&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Technical Approaches to
Characterizing and Cleaning up
Brownfields Sites:
Railroad Yards
Site Profile
-------
EPA/625/R-02/007
July 2002
Technical Approaches to
Characterizing and Cleaning up
Brownfields Sites:
Railroad Yards
Site Profile
7/15/02
Technology Transfer and Support Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
-------
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 Agencys 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.
Reviewers included Jan Brodmerkl of the USAGE in Wilmington, NC, Margaret Aycock of the
Gulf Coast Hazardous Substance Research Center at Lamar University in Beaumont Texas,
Alison Benjamin of Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, Detroit, Michigan, and from the
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO).
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. Railroad Yard Brownfields 4
Railyard Activities 4
Contaminants Found at Railyards 5
Railyard Site Remediation 5
Chapter 3. Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence 7
Background Information 7
Role of EPA and State Government 8
Performing A Phase I Site Assessment 9
Due Diligence 14
Conclusion 17
Chapter 4. Phase II Site Investigation 19
Background 19
Setting Data Quality Objectives 21
Establish Screening Levels 21
Conduct Environmental Sampling and Data Analysis 22
Chapter 5. Contaminant Management 25
Background 25
Evaluate Remedial Alternatives 26
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan 26
Remedy Implementation 28
Chapter 6. Conclusion 30
Appendix A. Acronyms 31
Appendix B. Glossary 33
Appendix C. Testing Technologies 45
Appendix D. Cleanup Technologies 51
Appendix E. Works Cited 71
-------
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 prevent, 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. 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.
The EPA has a website where information on
brownfields redevelopment can be found. The
address is www. epa.gov/brownfields.
Purpose
EPA has developed a set of technical guides,
including this document, to assist communities,
states, municipalities, and the private sector to
better address brownfields sites. Currently, six
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-9 8/007,
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.
^" Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Cleaning up Brownfields Sites, EPA/625/R-
00/009, December 2000.
^" Technical Approaches to Characterization
and Cleanup of Automotive Recycling
Brownfields, EPA/625/R-02/001, January
2001.
^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and
Redeveloping Brownfields: Municipal
Landfills and Illegal Dumps, EPA/625/R-
02/002, January 2002.
These guides are comprehensive documents that
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).
EPA developed a general guide (listed above) to
provide decision makers with a better
understanding of the common technical issues
involved in assessing and cleaning up brownfields
sites. This industry specific profile supplements
that general guide.
-------
Select Brownfield Site
1
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 Chapter 3
Y
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
1 Chapter 4
T
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
I Chapter 5
1
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan
Coordinate with stakeholders to design a remedy implementation plan
• Chapter 5
Y
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
• Chapter 5
T
Begin Redevelopment Activities
Exhibit 1-1. Flow Chart of the Brownfields Redevelopment Process
-------
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's
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.
Organization of this Document
This document is organized as follows:
^" Chapter 2 - Railroad Yard Brownfields
^" Chapter 3 - Phase I Site Assessment and
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
-------
Chapter 2
Railroad Yard Brownfields
On February 28, 1827, the State of Maryland
chartered the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad.
This was the beginning of the nation's rail system.
Since then, the railroad industry has laid over
300,000 miles of railroad track, connecting almost
every locale, rural or urban, throughout the United
States. When railroad lines meet industrial areas,
railroad yards result. Railroad yards are areas
where railcars and locomotives are maintained,
stored, and coupled to form trains. Rail yards are
in effect the "garage" of rail lines, a central
location in a region where railroad companies can
work on their rolling stock and dispatch trains to
locations around the country. Almost any large
town or city, especially ones with industry, are
likely to have a rail yard of some size. The
smallest ones can be as simple as track sidings
where rail cars can be stored until needed, while
the largest ones can be in the hundreds of acres.
(EPA 1997).
Today, railroads are experiencing a decline, as
trucks out-compete railroads for freight traffic. As
a result, more and more rail yards are laying
unused or closed. These rail yards many times
qualify as "brownfields".
This section discusses railroad yards, the typical
types of contaminants that can be found at a site,
and possible remediation strategies.
Railyard Activities
A wide variety of activities take place at a railroad
yard that can result in environmental problems.
These activities can be broken down into roughly
four areas (EPA August, 1999). These areas are:
>- Locomotive maintenance
>- Railcar refurbishing and maintenance
>- Track maintenance
>- Transportation operations
Locomotive Maintenance
There are numerous activities associated with
locomotive maintenance that can result in
environmental problems. Activities that may
have contributed contaminants to the area in
the past are: changing oil and oil filters,
painting and paint stripping, hydraulic system
repair, locomotive coolant disposal, metal
machining, used battery disposal and general
cleaning of engine parts and the locomotive
car (EPA 1997). Asbestos can be present
from the insulation around the boilers of
steam locomotives, old structures, or from old
brake shoes that were not properly disposed
of. Brake repair, large- and small-scale
equipment cleaning, and metal machining can
be part of maintenance. Each of these
activities can contribute to environmental
problems.
Railcar Refurbishing and Maintenance
Railcar refurbishing and maintenance consist
of cleaning the interiors and exteriors of the
railcars, stripping and painting the railcars,
and other maintenance such as brake and
wheel set repair (EPA 1997). Environmental
problems can result from all these activities.
In addition, anything that the railcars carry or
pass over (i.e., creosote) may wash off and
contaminate the surrounding soil or water.
Refurbishing railcars entails the removal of
old paint and the application of new paint.
Both of these activities can result in soil or
water contamination. The paint removal
process can result in paint chips and grit.
These chips and grit can cause soil or water
contamination. When the new paint is applied
there is also the chance that some of the new
paint could end up in the surrounding soil or
water. Exhibit 2-1 lists the processes, material
-------
inputs and wastes associated with railcar
refurbishing and maintenance.
Track Maintenance
Environmental problems from track
maintenance can result from two areas. First,
the wood ties are treated with a wood
preserver such as creosote, which can leach
into the soil and groundwater. Second, the
gravel and stone mixtures upon which the
tracks are built usually contain heavy metals.
