United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/625/R-98/004
December 1998
vxEPA   Handbook
         Advanced Photochemical
         Oxidation Processes

-------
                                            EPA/625/R-98/004
                                              December 1998
HANDBOOK ON ADVANCED PHOTOCHEMICAL
          OXIDATION PROCESSES
    Center for Environmental Research Information
   National Risk Management Research Laboratory
        Office of Research and Development.
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
             Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
                                          Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                           Notice

This document's preparation has  been funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) under
Purchase Order No. 7C-R442-NTLX issued to Tetra Tech EM Inc. The document has been subjected to U.S.
EPA peer and administrative reviews and  has been approved for publication as a U.S. EPA document.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does  not constitute an  endorsement or recommendation for
use.

-------
                                          Foreword

The U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)  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 environmental risks  in the future.

The National Risk Management Research  Laboratory (NRMRL) 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  effort is  to catalyze development and  implementation of innovative, cost-effective
environmental technologies and to develop scientific and engineering  information needed by U.S. EPA to
support regulatory and policy implementation of environmental regulations and strategies.

A key aspect of the  Laboratory's success is an effective program for technical information dissemination and
technology transfer.  The Center for Environmental Research  Information  (CERI) is the focal point for these
types of outreach activities in NRMRL.

This summary document, Handbook  on Advanced Photochemical  Oxidation Processes, produced  by CERI,
is  a technical resource guidance document for environmental engineering practitioners.


                                                 E. Timothy Oppelt,  Director
                                                 National Risk Management Research Laboratory

-------
                                           Abstract

This  handbook summarizes commercial-scale system performance and cost data for advanced photochemical
oxidation (APO) treatment of contaminated water, air,  and solids. Similar  information from pilot- and bench-
scale evaluations of APO processes is also  included to supplement the commercial-scale data. Performance
and  cost data is  summarized  for various APO processes,  including  vacuum ultraviolet (VUV)  photolysis,
ultraviolet (UV)/oxidation, photo-Fenton,  and dye-  or semiconductor-sensitized APO processes. This
handbook is intended to assist  engineering practitioners in evaluating the applicability of APO processes and
in  selecting one or more such  processes for site-specific evaluation.

APO has been shown to be effective in treating contaminated water and air. Regarding  contaminated water
treatment, UV/oxidation has been  evaluated for the  most contaminants, while VUV photolysis has been
evaluated for the  fewest. Regarding contaminated  air treatment, the sensitized APO processes  have been
evaluated for the  most contaminants, while VUV photolysis has been evaluated for the  fewest.

APO processes for treating contaminated  solids generally involve treatment of contaminated slurry or leachate
generated using an extraction process such as soil  washing. APO has been shown to be effective in treating
contaminated solids,  primarily at the  bench-scale level.
                                                 IV

-------
                                        Contents

Section

Notice	
Foreword  	     '"
Abstract  	  IV
Tables	y
Figures 	 viii
Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols	   'x
Glossary	,	X'
Acknowledgments  	  xv

Executive Summary 	     ES-1

1       Introduction 	• • 1-1

        1.1      Purpose and Scope 	   • • 1-1
        1.2     Organization	1-3
        1.3     References	   .. 1-4

2       Background	-2-  1

        2.1      APO Technologies 	   -2-  1

               2.1.1   VUV Photolysis  	   2-1
               2.1.2   UV/Oxidation Processes	2-2
               2.1.3   Photo-Fenton  Process  	   2-2
               2.1.4   Sensitized  APO  Processes	2-4

        2.2     Commercial-Scale APO  Systems	   2-6

               2.2.1  Calgon  perox-pure" and Rayox® UV/H2O2 Systems	 2-7
               2.2.2   Magnum CAV-OX®UV/H2O2 System 	2-8
               2.2.3   WEDECOUV/O3 Systems	2-8
               2.2.4   U.S. Filter UV/O3/H2O2 System	 2-9
               2.2.5   Matrix UV/Ti02 System 	   2-11
               2.2.6   PTI UV/03 System.	   2-12
               2.-2.7   ZentoxUV/TiO2System	 2-12
               2.2.8   KSE AIR UV/Catalyst System	2-13

        2.3     APO System Design and Cost  Considerations  	  2-13
        2.4     References	   ..2-14

 3      Contaminated  Water Treatment  		 3-1

        3.1     Contaminated Groundwater Treatment	  3-1

               3.1.1   VOC-Contaminated   Groundwater	 3-I
               3.1.2   SVOC-Contaminated  Groundwater	3-8
               3.1.3   PCB-Contaminated  Groundwater	3-10
               3.1.4   Pesticide-  and  Herbicide-Contaminated  Groundwater  	  3-10
               3.1.5   Dioxin- and Furan-Contaminated Groundwater 	   3-12
               3.1.6   Explosive- and  Degradation Product-Contaminated  Groundwater	 3-12
               3.1.7   Humic Substance-Contaminated  Groundwater	   3-14
               3.1.8   Inorganic-Contaminated  Groundwater  	3-14

-------
                                  Contents (Continued)

Section                                                                                    Page

        3.2     Industrial Wastewater Treatment	,	3-21

               3.2.1   VOC-Contaminated  Industrial  Wastewater	  3-21
               3.2.2   SVOC-Contaminated Industrial Wastewater	  3-22
               3.2.3   Dye-Contaminated  Industrial Wastewater	  3-23
               3.2.4    Inorganic-Contaminated  Industrial  Wastewater  	  3-25
               3.2.5   Microbe-Contaminated  Industrial  Wastewater  	  3-25

        3.3     Municipal Wastewater Treatment	   3-28
        3.4     Drinking Water Treatment  	   3-28
        3.5     Landfill Leachate Treatment	   3-29

               3.5.1    High-COD  Landfill Leachate 	   3-29
               3.5.2   SVOC-Contaminated Landfill Leachate  	  3-29

        3.6     Contaminated Surface Water Treatment.,	,	,	3-31

               3.6.1   SVOC-Contaminated Surface Water.	  ,	  3-31
               3.6.2   PCB-Contaminated  Surface Water	   3-31
               3.6.3   Pesticide- and Herbicide-Contaminated Surface Water  	  3-31

        3.7     References	3-32

4       Contaminated Air Treatment	4-1

        4.1     SVE Off-Gas Treatment	   4-I
        4.2     Air Stripper Off-Gas Treatment  	   4-8
        4.3     Industrial Emissions Treatment  	  4-10

               4.3.1   VOC-Containing  Industrial  Emissions	  4-10
               4.3.2   SVOC-Containing Industrial Emissions                                  4-11
               4.3.3   Explosive-  and Degradation  Product-Containing Industrial Emissions  	4-11

        4.4     Automobile  Emission Treatment  	  4-14
        4.5     References	4--|4

5       Contaminated Solids Treatment	, , ,	,	, . . . . 5-I

        5.1     Contaminated Soil Treatment	,	, .,	5-1

               5.1.1   SVOC-Contaminated'Soil	5-1
               5.1.2  PCB-Contaminated-SaiL	   5-2
               5.1.3   Pesticide- and  Herbicide-Contaminated Soil	5-2
               5.1.4   Dioxin- and Furan-Contaminated Soil	,	,,..,	5-2

        5.2     Contaminated Sediment Treatment	,	,	5-5
        5.3     Contaminated Ash  Treatment       ..,..,....,.,.      	,	   	-c~5
        5.4     References	5-5


Appendix

Technology Vendor  Contact Information


                                               vi

-------
                                           Tables
lahla                                                                                      Eaflfi
ES-1    Contaminated  Water Treatment 	    ES-5
ES-2    Contaminated  Air Treatment	    ES-8
i-1      Oxidation Potential of Several Oxidants in  Water	1-1
1-2     Rate Constants for 0, and *OH Reactions with Organic Compounds in Water  	  1-2
3-1      Contaminated  Groundwater  Treatment	   3-15
3-2     Industrial Wastewater Treatment  	    3-26
3-3     Landfill Leachate Treatment 	  •	   3-30
4-1     SVE Off-Gas Treatment  	  :	-	  4-7
4-2     Air Stripper Off-Gas  Treatment	    4~9
4-3     Industrial Emissions  Treatment	    4-13
5-1      Contaminated  Soil Treatment 	   5-4
                                                VII

-------
                                           Figures
Figure
/-/    Performance and  cost data organization	   1-3
2-I    Scheme of chemical  reactions in  the photo-Fenton reaction  	  2-3
2-2    Absorption spectra of H2O2 and potassium ferrioxalate in aqueous solution  	  2-4
2-3    Simplified  Ti02 photocatalytic mechanism	  2-6
2-4    Flow configuration in  a Calgon UV/H2O2 system  	   2-7
2-5    Flow configuration in  a Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H202 system	  2-8
2-6    Flow configuration in  a WEDECO UV/03 system for water contaminated with chlorinated
       VOCs   	    	2- 9
2-7    Flow configuration in  a WEDECO UV/O3 system for biologically treated landfill leachate  	2-10
2-8    Flow configuration in  a US Filter UV/O3/H2O2 system	2-10
2-9    Flow configuration in  a Matrix wafer  	  2-11
2-I 0   Flow configuration in  the Matrix UWTiO2 system 	  2-12
2-11    Flow configuration in  the PTI UV/O3 system  	  2-13
                                               VIII

-------
/4J/cm2-min
Ag
AIR
AOX
APO
BOD
BTEX
Calgon
CB
CFC-113
cfu/mL
CHQ
cm
CO
COD
CP
cu
2,4-D
DBCP
DCA
DCAC
DCB
DCE
DCP
DNG
eCB
EE/O
eV
Fe(ll)
Fe(lll)
Fe(lll)(OH)2+
Fe203
g
GAC
hv
h VB
H2O
H202
HCI
HHQ
H M  P A
H-
Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols

Greater than
Less than
Microgram per square  centimeter-minute
Microgram per liter
Micromole per liter
Silver
Adsorption-integrated-reaction
Adsorbable organic halide
Advanced  photochemical oxidation
Biochemical oxygen demand
Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
Calgon Carbon Corporation
Chlorobenzene
Trichlorofluoroethane
Colony forming unit per milliliter
Chlorohydroquinone
Centimeter
Carbon  monoxide
Chemical  oxygen  demand
Chlorophenol
Concentration  unit
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
Dichloroethane
Dichloroacetylchloride
Dichlorobenzene
Dichloroethene
Di chlorophenol
Dinitroglycerin
Electron in the conduction band
Electrical  energy consumption  per  order-of-magnitude contaminant  removal
Electron  volt
Ferrous iron
Ferric iron
Ferrihydroxalate
Ferric oxide
Gram
Granular activated carbon
Light energy
 Hole in the valence band
Water molecule
 Hydrogen  peroxide
 Hydrochloric  acid
 Hydroxyhydroquinone
 Hexamethylphosphoramide
 Hydrogen  radical
                                               IX

-------
            Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols (Continued)
IEA
kg
KSE
kW
kWh/m3
L
Umin
m
M-W
M'V1
m3
m3/h
Magnum
Matrix
MCL
mg/L
min
MNG
MTBE
mW/L
mW/cm2-sec
4-NA
N2O
NDMA
NG
nm
NO
NO2
NOX
4-NP
NQ
NREL
0(1D)
O&M
O,
 *OH
 PAH
 PCB
 PCDD
 PCDF
 PCE
 PCP
Irreversible electron  acceptor
Kilogram
KSE, Inc.
Kilowatt
Kilowatt-hour per cubic meter
Liter
Liter per minute
Meter
Liter per mole-centimeter
Liter per mole-second
Cubic meter
Cubic meter per hour
Magnum Water Technology, Inc.
Matrix Photocatalytic, Inc.
Maximum contaminant level
Milligram per liter
Minute
Mononitroglycerin
Methyl-ferf-butyl ether
Milliwatt per liter
Milliwatt  per square centimeter-second
4-Nitroaniline
Nitrous oxide
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Nitroglycerin
Nanometer
Nitric  oxide
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrogen oxides
4-Nitrophenol
Nitroguanidine
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Singlet oxygen
Operation and  maintenance
Oxygen
Superoxide  ion
Ozone
Hydroxide ion
Hydroxyl  radical
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
Polychlorinated biphenyl
Polychlorinated  dibenzo-p-dioxin
Polychlorinated dibenzofuran
Tetrachloroethene
Pentachlorophenol

-------
            Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols (Continued)
PDU
pfu/mL
ppbv
ppmv
psia
PTI
RDX
scmm
SITE
SnO2
SVE
S  V 0 C
2,4,5-T
TCA
TCE
2,3,5-TCP
Ti02
1,3,5-TNB
TNT
TOC
TOX
TPH
UDMH
U.S. Filter
U.S. EPA
uv
vc
voc
vuv
w
WEDECO
Zentox
ZnO
Photolytic Destruction  Unit
Plaque-forming unit per milliliter
Part per billion by volume
Part per million by volume
Pound per square inch absolute
Process Technologies, Inc.
Cyclonite
Standard cubic meter per  minute
Superfund Innovative  Technology Evaluation
Tin oxide
Soil vapor extraction
Semivolatile organic compound
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyaceticacid
Trichloroethane
Trichloroethene
2,3,5-Trichlorophenol
Titanium dioxide
1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene
2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene
Total organic carbon
Total organic halides
Total petroleum  hydrocarbons
Unsymmetrical  dimethylhydrazine
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc.
U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
Ultraviolet
Vinyl chloride
Volatile  organic compound
Vacuum ultraviolet
Watt
WEDECO  UV-Verfahrenstechnik
Zentox  Corporation
Zinc  oxide
                                              XI

-------
                                            Glossary

Anatase.  The brown, dark-blue, or black, tetragonal  crystalline form  of titanium dioxide

Band gap. The energy difference between two electron energy bands in  a metal

Batch reactor. A container in which a reaction is performed without any inflow or  outflow of material during
the reaction

Bioassay test. A test for quantitatively determining the concentration of a substance that  has  a  specific effect
on a suitable animal, plant,  or microorganism  under  controlled conditions

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). The amount of dissolved  oxygen consumed  by  microorganisms during
biochemical decomposition of oxidizable organic matter under aerobic conditions. The  BOD  test is widely
used to measure the pollution associated with biodegradable organic matter present in wastewaters.

Black light.  Ultraviolet (UV)  radiation having a relatively long wavelength  (in the approximate range of 315
to 400 nanometers). It is also called UV-A, near-UV, or long-wave radiation.

Brookite. A brown, reddish, or black, orthorhombic crystalline form of titanium dioxide

Catalyst. A substance that  alters the rate  of a chemical  reaction and that may  be recovered essentially
unaltered in form and amount at the end of the reaction

Chemical oxygen demand (COD).  A measure  of the oxygen  equivalent  of organic  matter that is susceptible
to oxidation by a strong chemical oxidant under acidic  conditions. The COD test is widely used to measure
the  pollution associated with both biodegradable and nonbiodegradable organic matter present in
wastewaters.

Complex. A compound formed by the union of a metal  ion  with a nonmetallic ion or molecule called a ligand
or complexing agent

Conduction  band. An energy band in a  metal in which  electrons  can  move  freely,  producing a net transport
of charge

Congener. A chemical substance that is related to another substance, such as a  derivative of a compound
or an element  belonging to  the same family as another element in the periodic table. For example, the 209
polychlorinated biphenyls are congeners of one another.

Doping. Introduction of a trace impurity into ultrapure crystals  to obtain desired physical properties.
Transistors  and other semiconductor devices are created  by carefully controlled doping.

Electrical conductivity. A measure of the ability of a solution to carry an electrical current. It varies with  both
the number and type of ions present in  a solution.

Electromagnetic radiation. A form of energy that appears  to be  both waves and  particles (called photons).
It includes  visible light, UV radiation,  radio waves, X-rays, and other forms differentiated  by their wavelengths
and  equivalent energies.

Excimer laser. A laser  containing a  noble gas such  as argon or krypton and  another gas such  as fluorine.
It functions  based on the creation of a metastable bond between the two  gas atoms that readily return to the
ground state and is a useful source of UV radiation.

First-order  reaction. A chemical reaction in  which the decrease in concentration of component "A" with  time
is proportional  to the residual concentration of "A'
                                                 XII

-------
                                   Glossary (Continued)
Half-life. The time required for a given  material to decrease to one-half of its initial amount during a chemical
reaction

Hydraulic retention time. The time spent by a unit volume of water in a reactor expressed as the ratio of
the reactor volume to the influent flow rate

Implicit price  deflator. The ratio of gross national product (GNP)  measured at current prices to  GNP
measured at prices in some base year

Long-wave radiation. UV  radiation having a relatively long wavelength (in the approximate  range of 315 to
400 nanometers). It is also called UV-A radiation, near-UV radiation,  or black light.

Maximum contaminant level (MCL). A value set by the US. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.  EPA)
representing the  maximum permissible  level of a  contaminant in water that is delivered to any user of a  public
water system.  MCLs are derived from health risks that are modified  based on practical considerations.

Molar absorption coefficient. The reduction in  light intensity while light passes through a solution of unit
concentration  and  unit path length

Near-ultraviolet radiation.  UV radiation  having a  relatively  long wavelength (in the approximate  range of 315
to 400 nanometers). It is also called UV-A radiation, long-wave radiation, or black light.

