmium Cadmium is a heavy metal that accumulates in the
environment. See also Heavy Metal.
Carbon Adsorption Carbon adsorption is a treatment method
that removes contaminants from groundwater or surface water
as the water is forced through tanks containing activated
carbon.
Chemical Dehalogenation Chemical dehalogenation is a
chernical process'that removes halogens (usually chlorine)
from a chemical contaminant,, rendering the contaminant less
hazardous. The chemical dehalogenation process can be
applied to common halogenated contaminants such as
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins (DDT), and certain
chlorinated pesticides, which may be present in soil and oils.
The treatment time is short, energy requirements are moderate,
and operation and maintenance costs are relatively low. This
technology can be brought to the site, eliminating the need to
transport hazardous wastes. See also Polychlorinated
Biphenyl.
Cleanup Cleanup is the term used for actions taken to deal
with a release or threat of release of a hazardous substance that
could affect humans and/or environment.
Colorimetric Colorimetric refers to chemical reaction-based
indicators that are used to produce compound reactions to
individual compounds, or classes of compounds. The
reactions, such as visible color changes or other easily noted
indications, are used to detect and quantify contaminants.
35
-------
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) CERCLIS is
a database that serves as the official inventory of Superfund
hazardous waste sites. CERCLIS also contains information
about all aspects of hazardous waste sites, from initial
discovery to deletion from the National Priorities List (NPL).
The database also maintains information about planned and
actual site activities and financial information entered by EPA
regional offices. CERCLIS records the targets and
accomplishments of the Superfund program and is used to
report that information to the EPA Administrator, Congress,
and the public. See also National Priorities List and Superfund.
Confining Layer A confining layer is a geological formation
characterized by low permeability that inhibits the flow of
water. See also Bedrock and Permeability.
Contaminant A contaminant is any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological substance or matter present in any
media at concentrations that may result in adverse effects on
air, water, or soil.
Data Quality Objective (DQO) DQOs are qualitative and
quantitative statements specified to ensure that data of known
and appropriate quality are obtained. The DQO process is a
series of planning steps, typically conducted during site
assessment and investigation, that is designed to ensure that
the type, quantity, and quality of environmental data used in
decision-making are appropriate. The DQO process involves a
logical, step-by-step procedure for determining which of the
complex issues affecting a site are the most relevant to
planning a site investigation before any data are collected.
Disposal Disposal is the final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive or other wastes; surplus or banned pesticides
or other chemicals; polluted soils; and drums containing
hazardous materials from removal actions or accidental
release. Disposal may be accomplished through the use of
approved secure landfills, surface impoundments, land
farming, deep well injection, ocean dumping, or incineration.
Dual-Phase Extraction Dual-phase extraction is a technology
that extracts contaminants simultaneously from soils in
saturated and unsaturated zones by applying soil vapor
extraction techniques to contaminants trapped in saturated
zone soils.
Electromagnetic (EM) Geophysics EM geophysics refers to
technologies used to detect spatial (lateral and vertical)
differences in subsurface electromagnetic characteristics. The
data collected provide information about subsurface
environments.
Electromagnetic (EM) Induction EM induction is a
geophysical technology used to induce a magnetic field
beneath the earth's surface, which in turn causes a secondary
magnetic field to form around nearby objects that have
conductive properties, such as ferrous and nonferrous metals.
The secondary magnetic field is then used to detect and
measure buried debris.
Emergency Removal An emergency removal is an action
initiated in response to a release of a hazardous substance that
requires on-site activity within hours of a determination that
action is appropriate.
Emerging Technology An emerging technology is an
innovative technology that currently is undergoing bench-scale
testing. During bench-scale testing, a small version of the
technology is built and tested in a laboratory. If the technology
is successful during bench-scale testing, it is demonstrated on a
small scale at field sites. If the technology is successful at the
field demonstrations, it often will be used full scale at
contaminated waste sites. The technology is continually
improved as it is used and evaluated at different sites. See also
Established Technology and Innovative Technology.
Engineered Control An engineered control, such as barriers
placed between contamination and the rest of a site, is a
method of managing environmental and health risks.
Engineered controls can be used to limit exposure pathways.
Established Technology An established technology is a
technology for which cost and performance information is
readily available. Only after a technology has been used at
many different sites and the results fully documented is that
technology considered established. The most frequently used
established technologies are incineration, solidification and
stabilization, and pump-and-treat technologies for
groundwater. See also Emerging Technology and Innovative
Technology.
Exposure Pathway An exposure pathway is the route of
contaminants from the source of contamination to potential
contact with a medium (air, soil, surface water, or
groundwater) that represents a potential threat to human health
or the environment. Determining whether exposure pathways
exist is an essential step in conducting a baseline risk
assessment. See also Baseline Risk Assessment.
Ex Situ The terni ex situ or "moved from its original place,"
means excavated or removed.
Filtration Filtration is a treatment process that removes solid
matter from water by passing the water through a porous
medium, such as sand or a manufactured filter.
Flame lonization Detector (FID) An FID is an instrument
often used in conjunction with gas chromatography to measure
the change of signal as analytes are ionized by a hydrogen-air
flame. It also is used to detect phenols, phthalates,
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), VOCs, and petroleum
hydrocarbons. See also Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons and
Volatile Organic Compounds.
36
-------
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy A Fourier transform
infrared spectroscope is an analytical air monitoring tool that
uses a laser system chemically to identify contaminants.
Fumigant A fumigant is a pesticide that is vaporized to kill
pests. They often are used in buildings and greenhouses.
Furan Furan is a colorless, volatile liquid compound used in
the synthesis of organic compounds, especially nylon.
Gas Chromatography Gas chromatography is a technology
used for investigating and assessing soil, water, and soil gas
contamination at a site. It is used for the analysis of VOCs and
semivolatile organic compounds (SVOC). The technique
identifies and quantifies organic compounds on the basis of
molecular weight, characteristic fragmentation patterns, and
retention time. Recent advances in gas chromatography
considered innovative are portable, weather-proof units that
have self-contained power supplies.
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) GPR is a technology that
emits pulses of electromagnetic energy into the ground to
measure its reflection and refraction by subsurface layers and
other features, such as buried debris.
Groundwater Groundwater is the water found beneath the
earth's surface that fills pores between such materials as sand,
soil, or gravel and that often supplies wells and springs. See
also Aquifer.
Hazardous Substance A hazardous substance is any material
that poses a threat to public health or the environment. Typical
hazardous substances are materials that are toxic, corrosive,
ignitable, explosive, or chemically reactive. If a certain
quantity of a hazardous substance, as established by EPA, is
spilled into the water or otherwise emitted into the
environment, the release must be reported. Under certain
federal legislation, the term excludes petroleum, crude oil,
natural gas, natural gas liquids, or synthetic gas usable for fuel.
Heavy Metal Heavy metal refers to a group of toxic metals
including arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, silver,
and zinc. Heavy metals often are present at industrial sites at
which operations have included battery recycling and metal
plating.
High-Frequency Electromagnetic (EM) Sounding
High-frequency EM sounding, the technology used for
non-intrusive geophysical exploration, projects high-frequency
electromagnetic radiation into subsurface layers to detect the
reflection and refraction of the radiation by various layers of
soil. Unlike ground-penetrating radar, which uses pulses, the
technology uses continuous waves of radiation. See also
Ground-Penetrating Radar.
Hydrocarbon A hydrocarbon is an organic compound
containing only hydrogen and carbon, often occurring in
petroleum, natural gas, and coal.
Hydrogeology Hydrogeology is the study of groundwater,
including its origin, occurrence, movement, and quality.
Hydrology Hydrology is the science that deals with the
properties, movement, and effects of water found on the earth's
surface, in the soil and rocks beneath the surface, and in the
atmosphere.
Ignitability Ignitable wastes can create fires under certain
conditions. Examples include liquids, such as solvents that
readily catch fire, and friction-sensitive substances.
Immunoassay Immunoassay is a technology used to measure
compound-specific reactions (generally colorimetric) to
individual compounds or classes of compounds. The reactions
are used to detect and quantify contaminants. The technology
is available in field-portable test kits.
Incineration Incineration is a treatment technology that
involves the burning of certain types of solid, liquid, or
gaseous materials under controlled conditions to destroy
hazardous waste.
Infrared Monitor An infrared monitor is a device used to
monitor the heat signature of an object, as well as to sample
air. It may be used to detect buried objects in soil.
Inorganic Compound An inorganic compound is a compound
that generally does not contain carbon atoms (although
carbonate and bicarbonate compounds are notable exceptions),
tends to be soluble in water, and tends to react on an ionic
rather than on a molecular basis. Examples of inorganic
compounds include various acids, potassium hydroxide, and
metals.
Innovative Technology An innovative technology is a process
that has been tested and used as a treatment for hazardous
waste or other contaminated materials, but lacks a long history
of full-scale use and information about its cost and how well it
works sufficient to support prediction of its performance under
a variety of operating conditions. An innovative technology is
one that is undergoing pilot-scale treatability studies that are
usually conducted in the field or the laboratory; require
installation of the technology; and provide performance, cost,
and design objectives for the technology. Innovative
technologies are being used under many Federal and state
cleanup programs to treat hazardous wastes that have been
improperly released. For example, innovative technologies are
being selected to manage contamination (primarily petroleum)
at some leaking underground storage sites. See also Emerging
Technology and Established Technology.