These heavy metals tend to be from the stone
mixture or "slag", which is often the residual
left over from copper mining. These can also
leach into surrounding soil and groundwater
(EPA 1999).
Transportation Operations
Transportation operations can create
environmental problems from three areas:
fueling, hazardous material transport, and oil
and coolant release during transport (EPA
1997). With fuel operations there can be
spillage or fuel leakages. It is also important
to determine if the fuel storage tanks and
piping were above ground or below ground If
the tanks and piping were below ground there
could be an increased chance of groundwater
contamination.
Associated Industrial Activities
Other industries, such as tank car cleaning,
have frequently grown up around the rail
industry. There may be contamination from
these kinds of activities. Also, while
hazardous wastes from the site are usually
drummed and shipped off site, there may be
unidentified waste-containing drums left at the
site. Therefore, the areas and buildings
surrounding the railyard may need to be
considered.
Contaminants Found at Railyards
Various types of contaminants can result from the
railroad yard operations described above. Each
contaminant is a risk to both soil and groundwater
quality.
Contaminants resulting from locomotive and
engine maintenance are degreasing solvents,
PCBS (poly-chlorinated biphenyls), and heavy
metals. Solvents and heavy metal-based paints
can be found in the area surrounding railcar
refurbishing and maintenance operations. Further
environmental problems can result from creosote
and Pentachlorophenol (PCP) from the rail ties.
The "slag" base for the railroad ties can contribute
to heavy-metal contamination. Finally,
contamination from the transportation operations
can be from diesel fuel associated with fueling as
well as possible contamination from spillage or
leakage of hazardous cargo during transport.
Typical Contaminants Found at
a Railroad Yard
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
• waste acids and alkalies
paints contaminated with
heavy metals
VOCs
BTEX
• Solvents and paint thinners
Fuels
• Oil and grease
Lead
PCBs
• used coolants
"Guide to Contaminants Found at Typical
Brownfields Sites, Appendix A." Undated.
http://clu-
in.org/PRODUCTS/ROADMAP/appenda.htm.
Exhibit 2-1. Typical Railyard Contaminants
Railyard Site Remediation
-------
Remediation of railyards depends, as with any
other brownfield, on the contaminants present,
their concentration, and the media they are
affecting (soil or water). In addition, selecting a
remediation strategy also involves an in-depth
analysis of the costs associated with development.
For ease of discussion, we will group the
remediation strategies by media to be treated.
Soil Remediation
There are two major classes of soil remediation;
ex situ, where soil is removed off site for
treatment, and in situ, where soil is treated on site.
For the most part, any technique that is performed
on site can be performed off site, and vice-versa.
Some soil treatment techniques include:
»• Bioremediation
This remediation strategy involves using
microorganisms such as bacteria, yeast, or
fungi to break down hazardous substances to
less-toxic or non-toxic substances.
»• Phytoremediation
For sites where it is appropriate,
phytoremediation may be used both to remove
contaminants and to establish greater
confidence on the part of the community.
*• Thermal Desorption
Thermal desorption is a remediation technique
that can be performed on contaminated soils,
both in-situ and ex-situ. In this process, soils
are heated to temperatures up to 1000°F to
break down and destroy contaminants. The
volatilized contaminants are then collected
and treated by a registered waste disposal
facility. This treatment technology works best
on compounds with high VOCs and PAHs.
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)
In this remediation technique the soil is usually
excavated and moved ex-situ, but it can sometimes
be treated in-situ. The method involves exerting a
vacuum through the soil formation to extract
vapors. It is especially valuable for treating soils
with high levels of VOCs and SVOCs.
Groundwater Remediation
*• Treatment Walls
This passive remediation strategy is very
popular at sites where the hazard is not acute
(thus not warranting more expensive methods)
but where groundwater contamination needs
to be contained. Construction involves
excavating a trench perpendicular to the
direction of groundwater flow and installing a
wall made of a material with the ability to
absorb contaminants while letting water flow
through naturally. This strategy is only for
contaminated groundwater.
*• Groundwater Extraction/Injection
This method of treating contaminated
groundwater involves drilling numerous wells
into and around contaminated groundwater.
Once completed, the wells can extract
contaminated water for treatment. Treated
water is then reinjected into the aquifer. This
method of treatment can take years to work,
depending on the size of the aquifer, because
groundwater withdrawal/injection rates must
be monitored closely so as not to cause ground
subsidence or other hydrogeological
problems. This technique can be used to treat
most groundwater problems, including heavy
metal and VOC contamination.
Each site will have a unique set of contaminants
and those contaminants will be present in unique
concentrations. Successful remediation depends
on the ability of the developers to create unique
treatment plans for that site, while observing any
economic constraints.
-------
Chapter 3
Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence
Background Information
This portion of the guide is more general and is
put here in case a user does not have the general
document. Each portion of the information is
relevant to railroad yards, and should be
considered in their redevelopment.
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;
*• Likely pathways through which the
contaminants may move; and
*• Potential risks to the environment and human
health that exist along the migration pathways.
Perform Phase I
Site Assessment
and Due Diligence
Perform
Phase II Site
Investigation
Evaluate
Remedial
Options
Develop
Remedy
Implementation
Plan
Remedy
Implementation
Due diligence typically identifies:
*• Potential legal and regulatory requirements
and risks;
»• Preliminary cost estimates for property
purchase, engineering, taxation and risk
management; and
»• Market viability of redevelopment proj ect.
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.
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.
>- 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 their 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 potential
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 investigation should include:1
>- A review of readily available records, such as
former site use, building plans, records of any
prior contamination events;
>- A site visit to observe the areas used for
various industrial processes and the condition
of the property;
The elements of a site assessment presented here
are based in part on ASTM Standards 1527 and 1528.
>- Interviews with knowledgeable people, such
as site owners, operators, and occupants;
neighbors; local government officials; and
^" 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.
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
potential 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 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).
>- 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.
>- 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.
>- Local fire departments may have responded to
emergency events at the facility. Fire
departments or city halls may have fire
insurance maps2 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
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.