Oxidant. A chemical that decreases the electron content  of other chemicals

Oxidation  potential.  The  difference in electrical  potential between an  atom or ion and the state in  which  an
electron has been  removed to an infinite distance from this atom or ion

Photochemical oxidation. A chemical  reaction  influenced  or initiated  by light that removes electrons from
a compound or part of a compound

Photochemical  reaction. A chemical reaction  induced or catalyzed by  light  or  other  electromagnetic
radiation

Photoconductivity.  The increase in electrical conductivity displayed by  many nonmetallic solids when they
absorb  electromagnetic  radiation

Photodecarboxylation. Removal  of a  carboxyl  radical  through a photochemical reaction

Photo-Fenton  process.  Generation  of  hydroxyl  radicals through decomposition of hydrogen peroxide  using
ferrous or ferric  iron under near-UV radiation or visible  light

Photolysis. Use  of radiant energy (electromagnetic radiation) to produce  a chemical change

Pseudo-first-order  reaction. A chemical reaction that appears to follow first-order reaction kinetics for a
specific reactant when all other  reactants are present at  levels  in excess of stoichiometry

Quantum yield. For a photochemical reaction, the number of moles of a reactant consumed or the number
of moles of a  product formed per Einstein  of light (per mole of photons) absorbed at a given wavelength

Radical. An uncharged  species  containing  one  or more unpaired electrons

Rutile. A  reddish-brown, tetragonal  crystalline  form of titanium dioxide
                                                 XIII

-------
                                   Glossary (Continued)
Saturated organic compound. An organic compound in which all the available valence bonds along the
carbon chain are  attached to other atoms

Semiconductor. A solid  crystalline  material whose  electrical  conductivity lies between the conductivities  of
a conductor and  an  insulator. A semiconductor's conductivity can be significantly changed by exposure  to
light (photoconductivity), addition of small amounts  of certain impurities (doping), or both.

Sensitizer. A chemical that lowers  the activation  energy of a reaction, thereby increasing the reaction rate

Singlet oxygen. Oxygen  with no unpaired electrons. It is more reactive than triplet oxygen (oxygen  with two
unpaired  electrons-the  ground state).

Solar radiation. Electromagnetic radiation  emitted  by  the  sun

Steady state. The condition of a system during which  system characteristics remain  relatively constant with
time after initial transients or fluctuations have disappeared

Superfund. A program established  in 1980 by U.S. EPA to identify abandoned or inactive sites where
hazardous substances have been or  might be released to the environment in order to ensure that the sites
are cleaned  up by responsible parties or the  government, evaluate damages  to  natural resources,  and create
a claim procedure for parties that have cleaned up sites or spent money to restore natural resources

Superfund Innovative Technology  Evaluation  Program.  A program established by  U.S.  EPA to  encourage
development and  implementation of innovative technologies  for hazardous waste site remediation,  monitoring,
and  measurement

Ultraviolet radiation. Electromagnetic  radiation in the wavelength range  of  4 to 400 nanometers

Unsaturated  organic compound. An organic compound  in which not all the available valence bonds along
the carbon chain  are attached to other atoms
                                                XIV

-------
                                  Acknowledgments

This handbook was prepared under the direction and coordination of Mr. Douglas Grosse and Ms. Norma
Lewis of the U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) National Risk Management Research
Laboratory (NRMRL) in Cincinnati,  Ohio. Mr. Grosse served as the project officer and Ms. Lewis served as
the technical coordinator for the  project. Contributors to and reviewers  of this  handbook were Mr.  Grosse and
Ms. Lewis; Dr. William Cooper  of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington; Mr.  Timothy Chapman of
BDM Federal; and Dr. Fred Kawahara, Dr. E. Sahle-Demessie, and Mr. Vincents Gallardo of U.S. EPA
NRMRL. The  handbook cover was designed by Mr. John McCready  of U.S. EPA NRMRL.

This handbook was prepared for U.S. EPA NRMRL by Dr. Kirankumar Topudurti, Ms.  Suzette  Tay, and
Mr. Eric Monschein of Tetra Tech EM Inc.  (Tetra Tech). Special acknowledgment is given to Mr. Nikhil Laul,
Mr. Jon Mann, Ms. Jeanne Kowalski, Mr. Stanley Labunski, Dr. Harry Ellis, Mr. Michael Keefe, and Mr. Gary
Sampson of Tetra Tech for their assistance during the preparation of this handbook.
                                              xv

-------

-------
                                     Executive Summary
   Over the past two decades, environmental  regulatory
   requirements have  become more stringent because
   of increased awareness of the human health and
   ecological risks associated with environmental
   contaminants.      Therefore,   various treatment
   technologies have been developed  over the last  10
   to 15 years in order to cost-effectively meet these
   requirements.  One such  group of technologies is
   commonly referred to as advanced oxidation
   processes.  These processes generally  involve
   generation and use of powerful but relatively
   nonselective transient oxidizing species, primarily
   the hydroxyl radical (-OH) and in some cases the
   singlet oxygen. The «OH can  be generated by both
   photochemical  and nonphotochemical  means to
   oxidize  environmental contaminants. This  handbook
discusses   the    applicability  of   advanced
   photochemical  oxidation (APO)  technologies for
   treatment of contaminated water, air, and solids (soil,
   sediment, and  ash).

   The primary  purpose  of this handbook is  to
   summarize   commercial-scale    APO    system
   performance  and cost data for  treatment of
   contaminated water, air,  and solids. In addition, it
   presents similar  information drawn from  pilot- and
   bench-scale evaluations of APO technologies as a
   supplement to the commercial-scale data. The
   handbook is intended to serve as an APO reference
   document for remedial project managers, on-scene
   coordinators, state  and local regulators, consultants,
   industry representatives,  and  other parties involved
   in management of contaminated water,  air, and
   solids. Specifically,  it should  assist these  intended
   users  in evaluating the applicability of APO
   technologies and  in selecting  one or more APO
   technologies for site-specific  evaluation.

   This handbook is not intended to summarize all the
   APO performance  and cost data available in the
   literature.    Rather,  it  is intended  to  present
   information on state-of-the-art APO technologies for
   treating   contaminated  environmental   media.
   Commercial-scale APO system performance and
   cost data is presented in greater detail than pilot-
   scale results because the handbook is intended for
   practitioners,     Similarly, pilot-scale results are
   presented in greater detail than bench-scale results.
    In addition, pilot- and bench-scale  results are
   presented only where they supplement commercial-
   scale APO system evaluation results or where they
   fill information  gaps, such as those associated with
   by-product formation.
This  handbook presents an introduction (Section 1);
provides background information on various APO
technologies, typical commercial-scale  APO
systems,  andsystem design and cost  considerations
(Section  2);  and  summarizes APO system
performance and cost  data for treating contaminated
water, air, and  solids (Sections 3, 4, and 5,
respectively).  References cited in  each section  are
listed at the end of the section.  APO technology
vendor contact information is presented  in the
appendix.

This  executive summary briefly describes the APO
technologies  and  summarizes the commercial-scale
system performance and cost  data for treatment of
contaminated water,  air, and  solids. Tables ES-1
and  ES-2 at the end of the executive  summary
present commercial-scale performance and cost
data  for  contaminated water and contaminated air
treatment using various APO processes.

APO Technologies

APO technologies can be broadly divided into the
following groups:  (1) vacuum ultraviolet  (VUV)
photolysis, (2) ultraviolet (UV)/oxidation processes,
(3) the  photo-Fenton  process, and (4)  sensitized
APO processes. These APO technologies and their
variations are briefly described below.

    VUV Photolysis

Photolysis of water using  UV radiation of a
wavelength shorter than 190 nanometers yields
•OH  and hydrogen  radicals (H*). Contaminant
degradation in water and in a relatively high-humidity
air stream can be accomplished through oxidation by
*OH  or reduction by H« because VUV photolysis of
water produces powerful oxidizing  species  (*OH)  and
reducing species (H«).  Commercial-scale VUV
photolysis systems  are not  currently  available.
However, bench-scale study results indicate that
VUV photolysis is effective in treating contaminated
water and humid  air streams.

    UV/Oxida tion Processes

UV/oxidation processes generally involve  generation
of *OH through UV  photolysis of conventional
oxidants, including hydrogen  peroxide (H202) and
ozone (0,).  Both UV/H2O2  and UV/03 processes
are  commercially available.  Some APO  technology
vendors also  offer variations of these processes (for
                                                 ES-1

-------
example, UV/O3/H2O2 and UV/h^O^proprietary cata-
lyst).  The commercial-scale  UV/oxidation  systems
available for contaminated  water treatment include
the (1) Calgon Carbon Corporation (Calgon) perox-
pure™ and Rayox® UV/H2O2 systems; (2) Magnum
Water Technology,  Inc. (Magnum), CAV-OX®
UV/H202    systems;    (3)   WEDECO   UV-
Verfahrenstechnik (WEDECO) UV/H2O2 and UV/03
systems; and (4) U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (U.S. Filter),
UV/03/H202 system.  The  only  commercial-scale
UV/oxidation system available for contaminated  air
treatment  is the Process Technologies, Inc. (PTI),
UV/O3 system. UV/oxidation treatment systems  for
contaminated solids  generally  treat  contaminated
slurry  or leachate  generated using an extraction
process such as soil washing.

    Photo-Fenton Process

Decomposition of H2O2 using ferrous iron (Fe(ll)) or
ferric iron (Fe(lll)) under acidic conditions yields *OH.
The rate of removal of organic pollutants and the
extent of mineralization using  the Fe(ll)/H2O2
and Fe(lll)/H2O2 reagents are improved considerably
by  irradiation with near-UV radiation and visible light.
This process is called the photo-Fenton reaction,
The only commercial-scale  photo-Fenton system
available is the  Calgon  Rayox® ENOX water
treatment  system.

    Sensitized APO Processes

Sensitized  APO  processes can  be  broadly
categorized as  dye-sensitized and  semiconductor-
sensitized processes.    These  categories are
described  below.

In  a dye-sensitized APO  process, visible light is
absorbed by a sensitizing dye, which excites the dye
molecules to a higher energy state. The excited dye
then transfers some of its excess energy to other
molecules present  in the waste stream, producing
a chemical reaction.   When dissolved oxygen
accepts energy  from the excited dye molecule  (for
example, methylene blue or rose bengal'), the
dissolved  oxygen is converted to singlet oxygen, a
powerful oxidant. This APO process has not  yet
become commercially viable.
In a semiconductor-sensitized APO process, metal
semiconductors  are  used  to destroy environmental
contaminants by means of light-induced redox
reactions. These reactions, involve generation of
conduction band electrons and valence band holes
by UV irradiation of semiconductor materials such as
titanium dioxide (Ti02).    In  this process,  the
formation and availability of *OH are maximized by
addition  of oxidants such as H2O2 and 0,.

The Matrix UV/TiO2 system is a commercial-scale
sensitized APO system for contaminated water
treatment. The  'commercial-scale  sensitized APO
systems for contaminated air treatment include the
(1)  Zentox Corporation (Zentox) UV/TiO2  system;
(2)  Matrix Photocatalytic, Inc. (Matrix),  UV/TiO2
system; and (3) KSE, Inc.  (KSE), Adsorption-
Integrated-Reaction  (AIR) UV/catalyst system.

Contaminated Water Treatment

APO has been shown to-be an  effective technology
for  treatment of contaminated  water. Matrices to
which APO has been applied include the following:
(1)  contaminated  groundwater,  (2)  industrial
wastewater, (3)  municipal wastewater, (4)  drinking
water, (5) landfill leachate, and (6) contaminated
surface  water. As shown below, a  number of APO
processes have been evaluated in terms of their
effectiveness  in treating various  waterborne
contaminants.  Of these processes, UV/oxidation
has been evaluated for the most contaminant
groups, while VUV photolysis has been evaluated for
the  fewest.

Table ES-I at the end of this executive summary
presents commercial-scale performance and  cost
data for contaminated water treatment using various
APO processes. This table shows that UV/oxidation
processes have been found to be effective in treating
various  contaminants.    Other APO  processes,
including the photo-Fenton  and sensitized APO
processes, have also been found to  be effective, but
for  only a limited number of contaminant groups.
The treatment costs vary  widely depending on the
type and concentration of contaminants treated  and
the  APO system used for treatment.  The information
sources cited in this handbook should be  carefully
reviewed before  a cost comparison is made  because
the cost estimates  presented in the literature were
not made using a consistent set of assumptions.
                                              ES-2

-------
Contaminant Group
Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC)
Semivolatile Organic
Compounds (SVOC)
fokgtilorinated Biphenyls
Pesticides and Herbicides
Dioxins and Furans
Explosives and Their
Degradation Products
Humic Substances
Inorganics
Dyes
Microbes
APO Process Status for Contaminated Water Treatment
VUV Photolysi
Q
Q
Q
0
Q
Q
Q
Q
Cl
Q
> UV/Oxidation
*
*
Q
•
Q
*
Q
Q
•
*
Photo-Fenton
*
*
cl
0
0
a
a
a
Q
a
Sensitized
*
0
0
0
cl
0
0
0
0
0
         lotes:   * = Commercial-scale, • = Pilot-scale, 0 = Bench-scale, Q = Developmental
Contaminated Air Treatment

APO has been shown to be an effective technology
for treatment of contaminated air. Matrices to which
APO has been applied include the following: (1) soil
vapor extraction (SVE) off-gas, (2) air stripper off-
gas, (3)  industrial  emissions,  and  (4) automobile
emissions. As shown below, a number of APO
processes have been evaluated in terms of their
effectiveness    in    treating   various   airborne
contaminants. Of these  processes,  the  sensitized
APO processes have been  evaluated for the most
contaminant groups, while the VUV photolysis
process has been evaluated for the fewest.
Table ES-2 at the end of this executive summary
presents  commercial-scale  performance  and  cost
data for contaminated air treatment using various
APO .processes. This table shows that sensitized
APO processes have been found to be effective in
treating various contaminants.  One UV/oxidation
process, the UV/03 process, has also been found to
be  effective, but only for VOCs. The table also
shows  that the  available treatment cost  information
is limited.
Contaminant Group
VOCs
svocs
Explosives and Their
Degradation Products
| Inorganics
APO Process Status for Contaminated Air Treatment
VUV Photolysis I UV/Oxidation
O
cl
Q
Q
*
•
. Q
Q
Sensitized
*
Q
*
0
        Notes:   * = Commercial-scale, • = Pilot-scale, 0 = Bench-scale, Q = Developmental
Contaminated Solids Treatment

APO has been shown to be an effective technology
for treatment of contaminated solids, primarily at the
bench-scale  level.    Most evaluations  involved
generating a leachate or slurry by washing the
contaminated  solids  with water,  surfactant solution,
or an organic solvent and then applying an APO
process to treat the contaminated leachate or slurry
in a manner similar to contaminated water treatment.
Use of an APO process to treat contaminated slurry
may require frequent APO system  maintenance
because solids in the slurry will coat the light source
and inhibit transmission of light.
                                              ES-3

-------
Solid matrices to which APO has been applied
include the following:  (1) contaminated  soil,
(2)  contaminated sediment,  and  (3) contami-
nated ash. As shown below,  a number of APO
processes 'have  been evaluated in  terms of their
effectiveness in  treating various  contaminated solids.
Of these processes, the UV/oxidation, photo-Fenton,
and sensitized APO processes have been  evaluated
to some extent, but little data  is available  on the
effectiveness of VUV  photolysis.