In Situ The term in situ, "in its original place," or "on-site",
means unexcavated and unmoved. In situ soil flushing and
natural attenuation are examples of in situ treatment methods
by which contaminated sites are treated without digging up or
removing the contaminants.
37
-------
In Situ Oxidation In situ oxidation is an innovative treatment
technology that oxidizes contaminants that are dissolved in
groundwater and converts them into insoluble compounds.
In Situ Soil Flushing In situ soil flushing is an innovative
treatment technology that floods contaminated soils beneath
the ground surface with a solution that moves the contaminants
to an area from which they can be removed. The technology
requires the drilling of injection and extraction wells on site
and reduces the need for excavation, handling, or
transportation of hazardous substances. Contaminants
considered for treatment by in situ soil flushing include heavy
metals (such as lead, copper, and zinc), aromatics, and PCBs.
See also Aromatics, Heavy Metal, and Polychlorinated
Biphenyl.
In Situ Vitrification In situ vitrification is a soil treatment
technology that stabilizes metal and other inorganic
contaminants in place at temperatures of approximately 3000-
F. Soils and sludges are fused to form a stable glass and
crystalline structure with very low leaching characteristics.
Institutional Controls An institutional control is a legal or
institutional measure which subjects a property owner to limit
activities at or access to a particular property. They are used to
ensure protection of human health and the environment, and to
expedite property reuse. Fences, posting or warning signs, and
zoning and deed restrictions are examples of institutional
controls.
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) IRIS is an
electronic database that contains EPA's latest descriptive and
quantitative regulatory information about chemical
constituents. Files on chemicals maintained in IRIS contain
information related to both non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic
health effects.
Landfarming Landfarming is the spreading and incorporation
of wastes into the soil to initiate biological treatment.
Landfill A sanitary landfill is a land disposal site for
nonhazardous solid wastes at which the waste is spread in
layers compacted to the smallest practical volume.
Laser-Induced Fluorescence/Cone Penetrometer
Laser-induced fluorescence/cone penetrometer is a field
screening method that couples a fiber optic-based chemical
sensor system to a cone penetrometer mounted on a truck. The
technology can be used for investigating and assessing soil and
water contamination.
Lead Lead is a heavy metal that is hazardous to health if
breathed or swallowed. Its use hi gasoline, paints, and
plumbing compounds has been sharply restricted or eliminated
by Federal laws and regulations. See also Heavy Metal.
Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) LUST is the
acronym for "leaking underground storage tank." See also
Underground Storage Tank.
Magnetrometry Magnetrometry is a geophysical technology
used to detect disruptions that metal objects cause in the earth's
localized magnetic field.
Mass Spectrometry Mass spectrometry is an analytical
process by which molecules are broken into fragments to
determine the concentrations and mass/charge ratio of the
fragments. Innovative mass spectroscopy units, developed
through modification of large laboratory instruments, are
sometimes portable, weatherproof units with self-contained
power supplies.
Medium A medium is a specific environment — air, water, or
soil — which is the subject of regulatory concern and activities.
Mercury Mercury is a heavy metal that can accumulate in the
environment and is highly toxic if breathed or swallowed.
Mercury is found hi thermometers, measuring devices,
pharmaceutical and agricultural chemicals, chemical
manufacturing, and electrical equipment. See also Heavy
Metal.
Mercury Vapor Analyzer A mercury vapor analyzer is an
instrument that provides real-time measurements of
concentrations of mercury hi the air.
Methane Methane is a colorless, nonpoisonous, flammable
gas created by anaerobic decomposition of organic
compounds.
Migration Pathway A migration pathway is a potential path
pr route of contaminants from the source of contamination to
contact with human populations or the environment. Migration
pathways include ah-, surface water, groundwater, and land
surface. The existence and identification of all potential
migration pathways must be considered during assessment and
characterization of a waste site.
Mixed Waste Mixed waste is low-level radioactive waste
contaminated with hazardous waste that is regulated under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Mixed
waste can be disposed only in compliance with the
requirements under RCRA that govern disposal of hazardous
waste and with the RCRA land disposal restrictions, which
require that waste be treated before it is disposed of in
appropriate landfills.
Monitoring Well A monitoring well is a well drilled at a
specific location on or off a hazardous waste site at which
groundwater can be sampled at selected depths and studied to
determine the direction of groundwater flow and the types and
quantities of contaminants present in the groundwater.
38
-------
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
NPDES is the primary permitting program under die Clean
Water Act, which regulates all discharges to surface water. It
prohibits discharge of pollutants into waters of the United
States unless EPA, a state, or a tribal government issues a
special permit to do so.
National Priorities List (NPL) The NPL is EPA's list of the
most serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites
identified for possible long-term cleanup under Superfund.
Inclusion of a site on the list is based primarily on the score the
site receives under the Hazard Ranking System (HRS). Money
from Superfund can be used for cleanup only at sites that are
on the NPL. EPA is required to update the NPL at least once a
year.
Natural Attenuation Natural attenuation is an approach to
cleanup that uses natural processes to contain the spread of
contamination from chemical spills and reduce the
concentrations and amounts of pollutants hi contaminated soil
and groundwater. Natural subsurface processes, such as
dilution, volatilization, biodegradation, adsorption, and
chemical reactions with subsurface materials, reduce
concentrations of contaminants to acceptable levels. An in situ
treatment method that leaves the contaminants in place while
those processes occur, natural attenuation is being used to
clean up petroleum contamination from leaking underground
storage tanks (LUST) across the country.
Non-Point Source The term non-point source is used to
identify sources of pollution that are diffuse and do not have a
point of origin or that are not introduced into a receiving
stream from a specific outlet. Common non-point sources are
rain water, runoff from agricultural lands, industrial sites,
parking lots, and timber operations, as well as escaping gases
from pipes and fittings.
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) O&M refers to the
activities conducted at a site, following remedial actions, to
ensure that the cleanup methods are working properly. O&M
activities are conducted to maintain the effectiveness of the
cleanup and to ensure that no new threat to human health or
the environment arises. O&M may include such activities as
groundwater and air monitoring, inspection and maintenance
of the treatment equipment remaining on site, and maintenance
of any security measures or institutional controls.
Organic Chemical or Compound An organic chemical or
compound is a substance produced by animals or plants that
contains mainly carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
Permeability Permeability is a characteristic that represents a
qualitative description of the relative ease with which rock,
soil, or sediment will transmit a fluid (liquid or gas).
Pesticide A pesticide is a substance or mixture of substances
intended to prevent or mitigate infestation by, or destroy or
repel, any pest. Pesticides can accumulate in the food chain
and/or contaminate the environment if misused.
Phenols A phenol is one of a group of organic compounds that
are byproducts of petroleum refining, tanning, and textile, dye,
and resin manufacturing. Low concentrations of phenols cause
taste and odor problems in water; higher concentrations may
be harmful to human health or the environment.
Photoionization Detector (PID) A PID is a nondestructive
detector, often used in conjunction with gas chromatography,
that measures the change of signal as analytes are ionized by
an ultraviolet lamp. The PID is also used to detect VOCs and
petroleum hydrocarbons.
Phytoremediation Phytoremediation is an innovative
treatment technology that uses plants and trees to clean up
contaminated soil and water. Plants can break down, or
degrade, organic pollutants or stabilize metal contaminants by
acting as filters or traps. Phytoremediation can be used to
clean up metals, pesticides, solvents, explosives, crude oil,
polyaromatic hydrocarbons, and landfill leachates. Its use
generally is limited to sites at which concentrations of
contaminants are relatively low and contamination is found in
shallow soils, streams, and groundwater.
Plasma High-Temperature Metals Recovery Plasma
high-temperature metals recovery is a thermal treatment
process that purges contaminants from solids and soils such as
metal fumes and organic vapors. The vapors can be burned as
fuel, and the metal fumes can be recovered and recycled. This
innovative treatment technology is used to treat contaminated
soil and groundwater.
Plume A plume is a visible or measurable emission or
discharge of a contaminant from a given point of origin into
any medium. The term also is used to refer to measurable and
potentially harmful radiation leaking from a damaged reactor.
Point Source A point source is a stationary location or fixed
facility from which pollutants are discharged or emitted; or any
single, identifiable discharge point of pollution, such as a pipe,
ditch, or smokestack.
Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) PCBs are a group of toxic,
persistent chemicals, produced by chlorination of biphenyl,
that once were used in high voltage electrical transformers
because they conducted heat well while being fire resistant and
good electrical insulators. These contaminants typically are
generated from metal degreasing, printed circuit board
cleaning, gasoline, and wood preserving processes. Further
sale or use of PCBs was banned in 1979.
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) A PAH is a chemical
compound that contains more than one fused benzene ring.
They are commonly found in petroleum fuels, coal products,
and tar.
39
-------
Pump and Treat Pump and treat is a general term used to
describe cleanup methods that involve the pumping of
groundwater to the surface for treatment. It is one of the most
common methods of treating polluted aquifers and
groundwater.
Radioactive Waste Radioactive waste is any waste that emits
energy as rays, waves, or streams of energetic particles.
Sources of such wastes include nuclear reactors, research
institutions, and hospitals.