10
-------
(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
Off site 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 soil, groundwater, and air,
depend on site-specific characteristics such as
geology and the physical characteristics 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 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 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
rhttp://www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/to order.hmtl]
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
11
-------
such as in a site assessment, site-specific
information will be needed in the event that
cleanup is necessary.
Groundwater Data. Planners 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. Planners 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).
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, planners 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,
planners 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, planners should identify any nearby
waterways or aquifers that may be impacted
by groundwater discharge of contaminated
water, including any drinking water wells
12
-------
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. Planners 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 site 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.
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 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, planners
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,
13
-------
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, 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 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
14
-------
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 II 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 time frame 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: "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
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, 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
edevelopment are available in Lessons from the
Field, Unlocking Economic Potential with an
15
-------
Conduct Due Diligence
Minimize the Legal and Financial Risk of a
Brownfields Project
Market Analysis
Determine the market viability of the project by:
* 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
-------
Environmental Key, by Edith Ferrer, 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 time 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
deductibility 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.
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
17
-------
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.
18
-------
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:
^" Types of contamination present;
>- Cleanup and reuse goals;
^" Length of time required to reach cleanup
goals;
>- Post-treatment care needed; and
>• Costs.
A site investigation involves setting appropriate
data quality goals 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. Planners 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
of. These will be the areas where potential
Perform Phase I
Site Assessment
and Due Diligence
Perform
Phase II Site
Investigation
Evaluate
Remedial
Alternatives
Develop
Remedy
Implementation
Plan
Remedy
Implementation
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).
19
-------
Phase II Site Investigation
Sample the Site to Identify the Type, Quantity, and
Extent of the Contamination
Set Data Quality Objectives (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 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
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
Write Report
Write report to document sampling findings. The report
should discuss the DQOs, methodologies, limitations,
and possible cleanup technologies and goals
Exhibit 4-1. Flow Chart of the Site Investigation Process
20
-------
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.
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.
^" Identify the decision that requires new
environmental data to address the
contamination problem.
^ Identify the inputs to the decision. Identify the
information needed to support the decision
and specify which inputs require new
environmental measurements.
^ Define the study boundaries. Specify the
spatial and temporal aspect of the
environmental media that the data must
represent to support the decision.
^ 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.
^" 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.
^ 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,
planners 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
21
-------
resource-intensive process. Planners 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
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.
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. Planners 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
22
-------
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).
^ Contaminant-specific Sampling. 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 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, planners 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
23
-------
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, 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;
>- Colormetric 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.
24
-------
Chapter 5
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 issues that planners
and decision-makers need to consider when
selecting alternatives.
The principal factors that will influence
selection of a cleanup technology include:
the
^" Types of contamination present;
>- Cleanup and 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
Perform Phase I
Site Assessment
and Due Diligence
Perform
Phase II Site
Investigation
Evaluate
Remedial
Alternatives
Develop
Remedy
Implementation
Plan
Remedy
Implementation
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 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
25
-------
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 levels
(discussed in "Performing a Phase II 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 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.
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:
>- 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.
26
-------
Evaluate Remedial Alternatives
Compile and Assess Possible Remedial Alternatives
for the Brownfields Site
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 funding
+ Timeframe
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
Exhibit 5-1. Flow Chart of the Remedial Alternative Evaluation Process
27
-------
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 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.
28
-------
Develop Remedy Implementation Plan
Coordinate -with Stakeholders to Design a Remedy
Implementation Plan
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
> Implementation of selected management option
Exhibit 5-2. Flow Chart of the Remedy Implementation Plan Development Process
29
-------
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 "greenfields," often at a relatively low
cost. This document in conjunction with the
General Guide provide an overview of the
technical methods that can be used to achieve
successful site assessment and cleanup, which are
two key components in the brownfields
redevelopment process.
This railroad yards site profile provides the
technical information necessary to conduct a
successful brownfields redevelopment at such a
site. However, each site is unique and the specific
cleanup activities will be dictated by the site
assessment, future use of the site, budget and time
frame. Several railroad yards have been
redeveloped for other uses. Some of these have
been highlighted throughout this document. Users
can review internet resources for the most recent
redevelopment of railroad yard sites.
To avoid problems throughout the process it is
important that stakeholders are involved from the
beginning. Consultation with state and local
environmental officials and community leaders, as
well as careful planning early in the project, will
allow planners to develop the most appropriate
site assessment and cleanup approaches. Planners
should also determine early on if they are likely to
require the assistance of environmental engineers.
A site assessment strategy should be agreeable to
all stakeholders and should 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 will need to
consider the cleanup options. Many different types
of cleanup technologies are available. The
guidance provided in this document on selecting
appropriate methods directs planners to base
cleanup initiatives on site- and project-specific
conditions. The type and extent of cleanup will
depend in large part on the type and level of
contamination present, 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 can achieve brownfield
redevelopment and reuse goals effectively and
safely.
30
-------
31
-------
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
OSWER 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
31
-------
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
33
-------
forced through tanks containing activated carbon. also Bedrock and Permeability.
Chemical Dehalogenation Chemical
dehalogenation is a chemical 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 the 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.
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
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
34
-------
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 term 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.
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
35
-------
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 an innovative
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
36
-------
"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.
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 in
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 in
thermometers, measuring devices, pharmaceutical
37
-------
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 in 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 or route of contaminants from the
source of contamination to contact with human
populations or the environment. Migration
pathways include air, 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.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) NPDES is the primary
permitting program under the 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 in 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
38
-------
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.
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
39
-------
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 creation 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
40
-------
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 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
41
-------
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.
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
42
-------
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.
43
-------
Table C-1. Non-Invasive Assessment Technologies
Appendix C
Testing 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 du mps.
• 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 cou ntry
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 sm all 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 pipe lines 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 determ ine what specific anom alies are
detected.
Cannot be used to detect a specific fluid or
contaminant, but all items not native to the area
will be detected.
Depends upon volume of data collected
and type of targets looked for.
Small areas <1 acre: $1,000-13,500.
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.
Small areas <1 acre: $3,500 - $5,000
Large areas > 10 acres: $2,500 - $3,500
per acre
45
-------
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.