The commercial-scale performance  data for
contaminated  solids treatment is limited to one
UV/oxidation process, the UV/H202 process. A
Calgon perox-pure™ system was used to treat soil
contaminated with pesticides. The influent to the
perox-pure™ system, which  was generated by an
on-site soil washing  system, primarily contained
0.49,1.1, and 3.9 mg/L of disulfoton, thiometon, and
oxadixyl, respectively. A sand  filter was  used to
remove suspended solids from the influent to the
perox-pure™ system.   The system achieved
removals of up to 99.5 percent. No cost information
is available. Based on the limited performance
results, APO processes appear to show promise for
treating  contaminated solids.
Contaminant Group
svocs
PCBs
Pesticides and Herbicides
Dioxins and Furans
APO Process Status for Contaminated Solids Treatment
VUV Photolysi
Q
Q
Q
Q
> UV/Oxidation
Q
Q
*
• Q
Photo-Fenton
Q
0
Q
Q
Sensitized
0
Q
0
0
Votes: "A" = Commercial-scale, 0 = Bench-scale, Q = Developmental
                                            ES-4

-------
        Table ES-I. Contaminated  Water Treatment
CONTAMINATED
MATRIX
CONTAMINANT
GROUP PROCESS
SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE DATA
Contaminant
Concentration Percent Removal
APPROXIMATE COST
(4998 U.S. Dollars)
IW/Oxidation Processes
Contaminated
Sroundwater
/OCs
JV/H202
iranular
ictivated
Carbon
'ollowed by
IV/H2O2
IV/H2O
bllowea by Air
itripper
IV/H2O2
Saigon
>erox-pure™
Jalgon Rayox®
Saigon Rayox®
lalgon Rayox®
rtagnum
:AV-OX® i
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
I.l-Dichloroethane
(DCA)
1,2-DCA
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichloroethene
(DCE)
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethene
(PCE)
1 ,1,1-Trichloroelhane
(TCA)
Trichloroethene (ICE)
Vinyl chloride (VC)
1,2-DCE 8
52 micrograms per liter
(/;g/L)
3,100A) 96
>99.9
93.6 to >97
>95.8 to >99.5
>92
>99.5
>99 to >99.9
>86
>98.7 to >99.9
92.9
>93 to >99.9
>95.8 to >97
91.4
TCE 14,700 ^g/L 99.9
Methylene chloride
Methylene chloride
IPCE
1.1.1-TCA
I Benzene
ds-1,2-DCE
ltrans-1.2-DCE
PCE
"TCE
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
6.9 ng/L
60 nQ/L
6,000 nQ/L
100M9/L
250 to 500 Aig/L
250 ng/L
200 uQlL
Wugli.
1 ,500 to 2,000 A98.3
>99.9
>99
99.9
>99.9
>99.9
>98
99.9
99.9
VC I53 WQ/L >99.7
$0.08 [operation and
maintenance (O&M)!. to
$1.50/cubic meter (m3)
(capital and O&M)
$0.09/m3 (O&M)
$0.3 1/m3 (O&M)
Not available


$0.32 (O&M) to $1 .50/m3
(capital and O&M)
m
to

en

-------
        Table  ES-I. Contaminated  Water Treatment (Continued)
CONTAMINATED
MATRIX
CONTAMINANT
GROUP
PROCESS
SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE DATA
Contaminant Concentration Percent Removal
APPROXIMATE COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
IV/Oxidation Processes (Continued)
Contaminated
5roundwater
Continued)
VOCs
(Continued)
svo cs
Explosives and
Their
Degradation
Products
UV/H2O2
UV/O3
UV/Oa/H2O2
UV/H202
UV/H2O2
Magnuiru
CAV-OX® II
WEDECO
WEDECO
U.S. Filter
Calgon
perox-pure™
Calgon Rayox
Calgon
perox-pure™
Calgon Rayox®
Benzene
TCE
Benzene
1,2-DCA
C1S-1.2-DCE
Ethylbenzene
v c
PCE
TCE
1,1 -DCA
1.1,1-TCA
TCE
Pentachlorophenol
(PGP)
N-
nitrosodimethylamine
(NDMA)
Polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons
Phenol
Benzathiazole
1,4-Dithiane
1 ,4-Oxathiane
Cyclonite
Thiodiglycol
1 ,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 1
Nitroglycerin (NG)
Nitroguanidine
250 to 500 ^g/L
1 ,500 to 2.000 /jg/L
31 0 //g/L
54 M9/L
46 /jg/L
41 M9/L
34 ^g/L
160^g/L
330 ng/L
9.5 to 13/Lig/L
2 to 4.5 ng/L
50 to 520 ngfL
15 mg/L
20/jg/L
1 to 2 mg/L
2mg/L
20 ng/L
200 Aig/L
82 /^g/L
28 mg/L
480 A87
92
86
96.6
99
65
87
99 to >99
99.3
>99.9
>99.9
>99.9
>82
>98
>97
>82
>97
96
>99.9
>99.9
$1.50/m3 (capital and
O&M)
$0.39/m3 (O&M)
$0.1 9/m3 (O&M)
$0.08 to $5.60/m3 (O&M)
$1.20/m3(0&M)
$0.1 0/m3 (O&M)
$0.02/m3 (O&M)
$13 to $34/m3 (capital and
O&M)
m
CO
CD

-------
        Table ES-I.  Contaminated Water  Treatment  (Continued)
CONTAMINATED
MATRIX
CONTAMINANT
GROUP
PROCESS
SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE DATA
Contaminant
Concentration I Percent Removal
i
APPROXIMATE COST
11998 U.S. Dollars)
UV/Oxidation Processes (Continued)
ndustrial
Vastewater
andfill Leachate
VOCs
svocs
UV/H2O2
UV/H2O2
Microbes UV/H2O2
COD UV/O3
Calgon
perox-pure"
Calgon Rayox
Magnum.
CAV-OX® II
Magnum
CAV-OX® II
WEDECO
Acetone
Isopropyl alcohol
Chemical oxygen
demand (COD)
NDMA
Unsymmetrical
dimethylhydrazine
Phenol
Salmonella
COD
20 mg/L
20mg/L
1 ,000 mg/L
30 M9/L to 1,400 mg/L
6. 000 mg/L
20ng/L
1 million colony forming
units per milliliter
900 mg/L
>97.5
>97.5
Not available
>98.3 to >99.9
Not available
>99.9
>99.9
>90
$1.10/m3(O&M)

$0.83 to$150/m3 (capital
and O&M)


Not available
Not available
$6.80/m3 (capital and
O&M)
Photo-Fenton Process
Contaminated
Groundwater
Industrial
Wastewater
svocs
VOCs
Photo-Fenton
Photo-Fenton
Calgon Rayox F
ENOX
Calgon Rayox® C
ENOX
C P
0 D
1 ,000 vg/L
3, 000 mg/L
Flow stream to be
reinjected: 90
Flow stream to be
discharged: 99
>98.4
$0.36/m3 (O&M)
$44/m3 (O&M)
Sensitized APO Process
Contaminated
Groundwater
'DCs
JWTiO2
Matrix
Benzene 400 to1,100Aig/L
1,1 -DCA
1,1-DCE
ds-1,2-DCE
PCE
1,1.1-TCA
TCE
Toluene
Total xylenes
660 to8492
98

m
-ij

-------
        Table  ES-2. Contaminated Air Treatment
CONTAMINATED
MATRIX
CONTAMINANT
GROUP
PROCESS
SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE DATA
Contaminant Concentration Percent Removal
APPROXIMATE COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
JV/Oxidation Process
5VE Off-Gas
VOCs
UV/O3
iensitized APO Processes
iVE Off-Gas
ir Stripper Off-
ias
idustrial
missions
VOCs
VOCs
VOCs
Explosives and
Their
Degradation
Products
UV/Catalyst 1
UV/TiO2
UV/Catalyst \
UV/Catalyst \
UV/Ti(yO3 Z
PTI

:SE AIR IV
Matrix
SE AIR
SE AIR
entox
cis-l ,2-DCE
PCE
TCE
Toluene
Total VOCs
22 parts per million by volume
(ppmv)
31 ppmv
28 ppmv
1 4 ppmv
1,000 to 1,100 ppmv as carbon
74.0
89.7
80.8
93.1
95.9

ethane
PCE
PCE
1,1,1-TCA
TCE
1.2-DCA
Total VOCs
Pentane
NG
2,000 to 4,000 ppmv
1 to 150 ppmv
1 ,200 ppmv
Not available
1 60 ppmv
0.9 to 3 ppmv
2,000 ppmv
2,100 ppmv
1 .7 ppmv
Minimal
>99
95.2
Not removed
98.1
About 99
>99
>99.9
99.2
(c
$3.80/pound of VOCs
removed (capital and O&M)

Not available
Not available
Not available
For a 1.8-stan<1ard cubic
meter per minute (scmm)
System
$53.320 (capital)
$376 (monthly energy)
$1,672 (annual maintenance)
For a 4.4-scmm Systern
$183.000 (capital)"
$7,800 (annual operating)
For an 18-scmm System
$175,00010 $260,000
s pita 1)
m
CO
CO

-------
                                         Section 1
                                       Introduction
Improper waste disposal practices have resulted in
contamination of various environmental media. Over
the past two decades,  environmental regulatory
requirements have become more stringent because
of increased awareness of the human health and
ecological risks associated with environmental
contaminants.    In many  cases,  conventional
treatment technologies,  such  as air stripping,  carbon
adsorption, biological treatment, and chemical
oxidation using ozone (0,)  or hydrogen peroxide
(H2O2), have limitations. For  example, stripping and
adsorption  merely transfer contaminants from one
medium to another, whereas biological treatment
and conventional  chemical oxidation have low
removal rates for many environmental  contaminants,
including chlorinated organics. Therefore, various
alternative treatment technologies have been
developed over the last 10 to 15 years in order to
cost-effectively meet environmental regulatory
requirements. One such group of technologies is
commonly referred to as advanced oxidation
processes,

Advanced oxidation processes generally  involve
generation  and use  of powerful but relatively
nonselective transient  oxidizing species,  primarily
the hydroxyl radical (*OH);  in some vapor-phase
advanced oxidation processes, singlet oxygen or
O(1D) has also been  identified as the dominant
oxidizing  species (Loraine  and Glaze  1992).
Table  1-1  shows  that *OH  has  the  highest
thermodynamic oxidation potential, which is perhaps
why *OH-based oxidation  processes have gained  the
attention of many advanced oxidation technology
developers. In addition,  as shown in Table 1-2, most
environmental contaminants react 1 million  to
1  billion times faster with »OH than with O3, a
conventional oxidant. *OH can be generated  by both
photochemical  processes (for example, ultraviolet
[UV] radiation in combination with O3, H2O2, or a
photosensitizer)  and nonphotochemical processes
(for example, electron beam irradiation, 0,  in
combination with H2O2, or Fenton's  reagent). This
handbook  discusses the applicability  of advanced
photochemical oxidation (APO) technologies  for
treatment of contaminated water, air, and solids (soil,
sediment, and ash).

This section discusses the purpose and scope
(Section 1 .1) and organization (Section 1.2) of this
handbook.
Table 1-1. Oxidation  Potential  of Several Oxidants in  Water
Oxidant Oxidation
*OH
0(1D)
03
H202
Perhydroxy radical
Permanganate ion
Chlorine dioxide
Chlorine
02
Note:
a Source: CRC Handbook 1985
Potential (eVf
2.80
2.42
2.07
1.77
1.70
1.67
1.50
1.36
123


1.1     Purpose  and Scope

The   primary purpose of this handbook is  to
summarize   commercial-scale    APO  system
performance  and  cost data  for treatment  of
contaminated water, air, and solids, In addition, it
presents  similar information drawn from pilot- and
bench-scale evaluations of APO technologies as a
supplement to the  commercial-scale  performance
and cost data. The  handbook is intended to serve
as an APO reference document for remedial project
managers, on-scene coordinators,  state and  local
regulators, consultants,  industry  representatives, and
other  parties   involved  in   management  of
contaminated  water, air, and solids.  Specifically, it
should assist these  intended users in evaluating the
applicability of APO technologies and in  selecting
one or more APO technologies for site-specific
evaluation.

For the purposes of this handbook, commercial-,
pilot-, and bench-scale systems are defined  as
follows:

    .   A commercial-scale  system  is  a  System
        manufactured by an APO technology vendor
        and available for  purchase or leasing from
       the vendor.
                                              1-1

-------
Table 1-2. Rate Constants for 0, and *OH  Reactions with  Organic Compounds in Water

                                                       Rate Constant (M^V1)"
Compound Type
Acetylenes
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Alkanes
Aromatics
Carboxylic acids
Chlorinated alkenes
Ketones
Nitrogen-containing organics
Olefins
Phenols
Sulfur-containing organics
03
50
icr2toi
10
10'2
1 to 10Z
10-3to10-2
10'1 to 103
1
10to102
1to450x103
103
10to1.6x103
*OH
108to109
108 to 1C9
109
106to109
108to101Q
107to109
109to1011
109to1010
108to1010
109to1011
109 to 1010
109to1010
         Note:
                Sources: Cater and Others 1990; Dussert 1997
        A pilot-scale system  is a system designed
        and fabricated by an engineering firm to
        (1) estimate the  performance and cost of a
        particular APO technology, (2)  identify field
        operational problems of the technology and
        their resolutions, and (3) evaluate scale-up
        requirements  for implementing  the
        technology. A commercial-scale  system is
        selected after the pilot-scale system  proves
        to be successful.

        A bench-scale system is a system that
        (1)  is  of  much  smaller  scale  than
        commercial- and pilot-scale systems, (2) is
        used  to  evaluate  the feasibility of a
        particular APO process, (3) is used to gain
        more insight into the process  kinetics and
        mechanisms,  and  (4) .may  be used to
        generate a preliminary cost estimate for
        comparison with the costs of alternative
        technologies. A  pilot-scale evaluation  of a
        system may follow  successful  performance
        by a particular APO  process at the bench-
        scale level.

This handbook is not intended to summarize all the
APO performance  and  'cost data available in the
literature.     Rather, it  is  intended  to present
information on state-of-the-art APO technologies for
treating   contaminated  environmental    media.
Commercial-scale APO  system performance and
cost data is presented in greater detail than pilot-
scale results because the handbook is intended for
practitioners.    Similarly, pilot-scale results are
presented  in greater detail than  bench-scale results.
In addition, pilot- and bench-scale results are
presented  only where they supplement commercial-
scale APO system evaluation results or where they
fill information gaps, such as those associated with
by-product  formation.

This handbook does  not address  nonenvironmental
APO technology  applications. For example, it does
not  discuss APO  technology  applications in
(1) industrial processes (for example, use of a UV/O3
process for surface  cleaning to improve adhesive
bonding)  and  (2)  the manufacture  of various
products  used  in  residential and commercial
buildings and tunnels (for example, titanium dioxide
[TiO2]-coated ceramic tiles and glass). Poulis and
others  (1993) and Fujishima (1996) summarize such
APO  applications.

Finally, the information  included in this handbook is
derived from an extensive literature review, and thus
the level of detail presented  varies depending on  the
information sources available.   Specifically, the
treatment  costs included should be considered only
order-of-magnitude estimates because most of the
references used do not state the assumptions made
in estimating treatment costs. To facilitate quick
APO  technology comparisons, cost estimates from
the literature were adjusted for inflation using implicit
price deflators for gross national product and  are
                                                1-2

-------
presented in 1998 U.S.  dollars  herein.  This
approach  has  been  proposed  by  the  U.S.
Department of Commerce and is used to  estimate
financial assurance  requirements under  Resource
Conservation and  Recovery Act Subtitle C as
documented  in 40 Code  of  Federal  Regula-
tions  264.142(b).   Cost estimates reported in
currencies  other than U.S.  dollars were converted to
U.S.  dollars using the exchange  rates for the
appropriate years before adjusting them for inflation.

1.2     Organization

This handbook is divided into six sections and
one appendix.  Section 1 presents an  introduction to
the APO handbook.  Section 2 provides background
information on various APO technologies, typical
commercial-scale APO systems, and system design
and  cost  considerations. Sections 3, 4, and 5
summarize APO system performance and cost data
for treating  contaminated water, air,  and solids,
respectively.  References cited in each section are
listed at the end of the section. The appendix
contains   APO  technology  vendor  contact
information.

To facilitate  user  access  to  information,  the
handbook  presents performance and cost data for
each environmental medium by matrix,  contaminant
group, scale  of evaluation, technology evaluated,
and technology vendor or proprietary system (see
Figure l-l).  For example, where performance and
cost data for water (the medium) is summarized,
groundwater  (matrix 1)  is discussed before other
matrices.    For the groundwater matrix, volatile
organic compounds  (VOC) or contaminant group 1
is discussed before other contaminant groups.
For the VOC contaminant group, commercial-scale
applications  are summarized before pilot- and
bench-scale evaluations.  Similarly, the commercial-
scale  applications are organized by APO technology
and by vendor or proprietary process. If bench-scale
results for  a  particular contaminant were derived
using  a synthetic matrix (for example, distilled water
spiked with target contaminants), the results are
included under the matrix that is described first. For
example, in general, bench-scale results derived
using  synthetic wastewater are  presented under the
groundwater matrix because the groundwater matrix
is the first  matrix discussed in  Contaminated Water
Treatment  (Section  3).   However,   bench-scale
results for dye removal in synthetic wastewater are
not presented  under  the  groundwater matrix
because no commercial- or pilot-scale results are
available for dye  removal in groundwater.  Therefore,
bench-scale results for  dye removal in synthetic
wastewater  are appropriately  presented  under the
industrial wastewater matrix.

Environmental
Medium
(Water)

/
/
\
N

Matrix 1
(Groundwater)
Matrix 2
(Industrial
Wastewater)

Matrix 3
(Municipal
Wastewater)
I7
• >
\
\
/
Contaminant
Group 1
(VOCs)

Contaminant
Group 2
(Pesticides
and
Herbicides)

Contaminant
Group 3
(Explosives)

/
\
\

Commercial
Scale
Pilot
Scale

Bench
Scale

/
\
\
APO
Technology 1
(UV/H202)

APO
Technology 2
(UV/03)
APO
Technology 3
(UWTiOj)

                                                                          Vendor/Proprietary Process 1
                                                                             (Calgon/perox-pure™)
                                                                          Vendor/Proprietary Process 2
                                                                              (Calgon/Rayox8)
  Note: The information in parentheses represents a typical example.


Figure l-l. Performance and cost data  organization.
                                               1-3

-------
1.3    References

Cater, S.R., K.G. Bircher, and R.D.S.  Stevens.
    1990.    "Ray ox?    A Second Generation
    Enhanced Oxidation Process for Groundwater
    Remediation." Proceedings of a Symposium on
    Advanced  Oxidation  Processes for the
    Treatment of Confaminafed Water and Air.
    Toronto,  Canada.  June.

CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (CRC
    Handbook). 1985.  Edited by R.C. Weast, M.J.
    Astle, and W.H. Beyer. CRC Press,  inc.  Boca
    Raton, Florida.