Radionuclide A radionuclide is a radioactive element
characterized according to its atomic mass and atomic number,
which can be artificial or naturally occurring. Radionuclides
have a long life as soil or water pollutants. Radionuclides
cannot be destroyed or degraded; therefore, applicable
technologies involve separation, concentration and volume
reduction, immobilization, or vitrification. See also
Solidification and Stabilization.
Radon Radon is a colorless, naturally occurring, radioactive,
inert gaseous element formed by radioactive decay of radium
atoms. See also Radioactive Waste and Radionuclide.
Release A release is any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring,
emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, leaching, dumping,
or disposing into the environment of a hazardous or toxic
chemical or extremely hazardous substance, as defined under
RCRA. See also Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) RCRA
is a Federal law enacted in 1976 that established a regulatory
system to track hazardous substances from their generation to
their disposal. The law requires the use of safe and secure
procedures in treating, transporting, storing, and disposing of
hazardous substances. RCRA is designed to prevent the
creadon of new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Risk Communication Risk communication, the exchange of
information about health or environmental risks among risk
assessors, risk managers, the local community, news media
and interest groups, is the process of informing members of the
local community about environmental risks associated with a
site and the steps that are being taken to manage those risks.
Saturated Zone The saturated zone is the area beneath the
surface of the land in which all openings are filled with water
at greater than atmospheric pressure.
Seismic Reflection and Refraction Seismic reflection and
refraction is a technology used to examine the geophysical
features of soil and bedrock, such as debris, buried channels,
and other features.
Semi-Volatile Organic Compound (SVOC) SVOCs,
composed primarily of carbon and hydrogen atoms, have
boiling points greater than 200* C. Common SVOCs include
PCBs and phenol. See also Polychlorinated Biphenyl.
Site Assessment A site assessment is an initial environmental
investigation that is limited to a historical records search to
determine ownership of a site and to identify the kinds of
chemical processes that were carried out at the site. A site
assessment includes a site visit, but does not include any
sampling. If such an assessment identifies no significant
concerns, a site investigation is not necessary.
Site Investigation A site investigation is an investigation that
includes tests performed at the site to confirm the location and
identity environmental hazards. The assessment includes
preparation of a report that includes recommendations for
cleanup alternatives.
Sludge Sludge is a semisolid residue from air or water
treatment processes. Residues from treatment of metal wastes
and the mixture of waste and soil at the bottom of a waste
lagoon are examples of sludge, which can be a hazardous
waste.
Slurry-Phase Bioremediation Slurry-phase bio-remediation,
a treatment technology that can be used alone or in
conjunction with other biological, chemical, and physical
treatments, is a process through which organic contaminants
are converted to innocuous compounds. Slurry-phase
bioremediation can be effective in treating various
semi-volatile organic carbons (SVOCs) and nonvolatile
organic compounds, as well as fuels, creosote,
pentachlorophenols (PCP), and PCBs. See also
Polychlorinated Biphenyl and Semi-Volatile Organic Carbon.
Soil Boring Soil boring is a process by which a soil sample is
extracted from the ground for chemical, biological, and
analytical testing to determine the level of contamination
present.
Soil Gas Soil gas consists of gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between particles of the earth
and soil. Such gases can move through or leave the soil or
rock, depending on changes in pressure.
Soil Washing Soil washing is an innovative treatment
technology that uses liquids (usually water, sometimes
combined with chemical additives) and a mechanical process
to scrub soils, removes hazardous contaminants, and
concentrates the contaminants into a smaller volume. The
technology is used to treat a wide range of contaminants, such
as metals, gasoline, fuel oils, and pesticides. Soil washing is a
relatively low-cost alternative for separating waste and
minimizing volume as necessary to facilitate subsequent
treatment. It is often used in combination with other treatment
technologies. The technology can be brought to the site,
thereby eliminating the need to transport hazardous wastes.
Solidification and Stabilization Solidification and
stabilization are the processes of removing wastewater from a
waste or changing it chemically to make the waste less
40
-------
permeable and susceptible to transport by water. Solidification
and stabilization technologies can immobilize many heavy
metals, certain radionuclides, and selected organic compounds,
while decreasing the surface area and permeability of many
types of sludge, contaminated soils, and solid wastes.
Solvent A solvent is a substance, usually liquid, that is capable
of dissolving or dispersing one or more other substances.
Solvent Extraction Solvent extraction is an innovative
treatment technology that uses a solvent to separate or remove
hazardous organic contaminants from oily-type wastes, soils,
sludges, and sediments. The technology does not destroy
contaminants, but concentrates them so they can be recycled or
destroyed more easily by another technology. Solvent
extraction has been shown to be effective in treating
sediments, sludges, and soils that contain primarily organic
contaminants, such as PCBs, VOCs, halogenated organic
compounds, and petroleum wastes. Such contaminants
typically are generated from metal degreasing, printed circuit
board cleaning, gasoline, and wood preserving processes.
Solvent extraction is a transportable technology that can be
brought to the site. See also Polychlorinated Biphenyl and
Volatile Organic Compound.
Surfactant Flushing Surfactant flushing is an innovative
treatment technology used to treat contaminated groundwater.
Surfactant flushing of NAPLs increases the solubility and
mobility of the contaminants in water so that the NAPLs can
be biodegraded more easily in an aquifer or recovered for
treatment aboveground.
Surface Water Surface water is all water naturally open to the
atmosphere, such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, streams, and seas.
Superfund Superfund is the trust fund that provides for the
cleanup of significantly hazardous substances released into the
environment, regardless of fault. The Superfund was
established under Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and subsequent
amendments to CERCLA. The term Superfund is also used to
refer to cleanup programs designed and conducted under
CERCLA and its subsequent amendments.
Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA)
SARA is the 1986 act amending Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) that increased the size of the Superfund trust fund
and established a preference for the development and use of
permanent remedies, and provided new enforcement and
settlement tools.
Thermal Desorption Thermal desorption is an innovative
treatment technology that heats soils contaminated with
hazardous wastes to temperatures from 200* to 1,000* F so that
contaminants that have low boiling points will vaporize and
separate from the soil. The vaporized contaminants are then
collected for further treatment or destruction, typically by an
air emissions treatment system. The technology is most
effective at treating VOCs, SVOCs and other organic
contaminants, such as PCBs, polyaromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), and pesticides. It is effective in separating organics
from refining wastes, coal tar wastes, waste from wood
treatment, and paint wastes. It also can separate solvents,
pesticides, PCBs, dioxins, and fuel oils from contaminated
soil. See also Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon, Polychlorinated
Biphenyl, Semivolatile Organic Compound, and Volatile
Organic Compound.
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) TPH refers to a
measure of concentration or mass of petroleum hydrocarbon
constituents present in a given amount of air, soil, or water.
Toxicity Toxicity is a quantification of the degree of danger
posed by a substance to animal or plant life.
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) The
TCLP is a testing procedure used to identify the toxicity of
wastes and is the most commonly used test for determining the
degree of mobilization offered by a solidification and
stabilization process. Under this procedure, a waste is
subjected to a process designed to model the leaching effects
that would occur if the waste was disposed of in a RCRA
Subtitle D municipal landfill. See also Solidification and
Stabilization.
Toxic Substance A toxic substance is a chemical or mixture
that may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment.
Treatment Wall (also Passive Treatment Wall) A treatment
wall is a structure installed underground to treat contaminated
groundwater found at hazardous waste sites. Treatment walls,
also called passive treatment walls, are put in place by
constructing a giant trench across the flow path of
contaminated groundwater and filling the trench with one of a
variety of materials carefully selected for the ability to clean
up specific types of contaminants. As the contaminated
groundwater passes through the treatment wall, the
contaminants are trapped by the treatment wall or transformed
into harmless substances that flow out of the wall. The major
advantage of using treatment walls is that they are passive
systems that treat the contaminants in place so the property can
be put to productive use while it is being cleaned up.
Treatment walls are useful at some sites contaminated with
chlorinated solvents, metals, or radioactive contaminants.
Underground Storage Tank (UST) A UST is a tank located
entirely or partially underground that is designed to hold
gasoline or other petroleum products or chemical solutions.
Unsaturated Zone The unsaturated zone is the area between
the land surface and the uppermost aquifer (or saturated zone).
The soils in an unsaturated zone may contain air and water.
41
-------
Vadose Zone The vadose zone is the area between the surface
of the land and the aquifer water table in which the moisture
content is less than the saturation point and the pressure is less
than atmospheric. The openings (pore spaces) also typically
contain air or other gases.
Vapor Vapor is the gaseous phase of any substance that is
liquid or solid at atmospheric temperatures and pressures.
Steam is an example of a vapor.
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) A VOC is one of a
group of carbon-containing compounds that evaporate readily
at room temperature. Examples of volatile organic compounds
include trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX). These contaminants
typically are generated from metal degreasing, printed circuit
board cleaning, gasoline, and wood preserving processes.
Volatilization Volatilization is the process of transfer of a
chemical from the aqueous or liquid phase to the gas phase.
Solubility, molecular weight, and vapor pressure of the liquid
and the nature of the gas- liquid affect the rate of
volatilization.
Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) A VCP is a formal
means established by many states to facilitate assessment,
cleanup, and redevelopment of brownfields sites. VCPs
typically address the identification and cleanup of potentially
contaminated sites that are not on the National Priorities List
(NPL). Under VCPs, owners or developers of a site are
encouraged to approach the state voluntarily to work out a
process by which the site can be readied for development.
Many state VCPs provide technical assistance, liability
assurances, and funding support for such efforts.