• Produces 3D images of hydrocarbon
plumes.
• Data can be collected to depth of 100
meters.
• Data can be collected from a single,
unlined ornonmetal 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.
• 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
Magnetometer (MG)
• Locates buried ferrous materials such
as barrels, pipelines, USTs, and
buckets.
• 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.
• 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.
46
-------
Table C-2.
Soil and Subsurface Sampling Tools
Tech nique/lnstru mentation
Media
Soil
Grou nd
Water
Relative Cost per Sample
Sa m pie Qua 1 ity
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/I
Specialized Thin Wall
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
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
Soil properties will probably be altered
Soil properties will likely be altered
Soil properties will probably 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 probably be unaltered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties will probably be unaltered
Soil properties will probably be unaltered
Direct Push Methods
Cone Penetrometer
Driven Wells
X
X
X
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
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
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties may be altered
Soil properties will probably be unaltered
Soil properties will probably be unaltered
Soil properties will probably be unaltered
47
-------
Table C-3. Groundwater Sampling Tools
Technique/Instrumentation
Co ntam inants1
Relative Cost perSample
Sample Quality
Portable Groundwater Sampling Pumps
Bladder Pump
Gas-Driven Piston Pump
Gas-Driven Displacement Pumps
Gear Pump
Inertial-Lift Pumps
Submersible Centrifugal Pumps
Submersible Helical-Rotor Pump
Suction-Lift Pumps (peristaltic)
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
metals
SVOCs, PAHs,
m eta Is
Mid-range expensive
Most Expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Most expensive
Most expensive
Least expensive
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered by sampling
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered by sampling
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties may be altered
Portable Grab Samplers
Bailers
Pneumatic Depth-Specific
Sam piers
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Liquid properties may be altered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Portable In Situ Groundwater Samplers/Sensors
Cone Penetrom eter Sam piers
Direct Drive Samplers
Hydropunch
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
Least expensive
Least expensive
Mid-range expensive
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Fixed In Situ Samplers
Multilevel Capsule Samplers
Multiple-Port Casings
Passive Multilayer Samplers
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs, SVOCs,
PAHs, metals
VOCs
Mid-range expensive
Least expensive
Least expensive
Liquid properties will probably be
unaltered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Liquid properties will probably be unaltered
Bold Most commonly used field techniques
VOCs Volatile Organic Carbons
SVOCsSemivolatile Organic Carbons
PAHs Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons
48
-------
Table C-4. Sample Analysis Technologies
Technique/
Instrumentation
Analytes
Media
Soil
Ground
Water
Gas
Relative
Detection
Relative
Cost per
Analysis
Application**
Produces
Quantitative
Data
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
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
Metals
X
X
X
X"
X'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ppb
ppm
ppm
ppb
ppb
ppm
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Most
expensive
Most
expensive
Most
expensive
Least
expensive
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
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Yes
Yes
No
Yes (limited)
PAHs.VOCs.andSVOCs
Laser-Induced Fluorescence
(LIF)
Solid/Porous FiberOptic
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
PAHs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs,
PAHs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
X
X"
X
X'
X'
X'
X'
X
X"
X
X
X
X'
X'
X'
X'
X"
X
X
X
X
X
X
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
100-1,000
ppm
100-1,000
ppb
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
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
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
No
No
No
No
Additional effort required
Yes
49
-------
Raman Spectroscopy/SERS
Infrared Spectroscopy
Scattering/Absorption Lidar
FTIR Spectroscopy
Synchronous Luminescence/
Fluorescence
Gas Chromatography (GC)
(can be used with numerous
detectors)
UV-Visible Spectrophotometry
UV Fluorescence
Ion Trap
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs,
SVOCs
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
ppb
100-1,000
ppm
100-1,000
ppm
ppm
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Mid-range
expensive
Most
expensive
Usually used in
laboratory
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
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Yes
Additional effort required
Additional effort required
Yes
Other
Chemical Reaction- Based
Test Papers
Im munoassay and Calorimetric
Kits
VOCs,
SVOCs,
Metals
VOCs,
SVOCs,
Metals
X
X
X
X
ppm
ppm
Least
expensive
Least
expensive
Usually used in field
Usually used in
laboratory, can be used
in field
Yes
Additional effort required
VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
SVOCs Semivolatile Organic Compounds (may be present in oil and grease)
PAHs Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons
X* Indicates there must be extraction of the sample to gas orliquid phase
** Samples sent to laboratory require ship ping time and usually 14 to 35 days turn a round time for analysis. Rush onders cost an additional amount per sample.
50
-------
Appendix D
Cleanup Technologies
Exhibit D-l. Cleanup Technologies for Landfill and Illegal Dump Sites
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Containment
Technologies
Capping
Used to cover buried waste materials to
prevent migration. Consist of a relatively
impermeable material that will minimize
rainfall infiltration. Waste materials can be
left in place.Requires periodic inspections
and routine monitoring.Contaminant
migration must be monitored periodically.
Metals
Cyanide
Costs associated with routine sampling
and analysis may be high.Long-term
maintenance may be required to ensure
impermeability.May have to be
replaced after 20 to 30 years of
operation.May not be effective if
groundwater table is high.
$11 to $40 per
square foot.1
Sheet Piling
Steel or iron sheets are driven into the
ground to form a subsurface barrier.Low-cost
containment method.Used primarily for
shallow aquifers.
Not con-
taminant-
specific
Not effective in the absence of a
continuous aquitard.Can leak at the
intersection of the sheets and the
aquitard or through pile wall joints.
$8 to $17 per
square foot.2
Grout Curtain
Grout curtains are injected into subsurface
soils and bedrock.Forms an impermeable
barrier in the subsurface.
Not con-
taminant-
specific
Difficult to ensure a complete curtain • $6 to $14 per
without gaps through which the plume square foot.2
can escape; however new techniques
have improved continuity of curtain.