Dussert,  B.W.   1997.   "Advanced Oxidation."
    Industrial Wastewater. November/December,
    Pages 29 through 34.
Fujishima, Akira. 1996. "Recent Progresses in TiO,
    Photocatalysis."    Abstracts,  -The Second
    International Conference on TiO2 Phofocatalyfic
    Purification and Treatment of Water and Air.
    Cincinnati, Ohio. October 26 through 29, 1996.
    Page 67.

Loraine, G.A., and W.H. Glaze. 1992.  "Destruction
    of Vapor Phase Halogenated Methanes by
    Means of Ultraviolet Photolysis."  47th Purdue
    Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings.
    Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea,  Michigan.

Poulis, J.A., J.C. Cool, and E.M.P. Logtenberg.
    1993.    "UV/Ozone Cleaning, a Convenient
    Alternative  for   High    Quality   Bonding
    Preparation." International Journal  of Adhesion
    and Adhesives.    Volume 13,  Number 2.
    Pages 89 through 96.
                                            1-4

-------
                                         Section 2
                                       Background
This section provides background information on
APO technologies (Section 2.1),  commercial-scale
APO systems (Section 2.2), and APO system design
and cost considerations (Section 2.3). The level of
detail included in  this  section should be adequate to
allow the user to comprehend the performance and
cost data included in Sections 3, 4, and 5 of this
handbook. For additional information, the  references
cited in Section 2 should be consulted.

2.1    APO  Technologies

As described in Section 1, APO technologies use
•OH generated by photochemical  means to oxidize
environmental contaminants. As implied by the term
APO, light energy is one of the  essential components
of an APO technology. Depending on the type of
APO technology  employed, UV  radiation  (of
wavelengths from 100 to  400  nanometers  [nm]) or
visible radiation (400 to 700 nm) is used to produce
*OH.

The wavelength required to  carry out an APO
process  is generally determined by the principle
involved in production of «OH by the particular APO
technology. For  example,  for a  UV/TiO2 technology,
light of a wavelength shorter than 387.5  nm is
required because Ti02 (anatase form)  has an energy
band gap of 3.2 electron volts (eV) and can be
activated by UV radiation of a wavelength shorter
than 387.5 nm. Similarly, visible radiation can be
used in a dye-sensitized  APO  technology  because
the wavelength  at which dyes absorb  significant
radiation  is in the visible radiation  wavelength range
(for example, 666 nm for  methylene blue),  In some
cases,  solar radiation  may be  used because it starts
at a wavelength of about 300 nm at ground level.
However, solar radiation may not be the best  choice
for a UV7TiO2 technology because only a small
portion of the total solar spectrum is in the 300 to
387.5 nm range.

APO technologies can  be broadly divided into the
following groups: (1)  vacuum UV (VUV)  photolysis,
(2) UV/oxidation processes,  (3) the photo-Fenton
process,  and (4) sensitized APO  processes.  These
APO technologies and their variations  are  briefly
described below.
2.1.1 VUV Photolysis

The UV spectrum is arbitrarily  divided into three
bands:    UV-A (315 to 400 nm),  UV-B (280 to
315 nm), and UV-C (100 to 280 nm)  (Philips Lighting
1985).   Of these'  bands,  UV-A and  UV-C are
generally  used in environmental  applications.  UV-A
radiation is also  referred to as long-wave radiation,
near-UV radiation, or black light. Most UV-A lamps
have their  peak emission  at 365  nm,  and  some have
their peak emission at 350  nm.   UV-C radiation,
which is also  referred to as  short-wave radiation,  is
used for disinfection of water and wastewater. The
spectral output of the low-pressure mercury vapor
lamps  used for disinfection purposes -is mostly at
254 nm, with only 5 to  IO percent of the output at
185 nm.  Often the 185-nm  emission that leads to
the in situ formation of 0, from  oxygen (0,) in the
surrounding  atmosphere  is  cut off from  the
germicidal lamps; doped silica or a sodium barium
glass sleeve is used to cut off radiation below
200 nm.     However,  in some photochemical
applications, a high-quality quartz sleeve such as
Suprasil that transmits the 185-nm radiation is used
to take advantage of the high energy associated with
the shorter wavelength  (one mole of photons at
254 nm equals 471  kilojoules, whereas one mole  of
photons at 185 nm equals 647 kilojoules). According
to  Unkroth and others (1997), in general, the
quantum yield of mercury vapor lamps is too low for
most photochemical reactions to occur. Therefore,
for some applications, more,  efficient radiation
sources such as excimer lasers  (high-intensity
pulsed  radiation) and excimer lamps are evaluated
as  alternatives to conventional UV radiation sources.

The high energy associated with UV radiation  of a
wavelength shorter than  190 nm can  photoiyze water
to yield *OH and hydrogen radicals  (H«), a process
referred to as VUV photolysis (Gonzalez and others
1994).  Contaminant degradation in  water and  in a
relatively high-humidity  air stream  can  be
accomplished through oxidation  by *OH or reduction
by H»  because VUV photolysis of water produces
powerful  oxidizing species (*OH) and reducing
species (H-)- This process  is particularly useful  in
treating  waste streams  contaminated  with
compounds that  are difficult to oxidize. For example,
                                               2-I

-------
 the -OH reaction rate constant for chloroform is
 5 x io6 liters per mole-second (M'V), whereas the
 H*  reaction  rate constant  for  chloroform  is
 1 .1 x 107 M'V1 (Buxton and others 1988).

 Commercial-scale VUV photolysis systems are not
 currently available. However,  bench-scale studies
conducted  using  xenon-xenon excimer lamps with a
 peak  emission of 172  nm  indicate that VUV
 photolysis of water has significant potential for
 cleaning up contaminated water  (Jacob and others
 1993;  Gonzalez and others 1994). In addition, VUV
 photolysis has  been shown to be effective at the
 bench-scale  level in  treating  humid  air streams
 contaminated  with  halogenated methanes  (Loraine
 and  Glaze 1992).

 2.1.2  U V/Oxida tion Processes

 Most commercial UV/oxidation processes involve
 generation of *OH  through  UV photolysis of
 conventional oxidants, including H2O2 and  O3.
 However, generation of *OH by  photolysis of chlorine
 using  UV-A and UV-C radiation, which has been
 observed by Nowell and Hoigne (1992),  has yet to be
 commercialized. A summary  of the chemistry of
 UV/H2O2 and UV/O3 processes is presented below.
 More information is provided by Glaze and others
 (1987).

 UV Photolysis of H2O2

 Generation of *OH by UV photolysis of H202 is
 described by  the following equation:
    H2O2 + light energy (hv)
2-OH
(2-1)
 Low-pressure mercury vapor UV lamps with a
 254-nm peak emission are typically used to produce
 UV radiation, but these lamps may not be the best
 choice for a  UV/H202  process  because the
 maximum absorbance of UV radiation by H2O2
 occurs at about 220 nm and because  the  molar
 absorption coefficient of H2O2 at 254 nm is low, only
 19.6 liters per mole-centimeter (M~1cm~1). If low-
 pressure mercury vapor lamps are used, a high
 concentration of H2O2 is needed in the medium to
 generate sufficient -OH because of the  low  molar
 absorption coefficient. However, high  concentrations
 of H2O2 may scavenge  the *OH,  making the
 UV/H2O2 process  less  effective. To overcome this
 limitation, some APO technology vendors use high-
 intensity, medium-pressure, broad band UV lamps;
 others use  high-intensity, xenon flash lamps whose
                    spectral output can be adjusted to match the
                    absorption characteristics of H2O2 or another
                    photolytic target.

                    UV Photolysis of 0,

                    UV photolysis of 0, in water yields H2O2, which  in
                    turn reacts with UV radiation or 0, to form *OH as
                    shown  below.
                        O3 + hv + H2O -» H2O2 + O2
                        H2O2 + hv - 2-OH
                        20, + H2O2 -* 2'OH + 30,
                                                (2-2)


                                                (2-3)


                                                (2-4)
                    Photolysis of O3 in wet air produces -OH as shown
                    below.
           0,
                                  0,
                   H2O
                                      2'OH
                                        (2-5)
                                         (2-6)
Because the molar absorption coefficient of 0, is
3,300 M'1cm'1 at 254 nm, UV photolysis of 0, is not
expected to have the same limitation as that of H2O2
when low-pressure mercury vapor UV lamps are
used. In addition, if the 185-nm emission  is  not cut
off from the low-pressure mercury vapor lamps, the
0, formed in  situ is photolyzed  to yield -OH
(Bhowmick and Semmens 1994).

Both  UV/H202   and  UV/03  processes are
commercially  available.   Some  APO technology
vendors also offer variations of these processes (for
example, UV/03/H2O2 and UV/H2O2/proprietary
catalyst).

2.1.3 Photo-Fenton  Process

The  dark reaction of ferrous iron (Fe(ll)) with H202
known as  Fenton's reaction (Fenton 1894), which is
shown in Equation 2-7, has been known for over a
century.
           Fe(ll)
                               H202
                    ferric iron (Fe(lll))
                    + hydroxide ion (OK)
                    + *OH
                                                             (2-7)
                    The *OH thus formed either can react with Fe(ll) to
                    produce Fe(lll) as shown below,
                                                                                          (2-8)
                                              2-2

-------
or can react with and initiate oxidation of organic
pollutants present in a waste stream.  This process
is effective at pH levels less than or equal to 3.0.
Decomposition of H2O2 is also catalyzed by Fe(lll)
(Walling  1975).     In this process,    H2O2 is
decomposed to the water molecule (H2O) and 02,
and a steady-state  concentration of Fe(ll) is
maintained during the decomposition,  as shown
below.


    Fe(lll) + H202  * [Fe(lll).  . . O2H]2+ + H*

                  ** Fe(ll)  + HO2- + H+      (2-9)
    HO2- + Fe(lll) -* Fe(ll) + H+ + 0,
(2-I 0)
The Fe(ll) ions react with H2O2 to generate *OH (see
Equation 2-7), which then  react with  organic
pollutants.  However, the initial  rate of removal of
organic pollutants by the Fe(lll)/H2O2 reagent is
much slower than that for the Fe(ll)/H2O2 reagent,
perhaps  because of the lower  reactivity  of Fe(lll)
toward H202. This  process  is only effective at an
acidic pH level of about 2.8  (Pignatello 1992).

The  rate of removal  of organic  pollutants and  the
extent of mineralization with the Fe(ll)/H2O2 and
         Fe(III)/H2O2 reagents are improved considerably by
         irradiation with near-UV radiation and visible light
         (Ruppert and others 1993). This process is called
         the photo-Fenton   reaction  (see  Figure 2-I).
         Photoenhancement of reaction rates  is likely
         because of (1)  photoreduction of Fe(lll) to Fe(ll);
         (2) photodecarboxylation of ferric carboxylate
         complexes; and  (3) photolysis of H2O2, all of which
         are briefly described below.

         1. Photoreduction of Fe(M) to Fe(ll): Irradiation of
         the hydroxylated Fe(lll)  ion  or ferrihydroxalate
         (Fe(lll)(OH)"*)virraqueous solution produces the
         Fe(ll)  ion and -OH (Faust and Hoigne  1990) as
        -shown below.
                                                      Fe(III)(OHr + hv - Fe(ll) + *OH
                                                  (2-11)
         This is a wavelength-dependent reaction, and the
         quantum yields of *OH and Fe(ll) ion formation
         decrease with increasing wavelength.  For example,
         the quantum yield of -OH is 0.14 at 313 nm and
         0.017 at 360 nm (Faust and  Hoigne 1990).  In
         addition  to the -OH produced by  the reaction shown
         in Equation 2-I 1, the photogenerated Fe(ll) can
         participate in the Fenton reaction  (see Equation 2-7),
         generating additional «OH and thus accelerating the
         rate of removal of organic contaminants.
      CFe
W

. Photolysis of
Fe (III) Complex
avelengt
1
Fer
Rea
Fe(ll)


i > 300 nm
00)
t
ton
:tion
+ HA

W


Photolysis of
HA
avelengt
1
Direct
Photolysis
A + hv
i < 300 nm 1
A*
Uo2
"oxidized
*OH
Radical

Radical
Reaction 4—
•OH+A
1
A-
Uo2
^oxidized

       Note: "A" is the target contaminant. "A"' and "A«" are reaction intermediates.
Figure 2-1.   Scheme  of chemical reactions in the photo-Fenton reaction (Source:  Kim and Others 1997).
                                               2-3

-------
2. Photodecarboxylafion of ferric carboxylate com-
plexes: Fe(lll) ions form stable complexes and
associated ion  pairs with carboxylates and
polycarboxylates (for example, anion of oxalic acid).
These  complexes are  photochemically active  and
generate Fe(II) ions when irradiated, according to
Balzani and Carassiti (1970), as  shown below.
    Fe(lll)(RCO2)2+
Fe(ll) + CO,
+ R-
                                         (2-12)
The radical R- can react with dissolved 0, and
degrade further.   The Fe(ll) ions  can  in turn
participate  in the Fenton  reaction and generate
additional «OH. Carboxylates are formed during
photocatalyzed oxidation of organic pollutants; thus
photodecarboxylation, as shown in Equation  2-12,  is
expected to play an important role in treatment and
mineralization of organic contaminants.
3. Photolysis  of H2O2: Some direct photolysis  of
H2O2 occurs (see  Equation 2-I); however,  in the
presence of strongly absorbing iron complexes, this
reaction contributes  only  in  a minor way to
photodegradation of organic  contaminants.

Many wastewaters exhibit high absorbance at
wavelengths  below 300  nm. Competition for UV light
from the wastewater and poor absorption of UV light
at 254 nm by H2O2 make UV/H2O2 treatment less
useful in some situations. In these cases, the UV-
visible/ferrioxalate/H2O2 process (Equation 2-12)
provides advantages,  as ferrioxalate  has a high
molar absorption coefficient at  wavelengths  above
200 nm (see Figure 2-2), absorbs light strongly at
longer wavelengths (up to 450  nm) and generates
*OH with a  high quantum yield.  Zepp and others
(1992) have shown that photolysis of ferrioxalate in
the presence of H202 generates -OH that can react
with and oxidize organic pollutants in solution,
Safarzadeh-Amiri (1993) has shown that irradiation
of a ferrioxalate/H202 mixture with UV-visible  light is
a very effective process for removal  of various
organic  pollutants in water.

The  Calgon Carbon Corporation (Calgon) Rayox®
enhanced  oxidation (ENOX 910) process takes
advantage of the ferrioxalate photo-Fenton chemistry
and supplements the UV/H2O2 process with  a
proprietary catalyst in some applications.

   18


   15


T  12

    9


    6


    3
                                      Potassium
                                      Fenrioxalate
                                200    250    300   "350    400

                                             Wavelength (nm)
                                   450
                                         500
                         Figure2-2. Absorption spectra of H2O2 and  potassium
                                   ferrioxalate  in aqueous solution (Source:
                                   Safarzadeh-Amiri and Others 1997).

                         2.1.4 Sensitized APO  Processes

                         Sensitized  APO  processes  can  be  broadly
                         categorized as dye-sensitized and semiconductor-
                         sensitized  processes.    These categories are
                         described  below.

                         Dye-Sensitized APO Processes

                         In a dye-sensitized APO process, visible light is
                         absorbed by a sensitizing dye, which excites the dye
                         molecule to  a higher energy state. The excited dye
                         then transfers some of its excess energy to other
                         molecules  present in the waste  stream, producing a
                         chemical reaction. When dissolved 0, accepts
                         energy from a sensitizer (for example, methylene
                         blue or rose bengal), the dissolved 0, is converted
                         to O(1D), an effective oxidant. This APO process
                         has yet to become commercially viable,  perhaps
                         because  of  the difficulty associated  with removing
                         the dye from the treated waste stream (Li and others
                         1992).

                         Semiconductor-Sensitized APO Processes

                         Semiconductors are solids that have electrical
                         conductivities between those  of conductors and
                         those of  insulators.      Semiconductors are
                         characterized by two separate energy bands: a low-
                         energy valence band and a high-energy conduction
                                               2-4

-------
band. Each band consists of a spectrum of energy
levels in which electrons can  reside. The separation
between energy levels within each energy band  is
small, and they essentially form a continuous
spectrum. The energy separation between the
valence and conduction bands is called the band gap
and  consists of energy levels in which electrons
cannot reside.

Light, a source of energy,  can be used to excite an
electron from the valence  band into the  conduction
band.   When an  electron  in the valence band
absorbs a photon,' the absorption of the  photon
increases the  energy of the electron and enables the
electron to move  into one  of the unoccupied energy
levels of the conduction  band.  However, because
the energy levels of the valence band  are lower than
those of the conduction band, electrons in the
conduction band  eventually move  back into the
valence band, leaving the  conduction band empty.
As this occurs,  energy  corresponding  to  the
difference  in  energy between the bands  is released
as photons  or heat. Semiconductors are said to
exhibit photoconductivity because photons can be
used to excite a semiconductor's electrons and  allow
easy  conduction.

Semiconductors  that  have  been   used in
environmental applications  include TiO2, strontium
titanium trioxide,  and  zinc oxide (ZnO). TiO2 is
generally preferred for use in commercial APO
applications because  of its  high  level of
photoconductivity, ready  availability, low toxicity,  and
low cost. TiO2 has three crystalline forms: rutile,
anatase, and brookite. Studies  indicate that the
anatase form provides  the highest *OH formation
rates (Tanaka and  others  1993).