Wastewater Wastewater is spent or used water from an
individual home, a community, a farm, or an industry that
contains dissolved or suspended matter.
Water Table A water table is the boundary between the
saturated and unsaturated zones beneath the surface of the
earth, the level of groundwater, and generally is the level to
which water will rise in a well. See also Aquifer and
Groundwater.
X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer An x-ray fluorescence
analyzer is a self-contained, field-portable instrument,
consisting of an energy dispersive x-ray source, a detector, and
a data processing system that detects and quantifies individual
metals or groups of metals.
42
-------
Appendix C
Testing Technologies
Table C-l. Non-Invasive Assessment Technologies
Applications
Strengths
Weaknesses
Typical Costs1
Infrared Thermography (IR/T)
• Locates buried USTs.
• Locates buried leaks from USTs.
• Locates buried sludge pits.
• Locates buried nuclear and nonnuclear
waste.
• Locates buried oil, gas, chemical and sewer
pipelines.
• Locates buried oil, gas, chemical and sewer
pipeline leaks.
• Locates water pipelines.
• Locates water pipeline leaks.
• Locates seepage from waste dumps.
• Locates subsurface smoldering fires in
waste dumps.
• Locates unexploded ordinance on hundreds
or thousands of acres.
• Locates buried landmines.
Able to collect data on large areas very
efficiently. (Hundreds of acres per
flight)
Able to collect data on long cross
country pipelines very efficiently
(300-500 miles per day.)
Low cost for analyzed data per acre
unit.
Able to prescreen and eliminate clean
areas from further costly testing and
unneeded rehabilitation.
Able to fuse data with other
techniques for even greater accuracy
in more situations.
Able to locate large and small leaks in
pipelines and USTs. (Ultrasonic
devices can only locate small, high
pressure leaks containing ultrasonic
noise.)
No direct contact with objects under
test is required. (Ultrasonic devices
must be in contact with buried
pipelines or USTs.)
Has confirmed anomalies to depths
greater than 38 feet with an accuracy
of better than 80%.
Tests can be performed during both
daytime and nighttime hours.
Normally no inconvenience to the
public.
• Cannot be used in rainy
conditions.
• Cannot be used to
determine depth or
thickness of anomalies.
• Cannot determine what
specific anomalies are
detected.
• Cannot be used to detect a
specific fluid or
contaminant, but all items
not native to the area will
be detected.
s Depends upon volume of
data collected and type of
targets looked for.
• Small areas <1 acre:
$1,000-$3,500.
• Large areas> 1,000 acres:
$10 - $200 per acre.
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)
• Locates buried USTs.
• Locates buried leaks from USTs.
• Locates buried sludge pits.
• Locates buried nuclear and nonnuclear
waste.
• Locates buried oil, gas, chemical and sewer
pipelines.
• Locates buried oil and chemical pipeline
leaks.
• Locates water pipelines.
• Locates water pipeline leaks.
• Locates seepage from waste dumps.
• Locates cracks in subsurface strata such as
limestone.
Can investigate depths from 1
centimeter to 100 meters+ depending
upon soil or water conditions.
Can locate small voids capable of
holding contamination wastes.
Can determine different types of
materials such as steel, fiberglass or
concrete.
Can be trailed behind a vehicle and
travel at high speeds.
Cannot be used in highly
conductive environments
such as salt water.
Cannot be used in heavy
clay soils.
Data are difficult to
interpret and require a lot
of experience.
• Depends upon volume of
datacollected and type of
targets looked for.
o Small areas <1 acre:
$3,500 - $5,000
• Large areas > 10 acres:
$2,500 - $3,500 per acre
43
-------
Electromagnetic Offset Logging (EOL)
• Locates buried hydrocarbon pipelines
• Locates buried hydrocarbon USTs.
• Locates hydrocarbon tanks.
• Locates hydrocarbon barrels.
• Locates perched hydrocarbons.
* Locates free floating hydrocarbons.
• Locates dissolved hydrocarbons.
• Locates sinker hydrocarbons.
• Locates buried well casings.
Magnetometer (MG)
• Locates buried ferrous materials such as
barrels, pipelines, USTs, and buckets.
Produces 3D images of hydrocarbon
plumes.
Data can be collected to depth of 100
meters.
Data can be collected from a single,
unlined or nonmetal lined well hole.
Data can be collected within a 100
meter radius of a single well hole.
3D images can be sliced in horizontal
and vertical planes.
DNAPLs can be imaged.
Low cost instruments can be be used
that produce results by audio signal
strengths.
High cost instruments can be used that
produce hard copy printed maps of
targets.
Depths to 3 meters. 1 acre per day
typical efficiency in data collection.
Small dead area around
well hole of approximately
8 meters.
This can be eliminated by
using 2 complementary
well holes from which to
collect data.
• Depends upon volume of
data collected and type of
targets looked for.
• Small areas < 1 acre:
$10,000-$20,000
• Large areas > 10 acres:
$5,000 - $10,000 per acre
• Non-relevant artifacts can
be confusing to data
analyzers.
• Depth limited to 3 meters.
• Depends upon volume of
data collected and type of
targets looked for.
• Small areas < 1 acre:
$2,500-$5,000
• Large areas > 10 acres:
$1,500 -$2,500 per acre
' Cost based on case study data in 1997 dollars.
44
-------
Table C-2.
Soil and Subsurface Sampling Tools
Technique/Instrumentation
Drilling Methods
Cable Tool
Casing Advancement
Direct Air Rotary with Rotary Bit
Downhole Hammer
Direct Mud Rotary
Directional Drilling
Hollow-Stem Auger
Jetting Methods
Rotary Diamond Drilling
Rotating Core
Solid Flight and Bucket
Augers
Sonic Drilling
Split and Solid Barrel
Thin-Wall Open Tube
Thin-Wall Piston/1
Specialized Thin Wall
Direct Push Methods
Cone Penetrometer
Driven Wells
Hand-Held Methods
Augers
Rotating Core
Scoop, Spoons, and Shovels
Split and Solid Barrel
Thin-Wall Open Tube
Thin-Wall Piston
Specialized Thin Wall
Tubes
Media
Soil Ground
Water
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
-
X X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Relative Cost per Sample
Mid-range expensive
Most expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Most expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Most expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Most expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Sample Quality
Soil properties will most likely be altered
Soil properties will likely be altered
Soil properties will most likely be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties will likely be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Soil properties will most likely not be altered
Most commonly used field techniques
45
-------
Table C-3. Groundwatcr Sampling Tools
Technique/Instrumentation
Contaminants'
Relative Cost per Sample
Sample Quality
Portable Groundwater Sampling Pumps
Bladder Pump
Gas-Driven Piston Pump
Gas-Driven Displacement Pumps
Gear Pump
Incrtial-Lift Pumps
Submersible Centrifugal Pumps
Submersible Helical-Rotor Pump
Suction-Lift Pumps (peristaltic)
Portable Grab Samplers
Bailers
Pneumatic Depth-Specific Samplers
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
Mid-range expensive
Most Expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Most expensive
Most expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered by
sampling
Liquid .properties will most likely not be altered by
sampling
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Portable ID Situ Groundwater Samplers/Sensors
Cone Penclrometcr Samplers
Direct Drive Samplers
Hydropuncb
Fixed In Situ Samplers
Multilevel Capsule Samplers
Multiple-Port Casings
Passive Multilayer Samplers
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Liquid properties will most likely not be altered
Bold Most commonly used field techniques
VOCs Volatile Organic Carbons
SVOCs Semivolatile Organic Carbons
PAHs Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons
Table C-4. Sample Analysis Technologies
46
-------
Media
Technique/
Instrumentation
Metals
Laser-Induced Breakdown
Spectrometry
Titrimetry Kits
Particle-Induced X-ray
Emissions
Atomic Adsorption
Spectrometry
Inductively Coupled
Plasma— Atomic Emission
Spectroscopy
Field Bioassessment
X-Ray Fluorescence
PAHs, VOCs, and SVOCs
Laser-Induced Fluorescence
(LIF)
Solid/Porous Fiber Optic
Chemical Calorimetric Kits
Flame lonization Detector
(hand-held)
Explosimeter
Photo lonization Detector
(hand-held)
Catalytic Surface Oxidation
Near IR Reflectance/Trans
Spectroscopy
Ion Mobility Spectrometer
Raman Spectroscopy/SERS
Analytes
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
PAHs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs,
PAHs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
Soil Ground Gas Relative
Water Detection
X ppb
X X ppm
X X ppm
X* X X ppb
X* X X ppb
X X
XXX ppm
X X ppm
X* X X ppm
X X ppm
X* X* X ppm
X* X* X ppm
X* X* X ppm
X* X* X ppm
X 100-1,000
ppm
X* X* X 100-1,000
ppb
X X X* ppb
Relative
Cost per
Analysis
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Most expensive
Most expensive
Most expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Application**
Usually used in
field
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
field
Laboratory and
field
Usually used in
field
Immediate, can be
used in field
Can be used in
field,
usually used in
laboratory
Immediate, can be
used in field
Immediate, can be
used in field
Immediate, can be
used in field
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Produces
Quantitative
Data
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Yes
Yes
No
Yes (limited)
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
No
No
No
No
Additional effort
required
Yes
Additional effort
required
47
-------
Infrared Spcctroscopy
Scattering/Absorption Lidar
FTIR Speclroscopy
Synchronous Luminescence/
Fluorescence
Gas Chromatography (GC)
(can be used with numerous
detectors)
UV-Visible
Spcctrophotomctry
UV Fluorescence
Ion Trap
Other
Chemical Reaction- Based
Test Papers
Immunoassay and
Calorimetric Kits
VOCs, X X
SVOCs
VOCs X* X*
VOCs X* X*
VOCs, X* X
SVOCs
VOCs, X* X
SVOCs
VOCs X* X
VOCs X X
VOCs, X* X*
SVOCs
VOCs, X X
SVOCs,
Metals
VOCs, X X
SVOCs,
Metals
X 100-1,000
Pprn
X 100-1,000
ppm
X ppm
ppb
X ppb
X ppb
X ppb
X ppb
ppm
Ppm
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Most expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Laboratory and
field
Usually used in
laboratory, can be
used in field
Usually used in
laboratory, can be
used in field
Usually used in
laboratory
Usually used in
laboratory
Laboratory and
field
Usually used in
field
Usually used in
laboratory, can be
used in field
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Yes
Additional effort
required
Additional effort
required
Yes
Yes
Additional effort
required
VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
SVOCs Scmivolatile Organic Compounds (may be present in oil and grease)
PAHs Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons
X* Indicates there must be extraction of the sample to gas or liquid phase
** Samples sent to laboratory require shipping time and usually 14 to 35 days turnaround time for analysis. Rush orders cost an additional amount per
sample.