51
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Slurry Walls • Used to contain contaminated ground water,
landfill leachate, divert contaminated
groundwater from drinking water intake,
divert uncontaminated groundwater flow, or
provide a barrier for the groundwater
treatment system.Consist of a vertically
excavated slurry-filled trench.The slurry
hydraulically shores the trench to prevent
collapse and forms a filtercake to reduce
groundwater flow.Often used where the
waste mass is too large for treatment and
where soluble and mobile constituents pose
an imminent threat to a source of drinking
threat to a source of drinking water.Often
constructed of a soil, bentonite, and water
mixture.
Not con-
taminant-
specific
Contains contaminants only within a
specified area.Soil-bentonite backfills
are not able to withstand attack by
strong acids, bases, salt solutions, and
some organic chemicals.Potential for
the slurry walls to degrade or
deteriorate overtime.
Design and
installation
costs of $5 to
$7 per square
foot (1991
dollars) for a
standard soil-
bentonite wall
in soft to
medium
soil.3Above
costs do not
include
variable costs
required for
chemical
analyses,
feasibility, or
compatibility
testing.
52
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Ex Situ
Technologies
Excavation/
Offsite Disposa
Removes contaminated material to an EPA
approved landfill.
Not
contaminant-
specific
Generation of fugitive emissions may
be a problem during operations.The
distance from the contaminated site to
the nearest disposal facility will affect
cost.Depth and composition of the
media requiring excavation must be
considered.Transportation of the soil
through populated areas may affect
community acceptability.Disposal
options for certain waste (e.g., mixed
waste or transuranic waste) may be
limted. There is currently only one
licensed disposal facility for radioactive
and mixed waste in the United States.
$270 to $460
per ton.2
53
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Composting • Controlled microbiological process by which
biodegradable hazardous materials in soils
are converted to innocuous, stabilized
byproducts.Typically occurs at temperatures
ranging from 50° to 55°C (120° to
130°F).May be applied to soils and lagoon
sediments.Maximum degradation efficiency
is achieved by maintaining moisture content,
pH, oxygenation, temperature, and the
carbon-nitrogen ratio.
SVOCs.
Substantial space is required.
Excavation of contaminated soils is
required and may cause the
uncontrolled release of
VOCs.Composting results in a
volumetric increase in material and
space required for treatment.Metals are
not treated by this method and can be
toxic to the microorganisms.The
distance from the contaminated site to
the nearest disposal facility will affect
cost.
$190 or
greater per
cubic yard for
soil volumes
of
approximately
20,000 cubic
yards.3Costs
will vary with
the amount of
soil to be
treated, the
soil fraction of
the com post,
availability of
amendments,
the type of
contaminant
and the type of
process design
employed.
Chemical
Oxidation/
Reduction
Reduction/oxidation (Redox) reactions
chemically convert hazardous contaminants
to nonhazardous or less toxic compounds
that are more stable, less mobile, or
inert.Redox reactions involve the transfer of
electrons from one compound to another.The
oxidizing agents commonly used are ozone,
hydrogen peroxide, hypochlorite, chlorine,
and chlorine dioxide.
Metals
Cyanide
Not cost-effective for high contaminant
concentrations because of the large
amounts of oxidizing agent required.Oil
and grease in the media should be
minimized to optimize process
efficiencv.
$190 to $660
per cubic
meter of soil.3
54
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Soil Washing • A water-based process for scrubbing
excavated soils ex situ to remove
contaminants.Removes contaminants by
dissolving or suspending them in the wash
solution, or by concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through particle size
separation, gravity separation, and attrition
scrubbing. Systems incorporating most of the
removal techniques offer the greatest
promise for application to soils contaminated
with a wide variety of metals and organic
contaminants.
SVOCs
Metals
Fine soil particles may require the
addition of a polymer to remove them
from the washing fluid.Complex waste
mixtures make formulating washing
fluid difficultHigh humic content in
soil may require pretreatment.The
washing fluid produces an aqueous
stream that requires treatment.
$120 to $200
per ton of
soil.3Cost is
dependent
upon the target
waste quantity
and
concentration.
Thermal
Desorption
Low temperatures (200°F to 900°F) are used
to remove organic contaminants from soils
and sludges.Off-gases are collected and
treated. Requires treatment system after
heating chamber.Can be performed on site or
off site.
VOCsPCBs
PAHs
Cannot be used to treat heavy metals,
with exception of
mercury.Contaminants of concern must
have a low boiling point.Transportation
costs to off-site facilities can be
expensive.
$50 to $300
per ton of
soil.transport
ation charges
are additional.
55
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Incineration
High temperatures 870° to 1,200° C (1400°F
to 2,200°F) are used to volatilize and
combust hazardous wastes.The destruction
and removal efficiency for properly operated
incinerators exceeds the 99.99% requirement
for hazardous waste and can be operated to
meet the 99.9999% requirement for PCBs
and dioxins.Commercial incinerator designs
are rotary kilns, equipped with an
afterburner, a quench, and an air pollution
control system.
VOCsPCBs
dioxins
Only one off-site incinerator is
permitted to burn PCBs and dioxins.
Specific feed size and materials
handling requirements that can affect
applicability or cost at specific
sites.Metals can produce a bottom ash
that requires stabilization prior to
disposal .Volatile metals, including lead,
cadmium, mercury, and arsenic, leave
the combustion unit with the flue gases
and require the installation of gas
cleaning systems for removal.Metals
can react with other elements in the
feed stream, such as chlorine or sulfur,
forming more volatile and toxic
compounds than the original species.
$200 to $1,000
per ton of soil
at off-site incin-
erators^ 1,500
to $6,000
per ton of soil
for soils
contaminated
with PCBs or
dioxins.3Mobile
units that can
operate onsite
reduce soil
transportation
costs.
UV Oxidation
Destruction process that oxidizes
constituents in wastewater by the addition of
strong oxidizers and irradiation with UV
light.Practically any organic contaminant
that is reactive with the hydroxyl radical can
potentially be treated. The oxidation
reactions are achieved through the
synergistic action of UV light in combination
with ozone or hydrogen peroxide.Can be
configured in batch or continuous flow
models, depending on the throughput rate
under consideration.