TiO2  exhibits  photoconductivity  when illuminated by
photons having an energy level that exceeds the
TiO2 band gap energy level of 3.2 eV. For TiO2, the
photon energy required  to overcome the band  gap
energy and excite an  electron from the valence band
to the conduction band can be provided by light of a
wavelength shorter than 387.5 nm.    When an
electron in the valence band is excited into the
conduction band, a vacancy or hole is left in the
valence band. Such holes have the effect of a
positive charge. The  combination  of the  electron  in
the conduction band (e"CB) and the hole in the
valence band (h+VB) is referred to as an electron-hole
pair.  The electron-hole  pair within a  semiconductor
band  tends to revert to a stage where the electron-
hole  pair no longer exists because the electron  is in
an unstable, excited  state; however,  the band  gap
inhibits this reversal long enough to allow excited
electrons and holes  near the surface  of  the,
semiconductor to participate in reactions at the
surface  of the semiconductor.

A  simplified TiO2 photocatalytic mechanism  is
summarized  in  Figure 2-3. This mechanism is still
being investigated,  but the primary photocatalytic
mechanism  is believed to proceed as follows (Al-
Ekabi and others 1993):
    TiO  + hv
                        VB
(2-13)
At the Ti02 surface, the holes react with either H2O
or OH' from water dissociation to form -OH as
follows:
    h+VB + H2O -» *OH + H+
    h+VB + OH- -»*OH
(2-14)


(2-15)
An additional reaction may occur if the electron in the
conduction  band reacts with  0, to form superoxide
ions (O2«') as follows:
    e'CB t 0,
(2-16)
The O2-~ can then react with H20 to  provide
additional «OH, OH-, and 0, as follows:
    2O2«- + 2H2O -* H2O2 + 2OH" + 0,      (2-17)


    H2O2 + e-CB -* OH' + 'OH              (2-18)

The OH- can then react with the hole in the valence
band  as shown in  Equation 2-15 to form additional
•OH. One practical problem with semiconductor
photoconductivity  is the electron-hole  reversal
process.  The overall result of this reversal is
generation of photons or  heat instead of «OH. The
reversal process   significantly  decreases the
photocatalytic activity of a semiconductor. One
possible method of increasing the  photocatalytic
activity  of a semiconductor is to  add irreversible
electron acceptors (IEA) or oxidants to the matrix to
be  treated.  Once lEAs accept  an electron in  the
conduction band  or react with O2'',  the lEAs
dissociate and provide additional routes for *OH
generation. H202 is an IEA and illustrates the role
that lEAs may play in APO  processes. When  the
IEA H2O2 accepts  an electron in the conduction
band, it dissociates as  shown in Equation  2-18.
Therefore, H2O2 not only inhibits the electron-hole
reversal process and prolongs the lifetime of  the
photogenerated hole, but  it also generates  additional
•OH.
                                               2-5

-------
                    Photon
                                       TiO2 Particle in Water
Figure 2-3. Simplified TiO2  photocatalytic mechanism.
0, is also used as an IEA and may undergo the
following reaction:
    20, + 2e-CB - 0, + 20,'
(2-1 9)
The 0, and O2-~ can generate additional -OH in
accordance with Equations 2-1 6 through 2-1 8.

Several  commercial-scale  semiconductor-sensitized
APO systems  are  available for treating both
contaminated water and air.

2.2    Com'mercial-Scale APO Systems

This section describes typical commercial-scale APO
systems for water and air.  No commercial-scale
APO systems for solids are available. However, an
APO system for water can be used to treat the
contaminated  leachate generated  by leaching
contaminants from soil using a  soil washing  process
that is commercially available. The information
included  in this section was obtained  from APO
vendors or from published documents. The level of
detail provided  varies depending on  the source of
information used.

The commercial-scale APO systems for water
described in  this section include the (1)  Calgon
perox-pure™ and  Rayox® UV/H202  systems;
(2) Magnum Water Technology, Inc.  (Magnum),
CAV-OX® UV/H2O2  system;  (3) WEDECO-  UV-
Verfahrenstechnik (WEDECO) UV/O3 systems;
(4) U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc. (U.S. Filter), UV/O3/H2O2
system; and  (5) Matrix Photocatalytic, Inc. (Matrix),
UV/TiO2 system.   The commercial-scale APO
systems for air described in this section include the
(1) Process Technologies, Inc. (PTI), UV/O3 system;
(2) Zentox Corporation (Zentox) UV/TiO2 system;
and  (3) KSE, Inc. (KSE), Adsorption-lntegrated-
Reaction  (AIR) UV/catalyst system.

Other  commercially available systems,  including
(I) the Calgon Rayox® ENOX 510, 710, and 910
systems,  photo-Fenton  systems for water  treatment,
and (2) the Matrix UVfno2 system  for air treatment,
are not described in this section because the
vendors stated that these systems are very similar to
their other APO systems and did not provide
additional information. In addition, the WEDECO
UV/H2O2 commercial-scale  water treatment system
is not  described in this section because the vendor
did not provide  a system description.  However,
according to a case study narrative provided by
WEDECO (1998), the UV/H202 system consists of
(1) two UV reactors in series with  one low-pressure
mercury vapor lamp in  each reactor and (2) an H2O2
dosing station. The narrative also states that  the
system is operated as a "once-through" system  (no
recirculation).
                                              2-6

-------
2.2.7 Calgon perox-pure™ and
        Rayox® U V/H2O2 Sys terns

The Calgon perox-pure™ and  Rayox® UV/H202
treatment systems are designed to remove organic
contaminants dissolved in water. These  systems
use UV radiation and H2O2  to  oxidize organic
compounds present  in water at  milligram per liter
(mg/L) levels or less.  These systems produce no air
emissions and generate no sludge or spent media
that require further processing, handling, or disposal.
The systems use medium-pressure  mercury vapor
lamps to generate  UV radiation.  The principal
oxidants in the systems, *OH, are  produced by direct
photolysis of H2O2 at UV wavelengths.

A typical Calgon UV/H2O2 system  is assembled from
the following portable, skid-mounted components: an
oxidation unit, an H2O2 feed module, an acid feed
module, and a base feed module. A schematic flow
diagram of a typical Calgon  UV/H2O2 system is
shown in Figure 2-4. The oxidation unit shown in
Figure 2-4 has six  reactors  in  series with  one
15-kilowatt (kW) UV lamp in each  reactor and a total
volume of 55 liters (L). Each UV lamp is mounted
inside a UV-transmissive quartz tube  in the center of
each reactor such that wafer flows around the quartz
tube.

In a typical application of the  Calgon system,
contaminated water is  dosed with H2O2 before the
water enters, the first reactor; however, a splitter can
be used to add H2O2 at the inlet to any reactor in the
oxidation unit. In some  applications, acid is added to
lower the influent pH and shift the carbonic acid-
bicarbonate-carbonate  equilibrium to carbonic acid.
This equilibrium is important because carbonate and
bicarbonate ions scavenge «OH. After  chemical
injections, the  contaminated water flows through a
static mixer and enters the oxidation unit. Water
then flows through the  six UV reactors. In some
applications, base is added to the treated water to
adjust  the pH  in order to  meet discharge
requirements, if necessary.

Solids may accumulate in this system as a  result of
oxidation of metals (such as iron and manganese),
water hardness, or solids precipitation. Accumulated
solids could eventually coat the quartz tubes, thus
reducing treatment efficiency. Therefore, the quartz
tubes encasing the UV lamps are equipped with
wipers that periodically clean the tubes and reduce
the impact of accumulated solids.
  Contaminated
     Water
                                                                                    Treated
                                                                                     Water
                                                                                UV Lamp (typical)
                                                                                 Reactor
                                           Static
                                           Mixer
            Oxidation  Unit
 Figure  24. Flow configuration in  a  Calgon  UV/H2O2 system.
                                               2-7

-------
 2.2.2 Magnum C/\V-OX® UV/H202
        System

 The CAV-OX® process was developed by Magnum
 to remove organic contaminants dissolved in water.
 The process uses  hydrodynamic cavitation,  UV
. radiation, and H2O2 to oxidize  organic compounds
 present in water at mg/L levels or less.  In the
 CAV-OX process, organic contaminants in water are
 oxidized by *OH and hydroperoxyl radicals produced
 by hydrodynamic cavitation, UV radiation,  and H2O2.

 A typical CAV-OX® UV/H2O2 system consists of a
 portable, truck- or skid-mounted module with the
 following components: a cavitation chamber, an
 H202 feed tank, and UV reactors (see Figure 2-5).
 Depending on the application,  Magnum uses the
 CAV-OX® I (low-energy) or the CAV-OX® II (high-
 energy) process for treating contaminated  water.
 The CAV-OX® I process uses one UV reactor with
 six 60-Watt (W), low-pressure UV lamps; the  reactor
 is operated at 360 W. The CAV-OX® II process uses
 two UV reactors,  each with one high-pressure  UV
 lamp operated  at  2.5  or 5 kW. The  CAV-OX®
 process generates UV radiation using mercury vapor
 lamps.     Each  UV  lamp  is housed  in  a
 UV-transmissive quartz tube mounted entirely within
 the UV reactor. The low-energy reactor  has a
 volume of about 40 L,  and each high-energy  reactor
 has a volume of about 25 L.

 In  a typical application of a CAV-OX® system,
 contaminated water is pumped to the cavitation
 chamber.   Here the water undergoes extreme
 pressure variations,  resulting in hydrodynamic
 cavitation.    H2O2  is usually  added to  the
contaminated  water  in-line between the cavitation
chamber and the UV reactor. However, H2O2 may
also be added to the contaminated water in-line
before the cavitation chamber.  Inside the UV
reactor, H2O2 photolysis by UV radiation results in
additional formation of *OH that  rapidly react with the
organic  contaminants. Treated water exits  the UV
reactor for appropriate disposal.

2.2.3  WEDECO  UV/O3  Systems

WEDECO commercial-scale UV/O3 system  designs
vary depending on the application. Figure 2-6 shows
a system designed to remove chlorinated VOCs  in
water. This system consists of a UV reactor, an  0,
generator, an 0, absorption tank, and a catalytic 0,
decomposer. In a  typical  application, contaminated
water first enters a UV reactor containing  several
UV-C lamps.  The UV-irradiated water is recycled
through the system for in-line 0, gas addition and
then for 0, absorption in  the 0, absorption tank.
The ozonated water is then returned to the UV
reactor after it is mixed with additional contaminated
water.   The  chlorinated  solvents  present  in the
combined waste stream are removed by the «OH
generated in the UV reactor. Until the system
reaches steady state, 100 percent of the UV-
irradiated  water is recycled.   Once the system
reaches steady state, only a small portion of the UV-
irradiated  water is recycled, and the  remaining water
(treated  water) is  disposed  of  appropriately.
Undissolved 0,  present in the off-gas from the 0,
absorption tank is decomposed to 0, in the catalytic
0, decomposer before the  off-gas is emitted to the
atmosphere.
         Contaminated
           Water
2.5- or 5-kW
UV Reactor


2.5- or 5-kW
UV Reactor
                                                                                Treated
                                                                               '  Water
         CAV-OX® I
                                                                 Treated
                                                                 Water
                                                 CAV-OX® I

 Figure 2-5.  Flow configuration in a Magnum CAV-OX* UV/H20, system.
                                             2-8

-------
                           Treated Off-Gas
                                      Catalytic O3
                                     Decomposer
                 Contaminated  Water
                                                                      Treated Water
Figure  2-6. Flow configuration in a WEDECO UV/O3 system for water contaminated with chlorinated  VOCs.
Figure 2-7 shows a WEDECO system designed for
chemical oxygen demand (COD) and adsorbable
organic halide (AOX)  removal from biologically
treated  landfill leachate.  This system is similar to the
system described above except that this system has
two 0, absorption tanks and the contaminated water
flows through the absorption tanks before it flows
through the UV reactor.

2.2.4   U.S. 'Filter UV/O./H2O2 System

The  U.S. Filter UV/oxidation treatment system uses
UV radiation, O3, and H2O2 to oxidize organics  in
water. This system was formerly known as the
Ultrox  system.  The major components -of this
system are the UV/oxidation reactor, 0, generator,
H2O2 feed tank, and catalytic 0, decomposition    out of the reactor for appropriate disposal.
spargers uniformly  diffuse 0, gas from the  base of
the reactor into the contaminated  wafer. H2O2 is
introduced in the influent line to the reactor from a
feed tank. An in-line static mixer is used to disperse
the H2O2 into the contaminated water in the influenf
feed.

In a typical operation,  contaminated water first
comes in contact with  H2O2 as it flows through the
influent  line to the reactor. The water then comes in
contact  with  UV radiation and 0, as  it flows through
the reactor at a rate selected to achieve the desired
hydraulic retention time.  As  the  0, in the reactor is
transferred to the contaminated water, -OH are
produced. The *OH formation from 0,  is catalyzed
by  UV radiation and H2O2. The treated water flows
(Decompzon) unit.

The UV/oxidation reactor shown in Figure 2-8 has a
volume of 600 L and is 1 meter (m) long by 0.5 m
wide by 2 m high. The reactor  is divided by five
vertical baffles into six chambers and contains
24 low-pressure mercury vapor lamps (65 W each)
in quartz  sleeves.   The UV lamps are installed
vertically and are evenly distributed  throughout  the
reactor (four lamps per chamber).

Each  chamber also  has one stainless-steel sparger
that extends along  the width of the reactor.  The
0, that is not transferred to the contaminated water
will be present in the reactor off-gas. This off-gas 0,
is subsequently removed by the Decompzon unit
before the off-gas is vented to the atmosphere. The
Decompzon  unit uses a nickel-based  proprietary
catalyst to decompose reactor off-gas 0,  to 0,.
The Decompzon unit can accommodate  flows of up
to 900 standard cubic meter (m3) per minute (scmm)
and can reduce 0, concentrations in  the range of 1
to 20,000 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to less
than (<) 0.1 ppmv.
                                               2-s

-------
                                                                               Treated  Off-Gas
                                  Biologically Treated
                                   Landfill Leachate
                                                                                            Catalytic  0,
                                                                                            Decomposer
                                           Treated  Water

Figure  2-7.  Flow configuration  in a  WEDECO UV/O3 system for biologically  treated landfill  leachate.
        UV Lamp
         (typical) "
      UV/Oxidation
         Reactor —
                                                      O3Gas
                        CZD*-1
                                                       fe	^
*
^
                                                                                                               Treated
                                                                                                               Off-Gas
                                                                                                      Decompzon
                                                                                                         Unit
                                                           O3 Sparger
                           Static Mixer
              Contaminated	
                  Water
                                                   H2O2 Feed Tank

Figure 2-8.   Flow configuration  in a  U.S.  Filter UV/03/H2O2 system.
                                                                                                          Treated
                                                                                                         "  Water
                                                         2-10

-------
 2.2.5 Matrix UV/TiO2  System

 The Matrix UV/Ti02 system is designed to treat liquid
 wastes containing  organic contaminants. The Matrix
 system uses UV light with its predominant emission
 at a wavelength of 254 nm, the anatase form of the
 TiO2 semiconductor,  and oxidants to generate -OH.

 A typical  Matrix treatment system contains many
 photocatalytic reactor cells; the  exact number of cells
 varies depending  on the application. Each cell is
 1.75 m long and has a 4.5-centimeter  (cm) outside
 diameter.  A 75-W 254-nm UV light source is located
 coaxially within a 1.6-m-long quartz sleeve.  The
 quartz sleeve is  surrounded by eight layers of
 fiberglass mesh bonded with  the anatase form of
 TiO2 and is enclosed in a stainless-steel jacket.
 Each  cell  is rated for a maximum flow rate of about
 0.8 liter per minute (L/min).

 A typical  Matrix treatment system consists of two
 units positioned side by side in  a mobile  trailer. Each
 unit consists of 12 wafers, and each wafer consists
 of  six  photocatalytic  reactor  cells  joined  by
 manifolds. A block placed  in each wafer channels
 contaminated water into three reactor cells at a time.
 The flow configuration in a wafer is shown  in
 Figure 2-9.  The overall maximum flow rate for this
 configuration is 2.4  Umin. Each set of three  cells
 along the path  where the contaminated water flows
 is defined as a path length. Therefore,  each wafer
 has two path lengths.  Each unit has 24 path lengths,
 resulting in  a total of 48 path lengths for the two
 units. The Matrix system can be operated with fewer
 path lengths than those available in a given system.
 H2O2 and 0, are injected at multiple path lengths
 throughout the  Matrix system. The  exact  number of
 injection points  varies depending  on the  application.