48
-------
8.'
2 §
£ sr
2,3 %M "S
l-dll-8
*a S g «
a
I
e
CM
e
.2
o
&
11
,S o
f
49
-------
50
-------
„£,- a a'§
8 T3 O j>> ^ ^ S3
&.a SllJfl'S'S'
*fI*s^*""
•"•BSS
o 6
o ."<•>
-
on 3
1
u
1
oh "0 eo
** ^ S —
-l|U'l §
& s s ^ a •§ £
-5 e
•S-S
OD
i
51
-------
o
1
s
f>
v»
§111
•u O
1 81
§11
O B
> 'S
•a.8-a .8
H " tj a
llfJ
Q
-Si4
i
it
—
52
-------
=2
|Sj£*
-1s
0)
a.
iss
as».
CD Q. g> 0) « g "g"
O o (0 .0 v> & &
CD
o
CS4
So1*2
8 So
^oo
CLirT <
o
** 5
O «/>
o
•
"o.
'o
g>
Q.
53
-------
oSS.
o "o
" US
I
fsli
** O «> 5.
8 T-- § § E" g g,
• «- — •*=.- O is
to *- ^ S "
O> CO O T3 .E
tu 1
0. I
**fsl
TO « <» to f=
s^
*5.
co C:
II
0) Q. .
j= g, ™
ill 2
O 5TE § M? J
CO £ C C3> O.T7 CO J3
CO
CE S o>.£ 2 to
l<3il||i
D-
E »a
>..!2_
g E o
E co -
8.
J2 O
o>
O
S
I
S
6
M- O l-
o •? .o
l^co
|8|
E c E
£ .co 53
i_ D.J;
2 E c
£ o co
o o E
o
"
8
0)
I
s 2 S.-H
li!lB-||l
m •§ JB ci'-co 3 -S 2
§1
JO O — .C
« fe i «i=
1«I fc *
|Se.
= c £ o jo 5 g-S
{2 'Z^to .E is o .§•*-
CD
1 §
Q- cf.
.2" co -g
_l O <
'5.
Q.
i
i?
54
-------
€&
\ji
w S
O .2
(0 T3
5
E«o .,
„ « *
-2? fi-
^ jE fe '5 •-§
8=^1? =
y c w o 9 i «
llllll
2 8oS 5°
o>
islssis
Ipi^a
> g ffl S
< o£ «
ai
55
-------
*- — p
w .2 -fc
t 8 ft J2
tillII
—
i
8
i
&
§•
•s
a>
1
J
LL.
Jo
56
-------
S
" I
•g*S-°
"f J«
57
-------
?=! ra
.2
If •-.
ia*M«
CO
°
•-S a S i" k
S -s -i «-1
111ft
. V)
II
I 0)
sr s
li
w >.
iJa-g co^^ro-o
•— — ^*-«C±i «) in
I8|1S||S
\u —
^ nj .
II"
b"S S
'5 ~o 'o>
S S
i.£ q> o
ro „- P c
§N»«i
o cu 5 .3 E
&il§*8f
^ S'sil §
_ T3 O) UJ Q) O
••s
•a
S
s?
I
03
58
-------
111
Q) *-4-» *—
-.g .E 8 ™
eg .».* j=| m
Q£ 8 (0 E ,
=5-4=
If
= to
£•2
1^2
S"|
§ ju
S.3
— <2
le
£
J.^>
Q-
IS!
ES.
5-s
HI
o
Q.
-H CS
59
-------
Appendix E
Works Cited
A "PB" publication number in parentheses indicates that the
document is1 available from the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161,
(703-487-4650).
Site Assessment
ASTM. 1997. Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.
American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM E1527-97).
ASTM. 1996. Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Transaction Screen Process. American Society for
Testing Materials (ASTM E1528-96).
ASTM. 1995. Guide for Developing Conceptual Site Models for
Contaminated Sites. American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTME1689-95).
ASTM. 1995. Provisional Standard Guide for Accelerated Site
Characterization for Confirmed or Suspected Petroleum Releases.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM PS3-95).
Data Quality Objectives Process for Hazardous Waste Site
Investigations (EPA 2000)
Go-Environmental Solutions. N.D. http://www.
gesolutions.com/assess.htm.
Geoprobe Systems, Inc. 1998. Rental Rate Sheet. September 15.
Robbat, Albert, Jr. 1997. Dynamic Workplans and Field
Analytics: The Keys to Cost Effective Site Characterization and
Cleanup. Tufts University under Cooperative Agreement with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October.
U.S. EPA. 2000. Assessing Contractor Capabilities for
Streamlined Site Investigations (EPA/542-R-00-001)
U.S. EPA. 1999. Cost Estimating Tools and Resources for
Addressing Sites Under the Brownfields Initiative (EPA/625/R-
99-001)
U.S. EPA. 1997. Expedited Site Assessment Tools for
Underground Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for Regulators and
Consultants (EPA 510-B-97-001).
U.S. EPA. 1997. Field Analytical and Site Characterization
Technologies, Summary of Applications (EPA-542-R-97-011).
U.S. EPA. 1997. Road Map to Understanding Innovative
Technology Options for Brownfields Investigation and Cleanup.
OSWER. (PB97-144810).
U.S. EPA. 1997. The Tool Kit of Technology Information
Resources for Brownfields Sites. OSWER. (PB97-144828).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Consortium for Site Characterization
Technology: Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-012).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence (FPXRF),
Technology Verification Program: Fact Sheet (EPA
542-F-96-009a).
U.S. EPA. 1996. . Portable Gas Chromatograph/Mass
Spectrometers (GC/MS), Technology Verification Program: Fact
Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-009c).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Site Characterization Analysis Penetrometer
System (SCAPS) LIF Sensor (EPA 540-MR-95-520, EPA 540
R-95-520).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Site Characterization and Monitoring:
Bibliography of EPA Information Resources (EPJ
542-B-96-001).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Soil Screening Guidance (540/R-96/128).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Clor-N-Soil PCB Test Kit L2000 PCB/Chloride|
Analyzer (EPA 540-MR-95-518, EPA 540-R-95-518).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Contract Laboratory Program: Volatile Organicsl
Analysis of Ambient Air hi Canisters Revision VCAA01.0|
(PB95-963524).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Contract Lab Program: Draft Statement of Work]
for Quick Turnaround Analysis (PB95-963523).
U.S. EPA. 1995. .EnviroGard PCB Test Kit (EPAj
540-MR-95-517, EPA 540-R-95-517).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Field Analytical Screening Program: PCB|
Method (EPA 540-MR-95-521, EPA 540-R-95-521).
U.S. EPA. 1995. PCB Method, Field Analytical Screening I
Program (Innovative Technology Evaluation Report) (EPA |
540-R-95-521, PB96-130026); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA
540-MR-95-521).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Profile of the Iron and Steel Industry (EPA
310-R-95-005).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Rapid Optical Screen Tool (ROST™) (EPA
540-MR-95-519, EPA 540-R-95-519).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund.
http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/
Catalog/EPA540R95132.html.
U.S. EPA. 1994. Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated
Sediments (ARCS) Program (EPA 905-R-94-003).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Characterization of Chromium-Contaminated
Soils Using Field-Portable X-ray Fluorescence (PB94-210457).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Development of a Battery-Operated Portable
Synchronous Luminescence Spectrofluorometer (PB94-170032).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Engineering Forum Issue: Considerations in
Deciding to Treat Contaminated Unsaturated Soils In Situ (EPA
540-S-94-500, PB94-177771).
U.S. EPA. 1994. SITE Program: An Engineering Analysis of the
Demonstration Program (EPA 540-R-94-530).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Data Quality Objectives Process for Superfund
(EPA 540-R-93-071).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Conference on the Risk Assessment Paradigm
After 10 Years: Policy and Practice, Then, Now, and in the
Future.
http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/Catalog/EPA600R93039.html.