VOCs
The aqueous stream being treated must
provide for good transmission of UV
light (high turbidity causes
interference).Metal ions in the
wastewater may limit
effectiveness.VOCs may volatilize
before oxidation can occur. Off-gas
may require treatment. Costs may be
higher than competing technologies
because of energy
requirements.Handling and storage of
oxidizers require special safety
precautions.Off-gas may require
treatment.
$0.10 to $10
per 1,000
gallons are
treated.3
56
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Pyrolysis
A thermal treatment technology that uses
chemical decomposition induced in organic
materials by heat in the absence of oxygen.
Pyrolysis transforms hazardous organic
materials into gaseous components, small
amounts of liquid, and a solid residue (coke)
containing fixed carbon and ash.
Metals
Cyanide.PAH
Specific feed size and materials
handling requirements affect
applicability or cost at specific
sites.Requires drying of the soil
to achieve a low soil moisture
content (<1%).Highly abrasive
feed can potentially damage the
processor unit.High moisture
content increases treatment
costs.Treated media containing
heavy metals may require
stabilization.May produce
combustible gases, including
carbon monoxide, hydrogen and
methane, and other
hydrocarbons.If the off-gases are
cooled, liquids condense,
producing an oil/tar residue and
contaminated water.
Capital and
operating
costs are
expected to
be
approximate-
ly $330 per
metric ton
($300 per
ton).3
57
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Precipitation
Involves the conversion of soluble
heavy metal salts to insoluble salts
that will precipitate.Precipitate can be
physical methods such as
clarification or filtration.Often used as
a pretreatment for other treatment
technologies where the presence of
metals would interfere with the
treatment processes.Primary method
for treating metal-laden industrial
wastewater.
Metals.
Contamination source is not
removed The presence of
multiple metal species may lead
to removal difficulties.Discharge
standard may necessitate further
treatment of effluent.Metal
hydroxide sludges must pass
TCLP criteria prior to land
disposal.Treated water will often
require pH adjustment.
Capital
costs are
$85,000 to
$115,000
for 20 to 65
gpm
precipitation
systems.Pri-
mary capital
cost factor
is design
flow
rate.Operat-
ing costs are
$0.30 to
$0.70 per
1,000.3
Sludge
disposal
may be
estimated to
increase
operating
costs by
$0.50 per
1,000
gallons
treated.3
58
-------
Applicable
Technology
Liquid
Phase
Carbon
Adsorption
Technology Description
• Groundwater is pumped through a
series of vessels containing activated
carbon, to which dissolved
contaminants adsorb. Effective for
polishing water discharges from other
remedial technologies to attain
regulatory compliance. Can be quickly
installed. High contaminant-removal
efficiencies.
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
• Low levels
of
metals.
VOCs.
SVOCs.
Limitations
• The presence of multiple
contaminants can affect process
performance. Metals can foul the
system. Costs are high if used as
the primary treatment on waste
streams with high contaminant
concentration levels. Type and
pore size of the carbon and
operating temperature will impact
process performance Transport
and disposal of spent carbon can
be expensive. Water soluble
compounds and small molecules
are not adsorbed well.
Cost
• $1.20 to
$6.30 per
1,000
gallons
treated at
flow rates of
0.1
mgd. Costs
decrease
with
increasing
low rates
and
concentra-
tions. 3Costs
are
dependent
on waste
stream flow
rates, type
of
contami-
nant,
concentra-
tion, and
timing
require-
ments.3
59
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Air Stripping
Contaminants are partitioned from
groundwater by greatly increasing the
surface area of the contaminated
water exposed to air.Aeration
methods include packed towers,
diffused aeration, tray aeration, and
spray aeration.Can be operated
continuously or in a batch mode,
where the air stripper is intermittently
fed from a collection tank.The batch
mode ensures consistent air stripper
performance and greater efficiency
than continuously operated units
because mixing in the storage tank
eliminates any inconsistencies in
feed water composition.
VOCs.
Potential for inorganic (iron
greater than 5 ppm, hardness
greater than 800 ppm) or
biological fouling of the
equipment, requiring
pretreatment of groundwater or
periodic column
cleaning.Consideration should be
given to the Henry's law constant
of the VOCs in the water stream
and the type and amount of
packing used in the
tower.Compounds with low
volatility at ambient temperature
may require preheating of the
groundwater.Off-gases may
require treatment based on mass
emission rate and state and
federal air pollution laws.
$0.04 to
$0.20 per
1,000
gallons.3A
major
operating
cost of air
strippers is
the
electricity
required for
the
groundwater
pump, the
sump
discharge
pump, and
the air
blower.
60
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
In Situ
Technologi
es
Natural • Natural subsurface processes such
Attenuation as dilution, volatilization,
biodegradation, adsorption, and
chemical reactions with subsurface
media can reduce contaminant
concentrations to acceptable
levels.Consideration of this option
requires modeling and evaluation of
contaminant degradation rates and
pathways.Sampling and analyses
must be conducted throughout the
process to confirm that degradation is
proceeding at sufficient rates to meet
cleanup objectives.Nonhalogenated
volatile and semivolatile organic
compounds.
VOCs
Intermediate degradation
products may be more mobile
and more toxic than original
contaminants.Contaminants may
migrate before they degrade.The
site may have to be fenced and
may not be available for reuse
until hazard levels are
reduced.Source areas may
require removal for natural
attenuation to be
effective.Modeling contaminant
degradation rates, and sampling
and analysis to confirm modeled
predictions extremely expensive.
Not
available
61
-------
Applicable
Technology
Soil Vapor
Extraction
Technology Description
• A vacuum is applied to the soil to
induce controlled air flow and remove
contaminants from the unsaturated
(vadose) zone of the soil. The gas
leaving the soil may be treated to
recover or destroy the
contaminants. The continuous airflow
promotes in situ biodegradation of
low-volatility organic compounds that
may be presnet.