 Figure 2-10 shows  the flow configuration in the
 Matrix UV/TiO2 treatment system. Beginning with
 the first wafer, contaminated water enters path
 length  1 (the first set of three reactor cells in Unit 1)
 and  then  path  length 2  (the second set of three
 reactor cells in  Unit 1). After treatment is completed
 in the  first wafer,  contaminated water flows to the
 second wafer and  enters  path length  3 (the first set
 of three reactor cells in Unit 2)  and then  path
 length 4 (the second set of three reactor cells in
 Unit 2).    This process  continues  'until the
 contaminated  water has passed through all 24
wafers (48  path lengths). The treated water exiting
 path length 48  is  disposed of appropriately.
               Treated Water
          Block
               Contaminated
                  Water
                                 Photocatalytid  Cell (typical)
Figure  2-9.  Flow configuration In  a  Matrix wafer.
                                               2-11

-------
Wafer /
(typical) \
(
(
C

48©0© ©0®47
41®®® ©©©42
^Q © © 0®039
330©0 ©Q©34
32©©© 0®®31
25® 00 © © ©26
240©© ©0®23
17®®® ©®©18
ia©0© ®®®15
9000 ©©©10
8©©© 0007
1 (3tl (%) fib (7} (7) (T)2
LJ 
-------
                          Treated Air
                   Regenerated    Spent
                    Adsorbent    Adsorbent
                         Ambient Air
                 Closed-Loop
                  Steam and '
                 Condensate
                                   Desorber
       Condenser
r\
1
,1
4-~
1
i
i
n '
i
i
-j



VOC Vapor

Low-Pressure
"* Sweep Steam
Boiler
System

j
r
b-J

Chiller Water
System
o ; 'o r.
1
Photolytic
0 | | 0 | i
o ' •' o ; I

i
0 ' 'O
Reactors |
o ' ' O
o " " o

*n
                             Acidic Gas
                              Scrubber
1
1
*
Water
em



Organic/Aqueous
Condensate Storage
                                            Treated Recycled Air
Figure  2-11. Flow  configuration  in the PTI  UV/03 system.

modular design allows multiple modules to be
connected, in series or in parallel in order to achieve
the desired level of performance. Within a module,
UV lamps are mounted inside quartz glass sleeves
to isolate the lamps from the process gas and to
allow  cooling air flow over the lamps.  Replaceable
catalyst media  are placed  in the reactor through a
removable side door.   The catalyst consists of
Degussa P25 TiO2 applied to a proprietary support
material that is designed to be chemically stable
under Zentox system operating conditions and to
provide  low-pressure drop through the  reactor. The
system uses 0,  as an  IEA  and UV lamps with their
predominant emission at a wavelength of 254 or
350 nm. The 350-nm UV lamps are considered to
be a good alternative for treating certain air streams
that form a polymeric coating on  254-nm UV lamps.
The  Zentox system  is  designed for  ambient
temperature operation  but  is capable of running at
temperatures up to 85 °C.

2.2.8 KSE AIR  W/Catalyst  System

The KSE AIR system combines two unit operations,
adsorption and chemical oxidation, and uses UV
light,  a proprietary catalyst, and 0,  present in the
contaminated air to  treat air streams containing
VOCs,  including  chlorinated and  nonchlorinated
compounds, In a typical  system application, the
contaminated air stream containing VOCs flows into
the photocatalytic reactor. The VOCs are trapped on
the surface of a proprietary catalytic adsorbent. This
adsorbent is continuously illuminated with  UV light,
removing  the concentrated VOCs trapped on the
surface by  enhanced photocatalytic oxidation. Thus,
the system at the same time removes VOCs and
continuously  regenerates the catalytic adsorbent.
The system operates at ambient temperature,  as the
catalyst is activated  by  UV light. Treated air  is
discharged to ambient air or to a polishing unit if
further treatment is required.

2.3 APO System  Design and Cost
      Considerations

Bolton and others (1996) present a simple, practical
scale-up approach for designing APO systems.  This
approach  requires that information on key process
variables,  such as UV dose and concentrations  of
oxidants and  catalysts,  be generated by performing
treatability  studies.  The approach  assumes that
contaminant removal follows first-order kinetics. The
approach should therefore be appropriately modified
when  contaminant removal deviates from first-order
kinetics.

As stated above, the UV dose (the amount of UV
power  to be  radiated  per unit  volume  of
contaminated  water treated) and the concentrations
of oxidants and catalysts to be used are the primary
design variables to be optimized when sizing an
APO  system.    Treatability studies should be
performed to measure the UV dose required  to
achieve  a    desired    effluent   contaminant
concentration. The UV dose  for a  particular  stream
is determined in an iterative manner by  examining
the effects of selected process variables-such  as
pH,   oxidant  concentration,   and  choice  of
catalyst-on the treatment process.
                                              2-13

-------
Before determining the UV dose to achieve a specific
percent contaminant  removal,  electrical energy
required  to  achieve  one  order-of-magnitude
contaminant removal  per unit  volume of waste
treated  (EE/0) should be determined from treatability
studies, EE/O combines light intensity, hydraulic
retention time, and contaminant percent removal into
'a single measure and is expressed in the units of
kilowatt  hour  per  cubic meter (kWh/m3). The
economics of APO are driven primarily by electrical
power, flow  rate, and percent removal, and EE/0
provides a simple, fairly  accurate tool for (1) sizing
the full-scale system and (2) estimating  capital and
operating  costs.

After the  EE/O is determined through  treatability
studies, the UV dose required in  a specific case is
calculated  using  the following equation:
    UV dose = EE/O x log (C/Cf)

where
(2-20)
    C, is the  initial concentration (expressed  in any
    units), and

    Cf is the anticipated or required discharge
    standard  (expressed in the same units as Cj).

Once the required UV dose is known, the electrical
operating cost associated with supplying UV  energy
can be calculated as follows:

    Electrical cost ($/m3) = UV dose (kWh/m3)
                         x power cost
                         ($/kilowatt-hour)  (2-21)

Lamp  replacement costs typically range between 30
and 50 percent of the electrical cost (for preliminary
costing purposes, a conservative value of 45 percent
is used  here). The next key  parameter  is the
chemical reagent  doses to be used. The chemical
reagent dose (including the oxidant and any  added
catalyst)  requirement depends on the compound to
be treated  and is based  on treatability test results.
Therefore, the total APO system operating cost can
be calculated as follows.

    Total APO system operating cost ($/m3)  =
    (1.45 x electrical cost) +
    chemical reagent cost                 (2-22)

Capital cost  is a function of system size, which in
turn is a function of the UV power required to  remove
selected  contaminants.  The following equation can
be used to determine the total UV power required:
    UV power (kW) =  EE/O x flow (cubic
                     meter per hour [m3/h])
                     x log (C/Cf)
                  = UV dose
                     xflow(m3/h)         (2-23)

Once  the required UV  power is  known,  the
associated  capital cost  can  be estimated  by
obtaining  price quotations from the APO system
vendors.

2.4    References

AI-Ekabi, H., B. Butters, D. Delany, W. Holden, T.
    Powell, and J. Story. 1993. "The Photocatalytic
    Destruction of Gaseous Trichloroethylene and
    Tetrachloroethylene  Over immobilized Titanium
    Dioxide."   Photocatalytic Purification  and
    Treatment of Water and Air. Edited by D.F. Ollis
    and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier  Science Publishers
    B.V. Amsterdam. Pages 719 through 725.

Balzani, V.,  and V. Carassiti. 1970. Photochemistry
    of Coordination  Compounds. Academic  Press.
    London.  Pages 145 through 192.

Bhowmick,  M.,  and M.J. Semmens.    1994.
    "Ultraviolet Photooxidation for the Destruction of
    VOCs in Air."  Water Research. Volume 28,
    Number 11. Pages  2407 through  2415.

Bolton, J.R., K.G. Bircher, W. Tumas,  and C.A.
    Tolman.  1996. "Figures of Merit for  Advanced
    Oxidation Technologies." Journal   of Advanced
    Oxidation Technologies. Volume  1.  Pages 13
    through  17.

Buxton, G.V., C.L. Greenstock, W.P.  Helman, and
    A.B. Ross. 1988.  "Critical Review of Rate
    Constants for Reactions of Hydrated Electrons,
    Hydrogen  Atoms,   and   Hydroxyl  Radicals
    (•OH/'O") in Aqueous Solution." Journal of
    Physical and Chemical Reference  Data. Volume
    17. Pages  513 through 886.

Faust, B.C., and J. Hoigne. 1990. "Photolysis of
    Fe(lll)-Hydroxy Complexes as Sources  of «OH
    Radicals  in   Clouds,   Fog,   and   Rain."
    Atmospheric  Environment.    Volume 24A.
    Pages 79 through 89.

Fenton, H.J.H. 1894. "Oxidation  of Tattaric Acid in
    Presence of Iron."  Journal of the Chemical
    Society.  Volume 65.  Page  899.
                                              2-14

-------
Glaze, W.H., J.W. Kang, and D.H. Chapin. 1987.
   "The Chemistry of Water Treatment  Processes
   Involving  Ozone,  Hydrogen Peroxide,  and
   Ultraviolet  Radiation."    Ozone Science &
   Engineering.     Volume 9.    Pages  335
   through 352.

Gonzalez, M.C., A.M. Braun, A.B. Prevot, and E.
   Pelizzetti.  1994. 'Vacuum-Ultraviolet (VUV)
   Photolysis of Water:  Mineralization of Atrazine."
   Chemosphere.     Volume 28,  Number 12.
   Pages 2121 through 2127.

Jacob, L, T.M. Hashem, M.M. Kantor, and A.M.
   Braun.    1993.   Vacuum-Ultraviolet (VUV)
   Photolysis of Water: Oxidative  Degradation of 4-
   Chlorophenol."  Journal of Photochemistry and
   Photobiology,  A: Chemistry.   Volume 75.
   Pages 97 through 103.

Kim,  S-M., S-U. Geissen, and A. Vogelpohl. 1997.
   "Landfill Leachate Treatment by a Photoassisted
   Fenton  Reaction."      Water Science  &
    Technology. Volume 35, Number 4. Pages 239
   through 248.

Li, X.,  P. Fitzgerald,  and  L. Bowen.  1992.
   "Sensitized  Photo-Degradation  of  Chlorophenols
   in a Continuous  Flow Reactor System." Water
   Science &  Technology. Volume 26, Numbers 1
   and 2. Pages 367 through 376.

Loraine, G.A., and W.H.  Glaze.  1992. "Destruction
   of Vapor Phase Halogenated Methanes by
   Means of.  Ultraviolet Photolysis." 47th Purdue
   Industrial  Waste Conference Proceedings.
   Lewis  Publishers,  Inc. Chelsea,  Michigan.

Nowell, L.H., and J.  Hoigne.  1992.  "Photolysis of
   Aqueous Chlorine  at Sunlight and  Ultraviolet
   Wavelengths-ll.  Hydroxyl  Radical Production."
    Water Research.    Volume 26, Number 5.
   Pages 599 through 605.

Philips Lighting.   1985. Germicidal Lamps and
   Applications.      Philips  Lighting Division.
   Netherlands.  November.

Pignatello, J.J. 1992.   "Dark and  Photoassisted
   Fe3+- Catalyzed Degradation  of Chlorophenoxy
    Herbicides  by    Hydrogen     Peroxide."
    Environmental   Science   &  Technology.
    Volume 26.  Pages  944 through  951.

Ruppert, G., R. Bauer, and G.J. Heisler. 1993. "The
    Photo-Fenton     Reaction-An     Effective
    Photochemical  Wastewater Treatment  Process."
    Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A:
    Chemistry. Volume 73. Pages 75 through 78.

Safarzadeh-Amiri, A. 1993. "Photocatalytic Method
    for Treatment of Contaminated Water."
    US. Patent No. 5,266,214.

Safarzadeh-Amiri, A., J.R. Bolton, and S.R. Carter.
    1997.  "Ferrioxalate-Mediated  Photodegradation
    of Organic Pollutants in Contaminated Water."
    Water Research.   Volume 31, Number- 4.
    Pages 787 through 798.

Tanaka,  K., T.  Hisanaga, and A. Rivera. 1993.
    "Effect of  Crystal  Form of TiO2 on the
    Photocatalytic Degradation  of  Pollutants."
    Photocataiytic Treatment of Water and Air.
    Edited by D.F. Ollis and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier
    Science     Publishers B.V.    Amsterdam.
    Pages 169 through 178.

Unkcoth,  A., V.  Wagner, and R. Sauerbrey.  1997.
    "Laser-Assisted  Photochemical  Wastewater
    Treatment."    Water Science &  Technology.
    Volume 35, Number 4. Pages 181 through 188.

Walling.,  C.  1975.  "Fenton's Reagent Revisited."
    Accounts of Chemical Research.  Volume 8.
    Pages 125 through 131.

WEDECO UV-Verfahrenstechnik (WEDECO).  1998.
    Letter Regarding Case Studies on WEDECO UV
    Oxidation Process. From Horst Sprengel. To
    Kumar Topudurti, Environmental  Engineer,  Tetra
    Tech EM  Inc. April 21.

Zepp, R.G., B.C. Faust, and J. Hoigne. 1992. "The
    Hydroxyl Radical  Formation  in  Aqueous
    Reactions (pH 3-8) of Iron(ll) with Hydrogen
    Peroxide:     The Photo-Fenton  Reaction."
    Environmental  Science  &   Technology.
    Volume 26.  Pages 313 through 319.
                                            2-15

-------

-------
                                       Section   3
                         Contaminated Water Treatment
APO has been  demonstrated to be an effective
technology  for treatment of contaminated water.
Matrices to which APO has been applied  include the
following:    (1)  contaminated  groundwater,
(2) industrial wastewater, (3) municipal wastewater,
(4)  drinking  water,  (5) landfill leachate,  and
(6) contaminated  surface water.  Collectively, APO
has  been  applied  to  the following types  of
waterborne contaminants: VOCs,  semivolatile
organic compounds (SVOC), polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB), pesticides and herbicides, dioxins
and  furans, explosives and their  degradation
products, humic  substances, inorganics, dyes, and
microbes.

To assist an environmental practitioner in the
selection  of an APO technology to  treat
contaminated   water,   this   section    includes
(1) commercial-scale  system evaluation results  for
UV/H2O2,. UV/O3, UV/O3/H2O2, photo-Fenton, and
UV/TiO2 processes  and (2)  pilot-scale  system
evaluation  results for  UV/H2O2,  photo-Fenton,
solar/TiO2, and solar/TiO2/H2O2 processes. This
section also summarizes supplemental  information
available  from  bench-scale studies of APO
processes.

As  described in Section 1.2, this  handbook
organizes performance and cost data for each matrix
by  contaminant  group,   scale  of evaluation
(commercial, pilot, or bench), and APO system or
process, In  general,  commercial-  and pilot-scale
applications are discussed in detail.    Such
discussions  include, as  available,  a  system
description,  operating conditions,  performance  data,
and system costs'presented  in  1998 dollars. Bench-
scale studies of APO processes are described in
less  detail and only if they provide information that
supplements commercial- and  pilot-scale evaluation
results. At the end of each matrix section, a table is
provided that summarizes operating conditions  and
performance results for each commercial- and pilot-
scale study discussed in the text.

3.1     Contaminated  Groundwater
       Treatment

The  effectiveness  of APO  technologies in treating
contaminated groundwater  has been  evaluated  for
various contaminant groups,  including VOCs,
SVOCs, PCBs, pesticides and herbicides, dioxins
and furans,  explosives and their  degradation
products,  humic substances,  and inorganics. This
section discusses APO technology effectiveness
with regard'to each of these contaminant groups.

3. /. 1  VOC-Contaminated Groundwater
This section discusses treatment of VOCs in
groundwater using   the   UV/H,O,,   UV/O
                                          3'
UV/O3/H202,  and UV/Ti02 processes on a
commercial scale. Additional information  on VOC
removal using  the UV/H2O2> solar/TiO2,  and
solar/TiO2/H2O2 processes at the pilot scale and
(2) UV/H2O2 and  UV/TiO2 processes at the bench
scale is  also included.

Commercial-Scale Applications

This section summarizes the effectiveness of
the Calgon perox-pure" UV/H2O2, Calgon Rayox®
UV/H202, Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H2O2, WEDECO
UV/H202, WEDECO UV/O3, U.S. Filter UV/O3/H2O2,
and Matrix UVn"iO2 treatment systems in  removing
the following VOCs from contaminated groundwater.
  APO Process'
     UV/H2O2
     UV/03

     UV/03/H202
     UV/TiO,
VOCs Removed
    Benzene; CB;
    chloroform; I  ,1 -DCA;
    1,2-DCA; 1,4-DCB;
    1,2-DCE; ethylbenzene;
    methylene chloride;
    PCE;1,1,1-TCA;TCE;
    TPH;'VC

   T C E ,  P  C E
    TCE

    Benzene; 1 ,1-DCA;
    1,1-DCE;cis-1,2-DCE;
    PCE;1 ,1,1-TCA;TCE;
    toluene; xylenes
    Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 Systems

A Calgon perox-pure" UV/H2O2 system' was
demonstrated  in  September 1992  under the
U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency  (U.S. EPA)
Super-fund  Innovative  Technology Evaluation (SITE)
program.  This  demonstration  involved removing
VOCs from groundwater  at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, Site 300,  in Tracy,.  California
(Topudurti and others 1994).
                                            3-1

-------
Trichloroethene (TCE) and tetrachloroethene (PCE)
were the primary groundwater contaminants at
Site  300, with concentrations ranging from 890 to
1,300 micrograms per liter (//g/L) and 71 to 150 /^g/L,
respectively.   In addition,  1 ,1 ,l-trichloro-ethane
(1,1,1-TCA); 1,1-dichloroethane (1,1-DCA); and
chloroform  were present in groundwater  in trace
amounts.   Two sets of system test runs were
conducted: Runs 1 through 8 used raw groundwater,
while Runs  9 through 14 used  groundwater spiked
with about 150 /zg/L of 1,1,1-TCA; 1,1-DCA; and
chloroform each. Average influent  total  organic
halide (TOX) and AOX concentrations  were
measured at 800 and 730 /^g/L, respectively. A flow
rate  of 38 L/min was maintained in all runs except
Runs 7 and 8, which had a flow rate of 150 Umin.
The  H2O2 dose ranged from 30 to 240 mg/L. The
influent pH levels for  Runs 1 and 2 were  8.0  and 6.5,
respectively, while Runs 3 through 14 had an influent
pH level of 5.0.