U.S. EPA. 1993. Guidance for Evaluating the Technical
Impracticability of Ground Water Restoration. OSWER directive
(9234.2-25).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Biodegradation Remedy Selection (EPA
540-R-93-519a, PB94-117470).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Subsurface Characterization and Monitoring
Techniques (EPA 625-R-93-003a&b).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Characterizing Heterogeneous Wastes: Methods
and Recommendations (March 26-28,1991) (PB92-216894).
60
-------
U.S. EPA. 1992. Conducting Treatability Studies Under RCRA
(OSWER Directive 9380.3-09FS, PB92-963501)
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guidance for Data Useability in Risk
Assessment (Part A) (9285.7-09A).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Final (EPA 540-R-92-071A, PB93-126787).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Soil Vapor Extraction (EPA 540-2-9 l-019a&b,
PB92-227271 & PB92-224401).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Soil Washing (EPA 540-2-91-020a&b,
PB92-170570 & PB92-170588).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Solvent Extraction (EPA 540-R-92-016a,
PB92-239581).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide to Site and Soil Description for
Hazardous Waste Site Characterization, Volume 1: Metals
(PB92-146158).
U.S. EPA. 1992. International Symposium on Field Screening
Methods for Hazardous Wastes and Toxic Chemicals (2nd),
Proceedings. Held hi Las Vegas, Nevada on February 12-14,
1991 (PB92-125764).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Sampling of Contaminated Sites
(PB92-110436).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Ground Water Issue: Characterizing Soils for
Hazardous Waste Site Assessment (PB-91-921294).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Guide for Conducting Treatability Studies
Under CERCLA: Aerobic Biodegradation Remedy Screening
(EPA 540-2-91-013a&b, PB92-109065 & PB92-109073).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Interim Guidance for Dermal Exposure
Assessment (EPA 600-8-91-011 A).
U.S. EPA. 1990. A New Approach and Methodologies for
Characterizing the Hydrogeologic Properties of Aquifers (EPA
600-2-90-002).
U.S. EPA. 1986. Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual
(EPA 540-1-86-060).
U.S. EPA. N.D. Status Report on Field Analytical Technologies
Utilization: Fact Sheet (no publication number available).
U.S.G.S. http://www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/to_order.hmtl.
Vendor Field Analytical and Characterization Technologies
System (Vendor FACTS), Version 1.0 (Vendor FACTS can be
downloaded from the Internet at www.prcemi.com/visitt or from
the CLU-IN Web site at http://clu-in.com).
The Whitman Companies. Last modified October 4,1996.
Environmental Due Diligence. http://www.whitmanco.
com/dilgnce 1 .html.
Site Cleanup
ASTM. N.D. New Standard Guide for Remediation by Natural
Attenuation at Petroleum Release Sites (ASTM E50.01).
Brownfields Redevelopment: A Guidebook for Local
Governments & Communities, International City/County
Management Association, 1997
Federal Register. September 9, 1997. www.access.
gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/acesl40.html, vol.62, no.174, p.
47495-47506.
Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable.
http://www.frtr.gov/matrix/top_page.html.
Interagency. Cost Workgroup. 1994! Historical Cost Analysis
System. Version 2.0.
Los Alamos National Laboratory. 1996. A Compendium of Cost
Data for Environmental Remediation Technologies
(LA-UR-96-2205).
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. N.D. Treatability of Hazardous
Chemicals in Soils: Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organics
(ORNL-6451).
Robbat, Albert, Jr. 1997. Dynamic Workplans and Field
Analytics: The Keys to Cost Effective Site Characterization and
Cleanup. Tufts University under Cooperative Agreement with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October.
U.S. EPA. 1999. Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning Up Metal Finishing Sites under the Brownfields
Initiative. (EPA/625/R-98/006)
U.S. EPA. 1997. Road Map to Understanding Innovative
Technology Options for Brownfields Investigation and Cleanup.
OSWER. PB97-144810).
U.S. EPA. 1997. The Tool Kit of Technology Information
Resources for Brownfields Sites. OSWER. (PB97-144828).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Bioremediation Field Evaluation: Champion
International Superfund Site, Libby, Montana (EPA
540-R-96-500).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Bibliography for Innovative Site Clean-Up
Technologies (EPA 542-B-96-003).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes: Research,
Development, and Field Evaluations (EPA 540-R-95-532,
PB96-130729).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Citizen's Guides to Understanding Innovative
Treatment Technologies (EPA 542-F-96-013):
Bioremediation (EPA 542-F-96-007, EPA 542-F-96-023) In
addition to screening levels, EPA regional offices and some states
have developed cleanup levels, known as corrective action levels;
if contaminant concentrations are above corrective action levels,
cleanup must be pursued. The section on "Performing a Phase II
Site Assessment" in this document provides more information on
screening levels, and the section on "Site Cleanup" provides more
information on corrective action levels.
Chemical Dehalogenation (EPA 542-F-96-004, EPA
542-F-96-020)
In Situ Soil Flushing (EPA 542-F-96-006, EPA 542-F-96-022)
Innovative Treatment Technologies for Contaminated Soils,
Sludges, Sediments, and Debris (EPA 542-F-96-001, EPA
542-F-96-017)
Phytoremediation (EPA 542-F-96-014, EPA 542-F-96-025)
Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging (EPA 542-F-96-008,
EPA 542-F-96-024)
Soil Washing (EPA 542-F-96-002, EPA 542-F-96-018)
Solvent Extraction (EPA 542-F-96-003, EPA 542-F-96-019)
Thermal Desorption (EPA 542-F-96-005, EPA 542-F-96-021)
Treatment Walls (EPA 542-F-96-016, EPA 542-F-96-027)
U.S. EPA. 1996. Cleaning Up the Nation's Waste Sites: Markets
and Technology Trends (1996 Edition) (EPA 542-R-96-005,
PB96-178041).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Completed North American Innovative
Technology Demonstration Projects (EPA 542-B-96-002,
PB96-153127).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Cone Penetrometer/Laser Induced Fluorescence
(LIF) Technology Verification Program: Fact Sheet (EPA
542-F-96-009b).
61
-------
U.S. EPA. 1996. EPA Directive: Initiatives to Promote
Innovative Technologies in Waste Management Programs (EPA
540-F-96-012).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Errata to Guide to EPA materials on
Underground Storage Tanks (EPA 510-F-96-002).
U.S. EPA. 1996. How to Effectively Recover Free Product at
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for State
Regulators (EPA 510-F-96-001; Fact Sheet: EPA 510-F-96-005).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual
Status Report Database (ITT Database).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Introducing TANK Racer (EPA 510-F96-001).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Market Opportunities for Innovative Site
Cleanup Technologies: Southeastern States (EPA 542-R-96-007,
PB96-199518).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Recent Developments for In situ Treatment of
Metal-Contaminated Soils (EPA 542-R-96-008, PB96-153135).
U.S. EPA. 1996. Review of Intrinsic Bioremediation of TCE in
Groundwater at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey and St. Joseph,
Michigan (EPA 600-A-95-096, PB95-252995).
U.S. EPA. 1996. State Policies Concerning the Use of Injectants
for In Situ Groundwater Remediation (EPA 542-R-96-001,
PB96-164538).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Abstracts of Remediation Case Studies (EPA
542-R-95-001, PB95-201711).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Accessing Federal Data Bases for Contaminated
Site Clean-Up Technologies, Fourth Edition (EPA 542-B-95-005,
PB96-141601).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Field Evaluation: Eielson Air
Force Base, Alaska (EPA 540-R-95-533).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Field Initiative Site Profiles:
Champion Site, Libby, MT (EPA 540-F-95-S06a)
Eielson Air Force Base, AK (EPA 540-F-95-506b)
Hill Air Force Base Superfund Site, UT (EPA 540-F-95-506c)
Public Service Company of Colorado (EPA 540-F-95-506d)
Escambia Wood Preserving Site, FL (EPA 540-F-95-506g)
Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation , MN (EPA
540-F-95-506h)
U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Final Performance Evaluation
of the Prepared Bed Land Treatment System, Champion
International Superfund Site, Libby, Montana: Volume I, Text
(EPA 600-R-95-156a); Volume II, Figures and Tables (EPA
600-R-95-156b).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation of Petroleum Hydrocarbons: A
Flexible, Variable Speed Technology (EPA 600-A-95-140,
PB96-139035).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Combined Chemical and Biological Oxidation
of Slurry Phase Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (EPA
600-A-95-065, PB95-217642).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Contaminants and Remedial Options at Selected
Metal Contaminated Sites (EPA 540-R-95-512, PB95-271961).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Development of a Photothermal Detoxification
Unit: Emerging Technology Summary (EPA 540-SR-95-526);
Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA 540-F-95-505).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Electrokinetic Soil Processing: Emerging
Technology Bulletin (EPA 540-F-95-504); ET Project Summary
(EPA 540-SR-93-515).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Emerging Abiotic In Situ Remediation
Technologies for Groundwater and Soil: Summary Report (EPA
542-S-95-001, PB95-239299).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Emerging Technology Program (EPA
540-F-95-502).
U.S. EPA. 1995. ETI: Environmental Technology Initiative
(document order form) (EPA 542-F-95-007).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Federal Publications on Alternative and
Innovative Treatment Technologies for Corrective Action and
Site Remediation, Fifth Edition (EPA 542-B-95-004,
PB96-145099).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable:
5 Years of Cooperation (EPA 542-F-95-007).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Guide to Documenting Cost and Performance
for Remediation Projects (EPA 542-B-95-002, PB95-182960).