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
• VOCs
Limitations
• Tight or very moist content
(>50%) has a reduced
permeability to air, requiring
higher vacuums. Large screened
intervals are required in
extraction wells for soil with
highly variable permeabilities.Air
emissions may require treatment
to eliminate possible harm to the
public or environment. Off-gas
treatment residual liquids and
spent activated carbon may
require treatment or disposal. Not
effective in the saturated zone.
Cost
• $10 to $50
per cubic
meter of
soil.3Cost is
site specific
depending
on the size
of the site,
the nature
and amount
of
contamina-
tion, and the
hydro-
geological
setting,
which affect
the number
of wells, the
blower
capacity
and vacuum
level
required,
and length
of time
required to
remediate
the site.Off-
gas
62
-------
Applicable
Technology
Soil
Flushing
Technology Description
• Extraction of contaminants from the
soil with water or other aqueous
solutions.Accomplished by passing
the extraction fluid through in-place
soils using injection or infiltration
processes. Extraction fluids must be
recovered with extraction wells from
the underlying aquifer and recycled
when possible.
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
• Metals
Limitations
• Low-permeability soils are
difficult to treat.Surfactants can
adhere to soil and reduce
effective soil porosity. Reactions
of flushing fluids with soil can
reduce contaminant
mobility. Potential of washing the
contaminant beyond the capture
zone and the introduction of
surfactants to the subsurface.
Cost
• The major
factor
affecting
cost is the
separation
of
surfactants
from
recovered
flushing
fluid.3
63
-------
Applicable
Technology
Solidifica-
tion/
Stabilization
Technology Description
• Reduces the mobility of hazardous
substances and contaminants
through chemical and physical
means. Seeks to trap or immobilize
contaminants within their "host"
medium, instead of removing them
through chemical or physical
treatment.Can be used alone or
combined with other treatment and
disposal methods.
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
• Metals
Limited
effective-
ness for
VOCs and
SVOCs.
Limitations
• Depth of contaminants may limit
effectiveness. Future use of site
may affect containment
materials, which could alter the
ability to maintain immobilization
of contaminants. Some processes
result in a significant increase in
volume. Effective mixing is more
difficult than for ex situ
applications. Confirmatory
sampling can be difficult.
Cost
• $50 to $80
per cubic
meter for
shallow
applications.
$190 to
$330 per
cubic meter
for deeper
applications.3
Costs for
cement-
based
stabilization
techniques
vary
according to
materials or
reagents
used, their
availability,
project size,
and the
chemical
nature of
the
contaminant.
64
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Air Sparging
In situ technology in which air is
injected under pressure below the
water table to increase groundwater
oxygen concentrations and enhance
the rate of biological degradation of
contaminants by naturally occurring
microbes.Increases the mixing in the
saturated zone, which increases the
contact between groundwater and
soil. Air bubbles traverse horizontally
and vertically through the soil column,
creating an underground stripper that
removes contaminants by
volatilization.Air bubbles travel to a
soil vapor extraction system.Air
sparging is effective for facilitating
extraction of deep contamination,
contamination in low-permeability
soils, and contamination in the
saturated zone.
VOCs
Depth of contaminants and
specific site geology must be
considered .Air flow through the
saturated zone may not be
uniform .A permeability
differential such as a clay layer
above the air injection zone can
reduce the effectiveness.Vapors
may rise through the vadose
zone and be released into the
atmosphere.Increased pressure
in the vadose zone can build up
vapors in basements, which are
generally low-pressure areas.
$50 to $100
per 1,000
gallons of
groundwater
treated.3
65
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Passive • A permeable reaction wall is installed
Treatment inground, across the flow path of a
Walls contaminant plume, allowing the
water portion of the plume to
passively move through the
wall.Allows the passage of water
while prohibiting the movement of
contaminants by employing such
agents as iron, chelators (ligands
selected for their specificity for a
given metal), sorbents, microbes, and
others.Contaminants are typically
completely degraded by the
treatment wall.
Metals
VOCs
The system requires control of
pH levels. When pH levels within
the passive treatment wall rise, it
reduces the reaction rate and
can inhibit the effectiveness of
the wall.Depth and width of the
plume. For large-scale plumes,
installation cost may be
high.Cost of treatment medium
(iron).Biological activity may
reduce the permeability of the
wall.Walls may lose their reactive
capacity, requiring replacement
of the reactive medium.
Capital
costs for
these
projects
range from
$250,000 to
$1,000,000.3
Operations
and
mainten-
ance costs
approximate-
ly 5 to 10
times less
than capital
costs.
Chemical
Oxidation
Destruction process that oxidizes
constituents in groundwater by the
addition of strong oxidizers.Practically
any organic contaminant that is
reactive with the hydroxyl radical can
potentially be treated.
VOCs
The addition of oxidizing
compounds must be hydraulically
controlled and closely
monitored.Metal additives will
precipitate out of solution and
remain in the aquifer.Handling
and storage of oxidizers require
special safety precautions.
Depends on
mass
present and
hydrogeo-
logic
conditions.3
66
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Bioventing • Stimulates the natural in-situ
biodegradation of volatile organics in
soil by providing oxygen to existing
soil microorganisms.Oxygen
commonly supplied through direct air
injection.Uses low air flow rates to
provide only enough oxygen to
sustain microbial activity.Volatile
compounds are biodegraded as
vapors and move slowly through the
biologically active soil.
VOCs.
Low soil-gas permeability.High
water table or saturated soil
layers.Vapors can build up in
basements within the radius of
influence of air injection
wells.Low soil moisture content
may limit biodegradation by
drying out the soils.Low
temperatures slow
remediation.Chlorinated solvents
may not degrade fully under
certain subsurface
conditions.Vapors may need
treatment, depending on
emission level and state
regulations.
$10 to $70
per cubic
meter of
soil.3Cost
affected by
contaminant
type and
concentra-
tion, soil
permea-
bility, well
spacing and
number,
pumping
rate, and
off-gas
treatment.
67
-------
Applicable
Technology
Technology Description
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
Limitations
Cost
Bio- • Indigenous or introduced
degradation microorganisms degrade organic
contaminants found in soil and
groundwater.Used successfully to
remediate soils, sludges, and
groundwater.Especially effective for
remediating low-level residual
contamination in conjunction with
source removal.