The system treated  about  150  m3 of VOC-
contaminated groundwater at Site 300.  For the
spiked  groundwater, optimum operating conditions
were determined to  be a flow rate of 38 L/min, an
influent H2O2 concentration of 40 mg/L, an H2O2
dose of 25 mg/L in the influent to Reactors 2 through
6, and an influent pH of 5.0 (see Figure 2-4 for a
system layout). TCE; PCE; and  1 ,1-DCA removals
in groundwater exceeded  99.9,  98.7,  and
95.8 percent, respectively. Also, 1  ,1,1-TCA and
chloroform were removed by a maximum of 92.9 and
93.6 percent, respectively.  TOX removal ranged
from 93 to  99 percent, and AOX removal ranged
from 95 to 99 percent.

The  treated effluent met California drinking water
action  levels and  federal drinking water maximum
contaminant levels  (MCL) for the abovementioned
compounds at the  95 percent confidence level.
Bioassay tests showed  that, while the influent was
not toxic,  the effluent was acutely toxic to freshwater
test  organisms (the water flea [Ceriodaphnia dubia]
and  fathead minnow [Pimephales promelas]). The
toxicity was attributed primarily to the H202 residual
in the effluent.

Groundwater remediation costs were estimated  for
two  scenarios.  In Case 1 (raw groundwater), the
groundwater was  assumed  to have only two
contaminants that are relatively easy to oxidize (TCE
and  PCE). Groundwater remediation  costs were
$2.1 0/m3 of water treated for a 190-L/min system, of
which the Calgon perox-pure™ direct  treatment cost
totaled $0.89/m3. In Case 2 (spiked  groundwater),
the  groundwater was assumed  to have five
contaminants, two of which are relatively easy to
oxidize (TCE and PCE), and three  of which are
difficult  to  oxidize  (1,1,1-TCA; 1,1-DCA; and
chloroform).  Groundwater remediation costs were
$3.30/m3  of water treated for a 190-L/min system, of
which the Calgon perox-pure™ direct treatment cost
totaled $1.50/m3.

In another field study, a Calgon perox-pure™ system
was tested at the Old O-Field site at Aberdeen
Proving Ground  in Maryland  in April and May 1991
(Topudurti and others 1993). The  primary  VOCs in
the  groundwater  at the site  included  1,2-
dichloroethene (1,2-DCE); benzene; and chloroform,
which were present at concentrations of 200,52, and
41 /j.g!L,  respectively.  In addition, 1,2-DCA; TCE;
and  methylene  chloride  were  present  in  the
groundwater  at concentrations of 22,21, and 8 ng/L,
respectively.    Iron (120 mg/L) and manganese
(2.5  mg/L) were also present in the groundwater at
the site.  Contaminated groundwater (a total  of
140 m3) was  pumped from three wells to two holding
tanks, where  it was pretreated  by a metals
precipitation system. During the  metals precipitation
pretreatment process, iron and manganese were
removed  by  99.8 and 99.2 percent to levels of 0.2
and  0.02  mg/L,  respectively. After  pretreatment, the
groundwater pH  was adjusted to 7. Then the influent
entered the  UV/oxidation system.  Four tests were
conducted at a  flow rate of 60 Umin;  the  hydraulic
retention  time was about 5 minutes. In Tests 1,  2,
and  3, the H2O2 doses were 45, 90, and 180 mg/L,
respectively; the doses  were equally divided into
three parts and added by a splitter  at (1) the influent
line to the first reactor, (2) the effluent line from the
first reactor, and (3) the effluent line from the second
reactor.  In Test 4, a total H2O2 dose of 45 mg/L was
added to the influent  line to the  first reactor; the
splitter was not  used.

The treated effluent met  federal MCLs -for all
compounds.     Removals of 1,2-DCE; benzene;
chloroform; 1,2-DCA;  TCE; and methylene chloride
were >99, >96, >97, >92, >93, and >86  percent,
respectively. The influent to and  effluent from the
system passed the bioassay tests; the  water was not
acutely toxic to freshwater test organisms (the
fathead  minnow, Daphnia magna,  sheepshead
minnow,  and mysid  shrimp).  Although specific
process by-products were not identified, the effluent
pH was observed to decrease by about  one unit,
indicating that some of the by-products were acidic.
The  study did not include a treatment  cost estimate.

In another field test, a Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2
system was used to evaluate the feasibility of
applying  APO  to  remediate VOC-contaminated
groundwater  at Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio,
                                              3-2

-------
Texas.  Groundwater  from two  highly contaminated
sites at  Kelly Air Force Base,  designated as
Sites E-l  and E-3 of Zone 2, was  used in the test
(Klink and others 1992).

The primary VOCs at Site E-l were 1,2-DCE; PCE;
TCE; and vinyl chloride (VC), which were present at
concentrations of  11,000; 2,500;  1,700;  and
1,200 ^g/L, respectively. Site E-3 groundwater was
contaminated with chlorobenzene (CB); VC; 1,2-
DCE; l,4-dichlorobenzene(1,4-DCB);and 1,1-DCA,
which were present at concentrations of 3,100;
1,700; 430; 420; and 400 /zg/L,  respectively.
Groundwater samples from  both sites  were
pretreated using  pre-oxidation with H2O2 followed by
filtration through a 3-micron filter to  remove dissolved
contaminants such as iron  and manganese and
suspended  solids, which can reduce transmission
of UV  light. The system was operated at flow
rates of 490 (Site E-l) and 940 (Site  E-3) Umin.

For Site E-l, an H2O2 concentration  of 50 mg/L, a pH
of 5.5, and a retention time of 2 minutes were
selected as the  preferred operating conditions. For
Site E-3, an H2O2 concentration  of 100 mg/L, a pH of
5.1, and a retention time of 4 minutes were selected
as the  preferred operating conditions. Removals at
Site E-l were >99.9 percent for 1,2-DCE; PCE; and
TCE and 95.8  percent for VC. At  Site E-3, the
removals of CB; VC;  1,2-DCE; 1,4-DCB;  and
1  ,1 -DCA were  >99.9, >97, >99.1,  >99.5, and
>99.5 percent, respectively.

The estimated capital  cost  of groundwater treatment
to  meet drinking water standards was $115,000 for
Site E-l and $241,000 for Site E-3.  These estimates
assume  a flow rate of 75 and 130 Umin for the
systems  at Sites  E-l and  E-3;  respectively.
Operation and  maintenance  (O&M)  costs were
projected to be  $2,800 and $13,000  per month for
Sites E-l  and E-3, respectively. These O&M costs
covered   all required chemicals  but  not  the
pretreatment and groundwater  extraction systems.

In 1989, a Calgon perox-pure" UV/H202 system
was used to remove TCE from groundwater that
served as a municipal drinking water source in
Arizona.  The drinking water well  contained 50 to
400 t^g/L of TCE. The Calgon perox-pure" Model
SSB-30R system treated the groundwater at a flow
rate of 510 Umin using  15 kW  of power. TCE
concentrations were  reduced to <0.5 /ug/L, which
corresponds to >99.7 percent removal. In addition to
meeting the target effluent level requirement, the
system met  the  local community requirement for a
low-visibility, quiet treatment system  that could  be
operated in the  middle of a large  residential area.
The total O&M cost estimated by the vendor was
about $0.08/m3 of water treated, including electricity,
H2O2, and general  maintenance costs  (U.S. EPA
1993).

    Calgon Rayox® UV/H202 System

The Calgon Rayoxe UV/H2O2 system was used to
treat groundwater contaminated  with halogenated
VOCs at the Groveland Wells Superfund site in
Groveland, Massachusetts (Weir and others  1996).
The primary VOCs of concern at the site were TCE	
and 1,2-DCE, which were  present in the
groundwater at concentrations  of 4,700 and
810 //g/L, respectively. The optimal  treatment
conditions, based on the lowest  system operating
cost, were an H2O2 dose of 25 mg/L, a flow rate of
1.5 m3/min, and use of a 60-kW system consisting of
four 15-kW UV lamps, Under theseconditions, the
technology effectively removed TCE and 1,2-DCE
from groundwater at the site and  met surface water
discharge limits,  achieving removals of 99.9 and
91.4 percent, respectively. -The  estimated capital
cost for the system was $110,000,  and the O&M cost
was $0.09/nr.

The Calgon Rayoxe UV/H2O2 technology has been
combined with  more  conventional water treatment
systems, such as  air stripping and granular activated
carbon  (GAC),  in  field  studies  to treat VOC-
contaminated groundwater.  Performance data for
these hybrid systems  is discussed below.

In a field test, a  Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2 system
was combined with  air stripping to remediate VOC-
contaminated groundwater at the Millville Municipal
Airport in New Jersey in, March  1994.  The hybrid
system consisted  of two 90-kW Calgon Rayoxe units
and a Low Profile Shallow Tray@ air stripper. The
hybrid system was designed to treat up to 760 Umin
of contaminated  groundwater (Bircher  and  others
1996).

PCE was the  primary VOC  present  in  the
groundwater,   with  concentrations   of about
6,000 @g/L; also 1,1,1 -TCA and methylene chloride
were present at concentrations of 100 and 60 /zg/L,
respectively. Adequate  treatment was achieved
using one 90-kW unit and a flow rate of 450 L/min.
H2O2 was added to the influent at a concentration of
25 mg/L.

The combined Calgon Rayox®/air stripping system
was able to almost completely degrade the VOCs in
the groundwater.  Specifically, while the  Calgon
Rayoxe  UV/H202  system  reduced  the  initial
concentrations of PCE; 1 ,1,1 -TCA; and methylene
                                             3-3

-------
chloride by 99.8,20, and 16.7 percent, respectively,
the  final concentrations of these compounds  in the
air  stripper effluent were  all <1 /zg/L, indicating
>99.9, 99, and 98.3 percent removal, respectively.
These results  show that for an unsaturated
compound such as PCE, most of the  removal
occurred in the Calgon Rayoxe system, while for the
saturated compounds (1 ,1 ,1 -TCA  and methylene
chloride), most of the removal occurred  in the air
stripper.  No cost information was available.

In another field test, a Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2
system  was used to treat VOC-contaminated
groundwater after treatment with GAC at the Fort
Ord Remedial Action Site in  Monterey, California
(Bircher and  others 1996). The  Fort  Ord site
groundwater was contaminated  with  methylene
chloride at concentrations up to 6.9  ^glL  and other
organics. The treatment system consisted of two
9,100-kilogram (kg) carbon adsorption units in  series
and four 90-kW Calgon Rayoxnjntts in parallel.
Groundwater was fed through the carbon adsorption
units at flow rates of up to 2,700 L/min. The pH of
the effluent from the carbon adsorption units was
adjusted to 5.0 using sulfuric acid. The pH-adjusted
water was then treated by the Calgon Rayoxe
UV/H2O2 system.

Organics other than methylene  chloride  were
removed primarily by the GAC,  while methylene
chloride was primarily removed by the Calgon
Rayoxe UV/H2O2 system. The system reduced the
concentration of methylene chloride to 0.5 //g/L, a
removal of 92.6 percent, using the four 90-kW units.
A total of eight 90-kW units would have been needed
to achieve this percent removal if the Calgon Rayoxe
UV/H2O2 system had been  used alone. The capital
cost of the combined GAC/Calgon Rayox® system
was $730,000, compared to  $1 million if the Calgon
Rayoxe technology had been used alone.  Operating
costs were estimated to be $0.31/m3  of water treated
for the GAC/Calgon Rayoxe hybrid system, whereas
the Calgon Rayoxe UV/H2O2 system  alone would
have cost $0.58/m3 of water treated to operate.
Magnum CAV-Otf*
                               System
The Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H2O2 system  was
demonstrated at Edwards  Air Force Base in
California under U.S.  EPA's SITE program in I993 to
remove  VOCs from groundwater (U.S.  EPA 1994).
The  primary groundwater contaminants  at the site
were TCE and benzene. During the demonstration,
influent  concentrations of TCE and benzene ranged
from 1,500 to 2,090 //g/L and 250 to 500 (j.g/1,
respectively. Three configurations of the CAV-OX®
UV/H2O2 system were demonstrated: (1) the
CAV-OX® I  low-energy system, which contained six
60-W UV lamps (broad band with a peak at 254 nm)
and operated at a flow rate of 1.9 to 5.7 L/min;
(2) the CAV-OX® II high-energy system operating at
5 kW and 3.8 to 15 L/min; and (3) the CAV-OX® II
high-energy system  operating at 10 kW and 3.8 to
15 L/min.

About 32 m3 of contaminated groundwater was
treated  during the  demonstration. The  optimum
operating conditions,  percent removals, and
estimated costs associated with the CAV-OX® I and
II systems are as follows:

       CAV-OX® I: influent H2O2 concentration =
       23 mg/L; flow rate =  2.3 Umin;  average
        removal  of  TCE  and   benzene   =
       99.9  percent;  groundwater remediation cost
       for 95-L/min system = $3.80/m3  of water
       treated (of which CAV-OX® I direct cost =
       $1.50/m3)

   .   CAV-OX® II: influent H2O2 concentration =
       48 mg/L; flow rate = 5.3 Umin; average
        removal  of  TCE  and  benzene  =
        99.8  percent;  groundwater remediation cost
       for 95-L/min system = $4.07/m3  of water
       treated (of which CAV-OX® II direct cost =
        $1.50/m3)

In 1990, the CAV-OX®  I low-energy system was
used at a former Chevron service station in Long
Beach, California, to  remediate  groundwater
contaminated by leaking  underground  storage  tanks
(U.S. EPA 1994).  The system used at the site
consisted of a  cavitation  chamber,  a centrifugal
pump, an H2O2 injection  process, and 12  60-W UV
lamps housed in  two  stainless-steel  reaction
chambers.  The primary  contaminant  of concern in
site groundwater was  total petroleum hydrocarbons
(TPH), which was present  at 190 mg/L. Pretreated
influent was pumped into the CAV-OX® system at a
flow rate of 38 Umin.  The  H2O2 dose was
maintained at 20 mg/L. About 2 years was required
to remediate the  site; during  this period, the
CAV-OX®  I low-energy  process was operational
99.9  percent of the time. After 2 years of operation,
99.9 percent of the TPH  in the  groundwater had
been  removed.  The overall cost was $0.47/m3 of
water treated; however, it is unclear what is included
in this cost.

In 1997, the CAV-OX® I UV/H2O2 system was used
to treat VOC-contaminated  groundwater at a  military
site; the name and location  of the  'site are
unavailable. The primary  contaminant of concern
was TCE, which was  present  in groundwater at an
                                             3-4

-------
average concentration of 1,800 i*g/L. Cis-1,2-DCE;
trans-1,2-DCE; VC; and  PCE were also present at
concentrations of 250, 200, 53,  and 11  ^g/L,
respectively.   The system  achieved the  following
removals for VOCs: 99.9  percent for TCE;
>99.9 percent for cis-1,2-DCE; >99.9 percent for
trans-1,2-DCE;  >99.7  percent for VC;  and
>98 percent for PCE. The estimated total direct
operating cost was $0.32/m3 of water treated, which
includes $0.06/m3 for 30 mg/L of 35 percent H202 (at
$1.17/kg), $0.1 5/m3 for electricity (at $0.08/kilowatt-
hour), $0.06/m3 for maintenance,  and $0.05/m3 for
replacement of 12 lamps once per year (Magnum
1998).

    WEDECO UV/H2O2  System

A commercial WEDECO  UV/H2O2 system was used
to treat  VOC-contaminated  groundwater.   The
primary  contaminants in  the groundwater were 1,2-
DCA;  cis-1,2-DCE; benzene; ethylbenzene; and VC,
which  were present at concentrations of 54,46,310,
41, and  34 ^g/L,  respectively.  The  1,2-DCA
concentration was reduced  by  only 9 percent.
However, removals for cis-1,2-DCE; benzene;
ethylbenzene; and  VC were >87, 93,  92, and
86 percent, respectively.  The total cost estimate for
the WEDECO groundwater treatment system was
$0.39/m3 of water  treated, which includes $0.15/m3
for electricity, $0.1 6/m3 for system operation and UV
lamp  replacement,   and   $0.08/m3 for  H2O2
(WEDECO 1998).

    WEDECO UV/O3 System

A commercial-scale WEDECO UV/03 system was
used  to treat groundwater contaminated with TCE
and PCE at concentrations of 330  and 160 /^g/L,
respectively. The  system was operated at a flow
rate of 10 m3/h, an 0, dose  of 5 mg/L, and a  UV-C
light intensity of 30 milliwatt per liter (mW/L).  Under
these conditions,  the system achieved 99.0 and
96.6  percent removals  for TCE and PCE,
respectively. The  estimated  treatment cost was
$0.19/m3 of water treated; of this cost, $0.08/m3 was
for electricity, $0.04/m3 was for O&M, and $0.07/m3
was for capital equipment (Leitzke and Whitby 1990).