U.S. EPA. 1995. In Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic Degradation
Process Technology, Environmental Technologies, Inc.:
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-95-510).
U.S. EPA. 1995. In Situ Vitrification Treatment: Engineering
Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-504, PB95-125499).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Intrinsic Bioattenuation for Subsurface
Restoration (book chapter) (EPA 600-A-95-112, PB95-274213).
U.S. EPA. 1995. J.R. Simplot Ex-Situ Bioremediation
Technology for Treatment of TNT-Contaminated Soils:
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-95-529);
Site Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-95-529a).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Lessons Learned About In Situ Air Sparging at
the Denison Avenue Site, Cleveland, Ohio (Project Report),
Assessing UST Corrective Action Technologies (EPA
600-R-95-040, PB95-188082).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Microbial Activity in Subsurface Samples
Before and During Nitrate-Enhanced Bioremediation (EPA
600-A-95-109, PB95-274239).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Musts for USTS: A Summary of the Regulations
for Underground Tank Systems (EPA 510-K-95-002).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Natural Attenuation of Trichloroethene at the
St. Joseph, Michigan, Superfund Site (EPA 600-SV-95-001).
U.S. EPA. 1995. New York State Multi-Vendor Bioremediation:
Ex-Situ Biovault, ENSR Consulting and Engineering/Larson
Engineers: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-95-525).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Process for the Treatment of Volatile Organic
Carbon and Heavy-Metal-Contaminated Soil, International
Technology Corp.: Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA
540-F-95-509).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Progress in Reducing Impediments to the Use of
Innovative Remediation Technology (EPA 542-F-95-008,
PB95-262556).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Handbook
(PB95-963307-ND2).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Handbook
Fact Sheet (PB95-963312-NDZ).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Bioremediation
(EPA 542-R-95-002, PB95-182911).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Fact Sheet and
Order Form (EPA 542-F-95-003); Four Document Set
(PB95-182903).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Groundwater
Treatment (EPA 542-R-95-003, PB95-182929).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Soil Vapor
Extraction (EPA 542-R-95-004, PB95-182937).
62
-------
[U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Thermal Desoiption,
I Soil Washing, and In Situ Vitrification (EPA 542-R-95-005,
IPB95-182945).
lu.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Technologies Screening Matrix
I and Reference Guide, Second Edition (PB95-104782; Fact Sheet:
EPA 542-F-9S-002). Federal Remediation Technology
Roundtable. Also see Internet:
http://www.frtr.gov/matrix/top-page.html.
U.S. EPA. 1995. Removal of PCBs from Contaminated Soil
Using the Cf Systems (trade name) Solvent Extraction Process: A
I Treatability Study (EPA 540-R-95-505, PB95-199030); Project
Summary (EPA 540-SR-95-505).
(U.S. EPA. 1995. Review of Mathematical Modeling for
i Evaluating Soil Vapor Extraction Systems (EPA 540-R-95-513,
PB95-243051).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Selected Alternative and Innovative Treatment
Technologies for Corrective Action and Site Remediation: A
Bibliography of EPA Information Resources (EPA
542-B-95-001).
U.S. EPA. 1995. SITE Emerging Technology Program (EPA
540-F-95-502).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Enhancement
Technology Resource Guide Ah- Sparging, Bioventing,
Fracturing, Thermal Enhancements (EPA 542-B-95-003).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Soil Vapor Extraction Implementation
Experiences (OSWER Publication 9200.5-223FS, EPA
540-F-95-030, PB95-963315).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Surfactant Injection for Ground Water
Remediation: State Regulators' Perspectives and Experiences
(EPA 542-R-95-011, PB96-164546).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Symposium on Bioremediation of Hazardous
Wastes: Research, Development, and Field Evaluations,
Abstracts: Rye Town Hilton, Rye Brook, New York, August
8-10, 1995 (EPA 600-R-95-078).
U.S. EPA. 1993-1995. Technology Resource Guides:.
Bioremediation Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-93-004)
Groundwater Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA
542-B-94-009, PB95-138657)
Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA
542-B-94-008, PB95-138665)
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Enhancement Technology Resource
Guide: Air Sparging, Bioventing, Fracturing, and Thermal
Enhancements (EPA 542-B-95-003)
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Treatment Technology Resource
Guide (EPA 542-B-94-007)
U.S. EPA. 1995. Waste Vitrification Through Electric Melting,
Ferro Corporation: Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA
540-F-95-503).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Accessing EPA's Environmental Technology
Programs (EPA 542-F-94-005).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Bioremediation: A Video Primer (video) (EPA
510-V-94-001).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Bioremediation in the Field Search System
(EPA 540-F-95-507; Fact Sheet: EPA 540-F-94-506).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Contaminants and Remedial Options at
Solvent-Contaminated Sites (EPA 600-R-94-203, PB95-177200).
U.S. EPA. 1990-1994. EPA Engineering Bulletins:.
Chemical Dehalogenation Treatment: APEG Treatment (EPA
540-2-90-015, PB91-228031)
Chemical Oxidation Treatment (EPA 540-2-91-025)
In Situ Biodegradation Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-502,
PB94-190469)
In Situ Soil Flushing (EPA 540-2-91-021)
In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment (EPA 540-2-91-006,
PB91-228072)
In Situ Steam Extraction Treatment (EPA 540-2-91-005,
PB91-228064)
In Situ Vitrification Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-504,
PB95-125499)
Mobile/Transportable Incineration Treatment (EPA
540-2-90-014)
Pyrolysis Treatment (EPA 540-S-92-010)
Rotating Biological Contactors (EPA 540-S-92-007)
Slurry Biodegradation (EPA 540-2-90-016, PB91-228049)
Soil Washing Treatment (EPA 540-2-90-017, PB91-228056)
Solidification/Stabilization of Organics and Inorganics (EPA
540-S-92-015)
Solvent Extraction Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-503,
PB94-190477)
Supercritical Water Oxidation (EPA 540-S-92-006)
Technology Preselectipn Data Requirements (EPA
540-S-92-009)
Thermal Desorption Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-501,
PB94-160603)
U.S. EPA. 1994. Field Investigation of Effectiveness of Soil
Vapor Extraction Technology (Final Project Report) (EPA
600-R-94-142, PB94-205531).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Ground Water Treatment Technologies
Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-009, PB95-138657).
U.S. EPA. 1994. How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup
Technologies for Underground Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for
Corrective Action Plan Reviewers (EPA 510-B-94-003, S/N
055-000-00499-4); Pamphlet (EPA 510-F-95-003).
U.S. EPA. 1994. In Situ Steam Enhanced Recovery Process,
Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc.: Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-94-510, PB95-271854); Site
Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-5 lOa, PB95-270476).
U.S. EPA. 1994. In Situ Vitrification, Geosafe Corporation:
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-94-520,
PB95-213245); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-94-520).
U.S. EPA. 1994. J.R Simplot Ex-Situ Bioremediation
Technology for Treatment of Dinoseb-Contaminated Soils:
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-94-508);
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-94-508).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Literature Review Summary of Metals
Extraction Processes Used to Remove Lead From Soils, Project
Summary (EPA 600-SR-94-006).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Northeast Remediation Marketplace: Business
Opportunities for Innovative Technologies (Summary
Proceedings) (EPA 542-R-94-001, PB94-154770).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology
Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-008, PB95-138665).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Profile of Innovative Technologies and Vendors
for Waste Site Remediation (EPA 542-R-94-002, PB95-138418).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Radio Frequency Heating, KAI Technologies,
Inc.: Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA
540-R-94-528); Site Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-528a,
PB95-249454).
63
-------
U.S. EPA. 1994. Regional Market Opportunities for Innovative
Site Clean-up Technologies: Middle Atlantic States (EPA
542-R-95-010, PB96-121637).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Rocky Mountain Remediation Marketplace:
Business Opportunities for Innovative Technologies (Summary
Proceedings) (EPA 542-R-94-006, PB95-173738).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Selected EPA Products and Assistance On
Alternative Cleanup Technologies (Includes Remediation
Guidance Documents Produced By The Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources) (EPA 510-E-94-001).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment Technology
Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-007).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Solid Oxygen Source for Bioremediation
Subsurface Soils (revised) (EPA 600-J-94-495, PB95-155149).
U.S. EPA, 1994. Solvent Extraction: Engineering Bulletin (EPA
540-S-94-503, PB94-190477).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Solvent Extraction Treatment System,
Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (EPA 540-MR-94-521).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Status Reports on In Situ Treatment Technology
Demonstration and Applications:.
Altering Chemical Conditions (EPA 542-K-94-008)
Cosolvents (EPA 542-K-94-006)
Electrokinetics (EPA 542-K-94-007)
Hydraulic and Pneumatic Fracturing (EPA 542-K-94-005)
Surfactant Enhancements (EPA 542-K-94-003)
Thermal Enhancements (EPA 542-K-94-009)
Treatment Walls (EPA 542-K-94-004)
U.S. EPA. 1994. Subsurface Volatization and Ventilation System
(SWS): Innovative Technology Report (EPA 540-R-94-529,
PB96-116488); Site Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-529a,
PB95-2S6111).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
(SITE) Program: Technology Profiles, Seventh Edition (EPA
540-R-94-526, PB95-183919).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption System, Maxymillian
Technologies, Inc.: Site Technology Capsule (EPA
540-R94-507a, PB95-122800).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption Treatment: Engineering
Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-501, PB94-160603).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption Unit, Eco Logic
International, Inc.: Application Analysis Report (EPA
540-AR-94-504).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Enhancements: Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA 542-K-94-009).