VOCs.
Cleanup goals may not be
attained if the soil matrix
prevents sufficient
mixing.Circulation of water-based
solutions through the soil may
increase contaminant mobility
and necessitate treatment of
underlying groundwater.
Injection wells may clog and
prevent adequate flow
rates.Preferential flow paths may
result in nonuniform distribution
of injected fluids.Should not be
used for clay, highly layered, or
heterogeneous subsurface
environments.High
concentrations of heavy metals,
highly chlorinated organics, long
chain hydrocarbons, or inorganic
salts are likely to be toxic to
microorganisms.Low
temperatures slow
bioremediation.Chlorinated
solvents may not degrade fully
under certain subsurface
conditions.
$30 to $100
per cubic
meter of
soil.3Cost
affected by
the nature
and depth
of the
contaminants
use of
bioaug-
mentation or
hydrogen
peroxide
addition,
and
groundwater
pumping
rates.
68
-------
Applicable
Technology
Oxygen-
Releasing
Compounds
Technology Description
• Based on Fenton's Reagent
Chemistry.Stimulates the natural in
situ biodegradation of petroleum
hydrocarbons in soil and groundwater
by providing oxygen to existing
microorganisms. Oxygen supplied
through the controlled dispersion and
diffusion of active reagents, such as
hydrogen peroxide. Active reagents
are injected into the affected area
using semi-permanent injection wells.
Contaminants
Treated by
this
Technology
• TPHs
VOCs
Limitations
• Low soil permeability limits
dispersion. Low soil moisture
limits reaction time. Low
temperatures slow reaction. Not
cost-effective in the presence of
unusually thick layers of free
product.
Cost
• Relatively
low cost in
applications
on small
areas of
contamina-
tion. Cost
depends on
size of
treatment
area and
amount of
contaminant
present as
free
product.
1. Interagency Cost Workgroup, 1994.
2. Costs of Remedial Actions at Uncontrolled Hazardous Wastes Sites, U.S. EPA, 1986.
3. Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable, http://www.frtr.gov/matrix/top page.html
UST = underground storage tank
SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds
VOCs = volatile organic compounds
PAHs = polyaromatic hydrocarbons
PCBs = polychlorinated biphenyls
TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons
69
-------
Appendix E
Works Cited and Other Useful Resources
A "PB" publication number in parentheses indicates
that the document is 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 El527-97).
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 (ASTM El 689-95).
ASTM. 1995. Provisional Standard Guide for
Accelerated Site Characterization for Confirmed or
Suspected Petroleum Releases. American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM PS3-95).
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. 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 (EPA542-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: A Bibliography of EPA Information
Resources (EPA 542-B-96-001).
U.S. EPA. 1996.
(540/R-96/128).
Soil Screening Guidance
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 Organics Analysis of Ambient Air in
Canisters Revision VCAAO1.0 (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 (EPA
540-MR-95-517, EPA540-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 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
(EPA310-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/
71
-------
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 (EPA540-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/EPA600R9303
9.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).
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
540-2-91-019a&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 in 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 600-8-91-011A).
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/dilgncel .html.
72
-------
Site Cleanup
ASTM. N.D. New Standard Guide for Remediation by
Natural Attenuation at Petroleum Release Sites
(ASTME50.01).
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. 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).
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:
73
-------
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-95-506a)
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 H, 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
74
-------
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).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Thermal
Desorption, Soil Washing, and In Situ Vitrification
(EPA 542-R-95-005, PB95-182945).
U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Technologies Screening
Matrix and Reference Guide, Second Edition
(PB95-104782; Fact Sheet: EPA 542-F-95-002).
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 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 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 Air
Sparging, Bioventing, Fracturing, Thermal
Enhancements (EPA542-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 (EPA542-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)
75
-------
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) (EPA510-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
(EPA540-S-92-015)
Solvent Extraction Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-503,
PB94-190477)
Supercritical Water Oxidation (EPA 540-S-92-006)
Technology Preselection 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-94-5lOa, 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).
U.S. EPA. 1994. Regional Market Opportunities for
76
-------
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)
(EPA510-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 (SVVS): Innovative Technology
Report (EPA 540-R-94-529, PB96-116488); Site
Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-529a,
PB95-256111).
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
Matrix (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, Eco 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, U.S. EPA: Innovative Technology
Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-93-505,
PB94-100161); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA
540-MR-93-505).
77
-------
U.S. EPA. 1993. HYPERVENTILATE: A software
Guidance System Created for Vapor Extraction
Systems for Apple Macintosh and IBM
PC-Compatible Computers (UST #107) (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
Contaminated Unsaturated
(EPA-S-93-501, PB93-234565).
Bioremediation of
Subsurface Soils
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
540-MR-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 (EPA510-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.: Applications
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-079,
PB94-105434); Demonstration Summary (EPA
540-SR-92-079).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Bioremediation Case Studies: An
Analysis of Vendor Supplied Data (EPA
600-R-92-043, PB92-232339).
U.S. EPA. 1992. Bioremediation Field Initiative (EPA
540-F-92-012).
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).
78
-------
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-93-506).
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. In 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).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Enhanced Bioremediation Utilizing
Hydrogen Peroxide as a Supplemental Source of
Oxygen: A Laboratory and Field Study (EPA
600-2-90-006, PB90-183435).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Guide to Selecting Superfund
Remedial Actions (9355.0-27FS).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Slurry Biodegradation: Engineering
Bulletin (EPA 540-2-90-016, PB91-228049).
U.S. EPA. 1990. Soil Washing Treatment:
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-2-90-017,
PB91-228056).
U.S. EPA. 1989. Facilitated Transport (EPA
540-4-89-003, PB91-133256).
U.S. EPA. 1989. Guide on Remedial Actions for
Contaminated Ground Water (9283.1-02FS).
U.S. EPA. 1987. Compendium of Costs of Remedial
Technologies at Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA
600-2-87-087).
U.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).
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
(OSWERDirective 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://www.prcemi.com/visitt or from the CLU-IN
Web site at http://clu-iacom).
79
------- |