U.S. EPA, 1994. The Use of Cationic Surfactants to Modify
Aquifer Materials to Reduce the Mobility of Hydrophobic
Organic Compounds (EPA 600-S-94-002, PB95-111951).
U.S. EPA. 1994. West Coast Remediation Marketplace: Business
Opportunities for Innovative Technologies (Summary
Proceedings) (EPA 542-R-94-008, PB95-143319).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Accutech Pneumatic Fracturing Extraction and
Hot Gas Injection, Phase I: Technology Evaluation Report (EPA
540-R-93-509, PB93-216596).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Augmented In Situ Subsurface Bioremediation
Process, Bio-Rem, Inc.: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA
540-MR-93-527).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Biogenesis Soil Washing Technology:
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-510).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Bioremediation Resource Guide and Matrbl
(EPA 542-B-93-004, PB94-112307).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Bioremediation: Using the Land Treatment
Concept (EPA 600-R-93-164, PB94-107927).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Fungal Treatment Technology: Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-514).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction Process,
Logic International Inc. (EPA 540-R-93-522, PB95-100251, EPA|
540-MR-93-522).
U.S. EPA. 1993. HRUBOUT, Hrubetz Environmental Services: |
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-524).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Hydraulic Fracturing of Contaminated Soil, I
U.S. EPA: Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA I
540-R-93-505, PB94-100161); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA]
540-MR-93-505).
U.S. EPA. 1993. HYPERVENTILATE: A software Guidance]
System Created for Vapor Extraction Systems for Apple
Macintosh and IBM PC-Compatible Computers (UST #107)I
(EPA 510-F-93-001); User's Manual (Macintosh disk included)
(UST #102) (EPA 500-CB-92-001).
U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Ground
Water (EPA 540-S-92-003, PB92-224336).
U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated
Unsaturated Subsurface Soils (EPA-S-93-501, PB93-234565).
U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of Ground Water and
Geological Material: A Review of Technologies (EPA
600-SR-93-124, PB93-215564).
U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Treatments of Contaminated
Groundwater: An Inventory of Research and Field
Demonstrations and Strategies for Improving Groundwater
Remediation Technologies (EPA 500-K-93-001, PB93-193720).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Laboratory Story on the Use of Hot Water to
Recover Light Oily Wastes from Sands (EPA 600-R-93-021,
PB93-167906).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Low Temperature Thermal Aeration (LTTA)
System, Smith Environmental Technologies Corp.: Applications
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-93-504); Site Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA 540rMR-93-504).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Mission Statement: Federal Remediation
Technologies Roundtable (EPA 542-F-93-006).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Mobile Volume Reduction Unit, U.S. EPA:
Applications Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-93-508,
PB94-130275).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Overview of UST Remediation Options (EPA
510-F-93-029).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Soil Recycling Treatment, Toronto Harbour
Commissioners (EPA 540-AR-93-517, PB94-124674).
U.S. EPA. 1993. Synopses of Federal Demonstrations of
Innovative Site Remediation Technologies, Third Edition (EPA
542-B-93-009, PB94-144565).
U.S. EPA. 1993. XTRAX Model 200 Thermal Desorption
System, OHM Remediation Services Corp.: Site Demonstration
Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-502).
U.S. EPA- 1992. Aostra Soil-tech Anaerobic Thermal Process,
Soiltech ATP Systems: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA
540-MR-92-008).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Basic Extractive Sludge Treatment (B.E.S.T.)
Solvent Extraction System, Ionics/Resources Conservation Co.:
64
-------
Lpplications Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-079,
IB94-105434); Demonstration Summary (EPA 540-SR-92-079).
JT.S. EPA. 1992. Bioremediation Case Studies: An Analysis of
Vendor Supplied Data (EPA 600-R-92-043, PB92-232339).U.S.
3 A. 1992. Bioremediation Field Initiative (EPA 540-F-92-012
J.S. EPA. 1990. Enhanced Bioremediation Utilizing Hydrogen
teroxide as a Supplemental Source of Oxygen: A Laboratory and
field Study (EPA 600-2-90-006, PB90-183435).
J.S. EPA. 1990. Guide to Selecting Superfund Remedial Actions
|9355.0-27FS).
J.S. EPA. 1990. Slurry Biodegradation: Engineering Bulletin
iPA 540-2-90-016, PB91-228049).
J.S. EPA. 1990. Soil Washing Treatment: Engineering Bulletin
iPA 540-2-90-017, PB91-228056).
J.S. EPA. 1989. Facilitated Transport (EPA 540-4-89-003,
JB91-133256).
J.S. EPA. 1989. Guide on Remedial Actions for Contaminated
Jround Water (9283.1-02FS).
J.S. EPA. 1987. Compendium of Costs of Remedial
Technologies at Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA 600-2-87-087).
J.S. EPA. 1987. Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response
[Activities: Development Process (9355.0-07B)
[U.S. EPA. 1986. Costs of Remedial Actions at Uncontrolled
Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA/640/2-86/037).
I U.S. EPA. N.D. Alternative Treatment Technology Information
Center (ATTIC) (The ATTIC data base can be accessed by
modem at (703) 908-2138).
U.S. EPA. N.D. Clean Up Information (CLU-IN) Bulletin Board
System. (CLU-IN can be accessed by modem at (301) 589-8366
or by the Internet at http://clu-in.com).
U.S. EPA. N.D. Initiatives to Promote Innovative Technology in
Waste Management Programs (OSWER Directive 9308.0-25).
U.S. EPA and University of Pittsburgh. N.D. Ground Water
Remediation Technologies Analysis Center. Internet address:
http://www.gwrtac.org
Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment
Technologies (VISITT), Version 4.0 (VISITT can be
downloaded from the Internet at http://WAyw.prcemi.com/visitt or
from the CLU-IN Web site at http://clu-in.c
U.S. EPA. 1992. Carver Greenfield, Process, Dehydrotech
Corporation: Applications Analysis Report (EPA
540-AR-92-002, PB93-101152); Demonstration Summary (EPA
540-SR-92-002).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Chemical Enhancements to Pump-and-Treat
Remediation (EPA 540-S-92-001, PB92-180074).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Cyclone Furnace Vitrification Technology,
Babcock and Wilcox: Applications Analysis Report (EPA
540-AR-92-017, PB93-122315).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Evaluation of Soil Venting Application (EPA
540-S-92-004, PB92-235605).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Excavation Techniques and Foam Suppression
Methods, McColl Superfund Site, U.S. EPA: Applications
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-015, PB93-100121).
U.S. EPA. 1992. In Situ Biodegradation Treatment: Engineering
Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-502, PB94-190469).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Low Temperature Thermal Treatment System,
Roy F. Weston, Inc.: Applications Analysis Report (EPA
540-AR-92-019, PB94-124047).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Proceedings of the Symposium on Soil Venting
(EPA 600-R-92-174, PB93-122323).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Soil/Sediment Washing System, Bergman USA:
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-92-075).
U.S. EPA. 1992. TCE Removal From Contaminated Soil and
Groundwater (EPA 540-S-92-002, PB92-224104).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Technology Alternatives for the Remediation of
PCB-Contaminated Soil and Sediment (EPA 540-S-93-50'6).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Workshop on Removal, Recovery, Treatment,
and Disposal of Arsenic and Mercury (EPA 600-R-92-105,
PB92-216944).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Biological Remediation of Contaminated
Sediments, With Special Emphasis on the Great Lakes: Report of
a Workshop (EPA 600-9-91-001).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Debris Washing System, RREL. Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA 540-5-91-006, PB91-231456).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Guide to Discharging CERCLA Aqueous
Wastes to Publicly Owned Treatment Works (9330.2-13FS).
U.S. EPA. 1991. In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction: Engineering
Bulletin (EPA 540-2-91-006, PB91-228072).
U.S. EPA. 1991. In Situ Steam Extraction: Engineering Bulletin
(EPA 540-2-91-005, PB91-228064).
U.S. EPA. 1991. hi Situ Vapor Extraction and Steam Vacuum
Stripping, AWD Technologies (EPA 540-A5-91-002,
PB92-218379).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Pilot-Scale Demonstration of Slurry-Phase
Biological Reactor for Creosote-Contaminated Soil (EPA
540-A5-91-009, PB94-124039
U.S. EPA. 1991. Slurry Biodegradation, International
Technology Corporation (EPA 540-MR-91-009).
U.S. EPA. 1991. Understanding Bioremediation: A Guidebook
for Citizens (EPA 540-2-91-002, PB93-205870).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Anaerobic Biotransformation of Contaminants
in the Subsurface (EPA 600-M-90-024, PB91-240549).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Chemical Dehalogenation Treatment, APEG
Treatment: Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-2-.90-015,
PB91-228031).
65
-------
-------
-------
©EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
National Risk Management
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
Please make all necessary changes on the below label,
detach or copy, and return to the address in the upper
left-hand comer.
If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HERED;
detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the
upper left-hand comer.
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAIDl
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/625/R-00/009
November 2001
------- |