    U.S. Filter UV/O^H2O2 System

The U.S. Filter UV/O^H2O2 system, formerly known
as the Ultrox system, was demonstrated at the
Lorentz Barrel and  Drum  site in San Jose, California,
under the U.S. EPA SITE program in February and
March 1989 (Topudurti  and others  1993). Primary
contaminants in the  groundwater at the site were
TCE; 1 ,1 -DCA; and 1,1,1 -TCA, which were present
at concentrations of 50 to 88 ^g/L, 9.5 to 13 /J.Q/L,
and 2 to 4.5 ^g/L, respectively.  Eleven test  runs
were  performed to evaluate  the U.S.  Filter
UV/O3/H2O2 system under various operating
conditions.   The flow rate was maintained at
0.14 rrvVmin. Optimum conditions for treatment  were
an influent pH of 7.2, a retention time  of 40 minutes,
an 0, dose of 110 mg/L, an H2O2 dose of 13 mg/L,
and use of 24 65-W UV lamps.

Under these conditions, the system achieved
removals as high  as 99 percent for TCE; 65 percent
for 1 ,1-DCA; and 87 percent for 1,1,1-TCA. While
most VOCs were removed by chemical oxidation,
1 ,1-DCA and  1 ,1 ,1 -TCA were  removed by 0,
stripping in addition to oxidation.   Specifically,
stripping accounted for 12 to  75 percent of the total
1,1,1 -TCA removal and 5 to 44  percent of the total
1 ,1 -DCA removal.   The off-gas treatment unit
(Decompzon unit) reduced  reactor  off-gas 0,  by
more than 99.9 percent to levels <0.1 ppm.  Capital
costs for the UV/oxidation unit and 0, generator in
the system were estimated to range between
$88,000 and $320,000. O&M costs for the system
can be as low as $0.08/m3 of treated water if only
oxidant and electrical costs  are  considered  or can
exceed. $5.6/m3 of treated water  if extensive
pretreatment is required.

The U.S. Filter UV/O3/H2O2 system was field-tested
by the U.S. Department of Energy at the Kansas City
Plant in Missouri in 1988. TCE was  present in the
groundwater at  a  concentration 520 //g/L. During the
field test, the flow rate through the system  ranged
from 20 to 38 Umin. The TCE removal achieved by
the system was >99 percent. Capital and O&M
costs were estimated to be $380,000 and $5/m3 of
water treated,  respectively (U.S.  EPA 1990).

    Matrix UV/TiO2 System

Under U.S. EPA's SITE program, the Matrix UV/TiO2
system was demonstrated to destroy VOCs in
groundwater at the  U.S. Department of Energy's
K-25 Site on the Oak Ridge Reservation  in Oak
Ridge,  Tennessee, in August and September  1995
(Topudurti and  others 1998).

The  primarygroundwater contaminants at the  K-25
Site included 1 ,1-DCA; 1 ,1,1-TCA; xylenes; toluene;
cis-1,2-DCE; and  1 ,1-DCE,  which were present in
concentrations ranging from 660 to 840 ^g/L, 680 to
980 ^g/U 55 to 200 /ug/L,  44  to 85 ^g/L, 78 to
98 //g/L, and  120 to  160 ^g/L,  respectively.
Groundwater was also spiked with TCE, PCE, and
benzene—contaminants  not present  at  high
concentrations in groundwater  at the Oak Ridge
                                             3-5

-------
 Reservation  but present  at many  Superfund
 sites-to produce system influent concentrations
 ranging from 230 to 610 //g/L; 120 to 200 t*g/L; and
 400 to 1 ,1 00 ^g/L, respectively. H202 and 0, were
 added to the Matrix system influent at concentrations
 of 70 and 0.4 mg/L, respectively, in order  to enhance
 treatment performance  in  certain runs. Influent  flow
 rates  varied from 3.8  to  9.1 Umin.  Groundwater
 alkalinity ranged from 270 to 300 mg/L calcium
 carbonate, and the pH  ranged from 6.5 to 7.2.  The
 Matrix system  did not require pH adjustment of
 groundwater prior to treatment. The groundwater
 also contained high concentrations of iron  and
 manganese (about 16  and 9.9 mg/L, respectively).
 To prevent fouling  of the photocatalytic reactor  cells
 during  the demonstration,   an  ion-exchange
 pretreatment system  was used to remove Iron and
 manganese in the groundwater.

 During the demonstration, the Matrix system  (see
 Figure 2-I  0) treated about 11,000 L of contaminated
 groundwater. In  general, at path length 48, removals
 of up to 99 percent were observed for benzene;
 toluene; xylenes; TCE;  PCE; cis-1,2-DCE;  and
 1,1-DCE.  However, low removals were observed for
 1 ,1 -DCA and 1,1,1-TCA, which were reduced by no
 more than 21 and 40 percent, respectively.  The
 demonstration showed  that the percent  removals at
 path length 24 (halfway through the system)  can be
 increased  to match the removals at path length 48
 by adding H2O2 at a dose of 70 mg/L. This  finding
 indicates  that the equipment  cost and electrical
 energy cost could be reduced by 50  percent by
 adding H2O2 at a relatively low cost. The system
 effluent met the Safe Drinking Water Act MCLs for
 benzene; cis-1,2-DCE; and 1 ,1-DCE. However, the
effluent did not meet  the MCLs for PCE; TCE;
 1,1-DCA;  and  1,1,1-TCA.  VOC  removal  was
 generally reproducible for  most VOCs when the
 Matrix system'was operated on different occasions
 under identical  conditions. Treatment by the Matrix
 system did not reduce  groundwater toxicity to
 freshwater  test  organisms  (the water  flea
 [Ceriodaphnia  dubia]  and  fathead  minnow
 [Pimephalespromelas]). The estimated groundwater
  remediation cost for the Matrix system is about
 $18/m3 of water treated. Of this cost, the Matrix
 system direct treatment cost was about  $7.60/m3 of
 water treated.

  Pilot-Scale Applications

 VOCs in  groundwater have been removed using
 APO processes on  a pilot  scale. This  section
  presents pilot-scale  evaluation  results  for the
  UV/H2O2, so!ar/TiO2, and solar/TiO2/H202 processes
  in removing the following  VOCs.
|  APO  Process.  | VOCs Removed    |
. UV/H2O2
• Solar/TiO2
. Solar/TiO,/H,O,
Benzene
. TCE
. BTEX
    UV/H202

A UV/H2O2 system was pilot-tested by the Gateway
Center Water Treatment Plant in Los Angeles,
California, to treat groundwater contaminated with
benzene prior to the groundwater's discharge to the
Los Angeles River. The system consisted of an
H2O2 injection unit; a 360-kW UV reactor; and two
vessels containing 9,100 kg of activated  carbon
each. The average concentration of benzene in the
untreated groundwater was 35 ^g/L. The influent pH
averaged 6.8, and the flow rate was maintained at
about 3.2 m3/min. Under these conditions, the
UV/H2O2 system achieved 98 percent removal of
benzene.   The treated groundwater's pH was
adjusted  using  sodium hydroxide to meet the
discharge  limit. No cost information was  reported
(Oldencrantz and others 1997).

    So/ar/77O2

A  pilot-scale solar/TiO2 system  designed  by
researchers at the  National  Renewable  Energy
Laboratory and  Sandia National Laboratory was
field-tested at a Super-fund  site at Lawrence
Livermore  National Laboratory in Tracy,  California, to
treat TCE-contaminated groundwater  (Mehos and
Turchi 1993).   The system used at -Lawrence
 Livermore National Laboratory consisted of a
concentrating solar collector and a mobile equipment
skid.. The reactor for the  study  consisted of a
0.051  -cm-diameter borosilicate glass pipe  that ran
 along the length of the solar collector at the focal line
 of the parabolic troughs.     The influent TCE
 concentration was about 110  f^g/L, and  the raw
 groundwater's pH averaged 7.2.  Powdered  TiO2
 catalyst was added to the influent as a concentrated
 slurry at a dose of 800 to 900 mg/L. The flow rate
was maintained at 15  Umin, corresponding to a
 retention time  of 10 minutes.

 The study results showed that lowering  the pH of the
 influent groundwater significantly   increased
 the percent  removal  of TCE by reducing the
 concentration of bicarbonate  ion, a known scavenger
 of «OH. Lowering the pH from 7.2 to 5.6 increased
 TCE removals from 91 to 99 percent. The projected
 treatment cost for a full-scale, 380-m3/day treatment
 system at the  Lawrence Livermore  National
 Laboratory site was $0.83/m3 of water treated.
                                               3-6

-------
    So/ar/7/O/H2O2

In  a pilot-scale field test at Tyndall Air Force Base in
Florida, a solar/Ti02/H2O2 batch system was used to
treat jet fuel contaminants-specifically,  2 mg/L of
total benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene
(BTEX)—in groundwater.  The  treatment  unit
consisted of a photoreactor area made up of 15
nonconcentrating solar panels. TiO2 doses of 0.5 to
1 mg/L and an H2O2 dose of 100 mg/L were used.
Removal rates for BTEX  and  total  organic carbon
(TOC) were slightly higher at pH levels of 4 and 5,
suggesting that an acidic medium is beneficial. From
about 50 to 75 percent of the  BTEX was removed
during the 3-hour studies. The TOC concentration,
which ranged  from 70 to  90 mg/L  initially, remained
relatively unchanged,  suggesting that while parent
compounds were  destroyed,  complete mineralization
did not occur.    The estimated treatment  cost,
including capital and O&M costs and based on a flow
rate of 38 m3/day, was $20  to $29/m3 of water
treated (Turchi and others 1993).

Bench-Scale  Studies

This section summarizes  the results of bench-scale
studies  of the effectiveness of APO processes for
VOC  removal from groundwater.  The bench-scale
results are summarized only for studies that provided
information beyond the commercial- and  pilot-scale
applications summarized  above. The level of detail
provided varies depending on the  source of
information used.  For example, VOC percent
removals and test conditions  are not  specified for
some of the bench-scale studies  because such
information is unavailable in  the sources. Bench-
scale study results on VOC  removals and treatment
by-products  in  groundwater  and  synthetic
wastewater matrices for the following VOCs by
UV/H2O2 and TiO2 are discussed,
| APO Process | VOCs Removed
I
• UV/H2O2
• UWTi02
. Acetone, naphthalene,
TCE, PCE
. Chloroform, ethylbenzene,
nitrobenzene, MTBE
    UV/H2O2

 Hirvonen and others (1996) report on UV/H202
 treatment of well water contaminated with TCE and
 PCE in a  batch UV reactor.  TCE and  PCE
 concentrations were initially 100 and 200 ^g/L,
 respectively. The UV dose was 1.2 W/L, the H202
 dose was 140 mg/L, and the influent pH was 6.8.
 Treatment resulted in  98 and 93 percent removals  of
TCE  and  PCE,  respectively,  in  5  minutes.
Chlorinated by-products formed included trichloro-
acetic acid and  dichloroacetic acid.

A Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2 bench-scale reactor was
used to study degradation of acetone in synthetic
wastewater. Acetone was present at  concentrations
of 30 to 300 mg/L. The H2O2 dose was varied from
100 to 544 mg/L.  The initial concentrations of
acetone and H2O2' significantly affected  the initial
rate of acetone degradation.    At a  high  pH,
by-products of acetone degradation-specifically,
acetic    acid,    formic   acid,    and    oxalic
acid-accumulated,  competed  for *OH,  and slowed
down  acetone removal (Stefan  and others 1996).

By-product   formation     during    naphthalene
degradation  by UV/H2O2 treatment was studied
using  synthetic wastewater.  By-products of the
reaction   included naphthol; naphthoquinone;
bicyclo[4,2,9]octa-1,3,5-triene; 2,3-dihydroxy-benzo-
furan;   1 (3h)isobenzofuranone;   benzaldehyde;
phthalic acid;  benzoic acid; phenol;  hydroxy-
benzaldehyde; hydroxyacetophenone;  and dimethyl-
pentadiene  (Tuhkanen  and Beltran 1995).

    UV/TiO2

UVrriO2 degradation of chloroform in distilled  water
was studied using pure  silver (Ag)-loaded TiO2. At
an  initial chloroform  concentration of 200 mg/L,
44 percent of the chloroform was removed when Ag-
loaded TiO2 was used, and 35 percent was removed
when  pure  (unloaded)  TiO2 was used. The addition
of Ag  as a sensitizer  improved the performance of
the UV/TiO2 process (Kondo and Jardim  1991).

UV/TiO2 degradation  of ethylbenzene was studied.
The initial concentrations of ethylbenzene and TiO2
were 0.32 to 5.4 mg/L and 1,000 mg/L, respectively.
The  reaction  by-products  identified include
4-ethyIphenol,   acetophenone,   2-methylbenzyl
alcohol, 2-ethylphenol, and 3-ethylphenol. At an
initial  pH of 4.5, about 65 minutes was required for
complete mineralization  (Vidal  and others 1994).

Minero and others (1994)  studied  photocatalytic
degradation of nitrobenzene using the UV/TiO2
process. Within 1 hour, >90 percent mineralization
was achieved using 200 mg/L of TiO2. The reaction
by-products   identified  include  2-,  3-,   and
4-nitrophenol and dihydroxybenzenes.

Photodegradation  of methyl-terf-butyl ether (MTBE)
in synthetic wastewater  using the  UV/TiO2 process
was studied.  The optimum  amount of catalyst was
 100 mg/L, above which increased turbidity reduced
                                              3-7

-------
360 minutes of irradiation at a pH of 7.0 (Jardim and
others 1997).

    UV/ZnO

Richard and Boule (1994) studied photochemical
oxidation of salicylic acid using the UV/ZnO process.
At  a ZnO dose  of 2,000 mg/L  and under
O2-saturated conditions, 2,5-dihydroxybenzoic acid;
2,3-dihydroxybenzoic acid; and pyrocatechol were
identified  as  by-products.

3.1.3  PCB-Contaminated  Groundwater

No commercial- or pilot-scale information was
available on the effectiveness of APO in treating
groundwater contaminated with PCBs. Two bench-
scale studies for the following PCBs are summarized
below.
APO Process
. Solar/diethylamine .
. Solar/TiO2
PCBs Removed
PCB congeners:
66, 101, 110, 118,
138 (Aroclor 1254)
• Aroclor 1248
Lin and others  (1995) studied photodegradation of
five PCB congeners—66,101,110,118,138—under
simulated sunlight in the presence of the  sensitizer
diethylamine.     These  congeners represent
45.5 percent of all Aroclor 1254 congeners. PCBs
were  present  in synthetic wastewater at a
concentration of  1 .0 mg/L. With a diethylamine dose
of 1 /j.g/L and a reaction time of 24 hours, congeners
66, 101, 110, 118, and 138 were degraded by 89,
99,84,  98,  and  78 percent, respectively.  Congener
138  generated  five congeners  during  photochemical
oxidation; specifically, congeners 85, 87,97,99,  and
118  were generated during 1 hour of treatment.

PCB removal from synthetic wastewater has also
been studied using the solar/Ti02  process in a
bench-scale study by Zhang and others  (1993).
Aroclor  1248 was  present in synthetic wastewater at
a concentration  of 320 mg/L. At a Ti02 dose of
50,000 mg/L, 83 percent removal of Aroclor 1248
was observed in 4 hours.

3.7.4  Pesticide- and Herbicide-
        Contaminated Groundwa ter

No evaluations of commercial-scale APO  processes
for removing   pesticides  and  herbicides  from
groundwater were available. However, one APO
process (UV/03) has been evaluated at the pilot
scale, and several such APO  processes have been
evaluated at the bench scale. The results of these
evaluations  are  summarized  below.

Pilot-Scale Application

Kearney and others (1987) conducted a UV/O3 pilot-
scale study involving treatment of pesticide in
synthetic wastewater. The concentration of each
contaminant (alachlor;  atrazine;  Bentazon; butylate;
cyanazine;  2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid [2,4-D];
metolachlor; metribuzin; trifluraline; carbofuran; and
malathion) was varied at three levels: 1 0,  100, and
1,000 mg/L. The treatment unit used consisted  of
66 low-pressure  mercury vapor lamps with a total UV
output  of 455 W at 254 nm. The  flow  rate through
the system was varied from 8 to 40 Umin. For
pesticides at initial concentrations of 10 to 100 mg/L,
>99.9 percent  removal was observed. For the
1 ,000-mg/L initial concentrations, the removals
ranged from 75 to 85 percent. The time required for
90 percent  removal depended on the initial pesticide
concentration  and  increased as the  initial
concentration increased (about 20 minutes for a
10-mg/L initial concentration and 60 minutes for a
1 00-mg/L initial concentration).

Bench-Scale Studies-

Pesticides and herbicides  in water have been
removed using the VUV, UV/H2O2, UV/O3, photo-
Fenton, and UVfi"iO2 processes at the bench-scale
level. This  section summarizes  bench-scale results
for APO treatment of the following pesticides and
herbicides;    information  on  by-products and
contaminant percent removals is provided where
available.
                                              3-10

-------
 APO  Process
UV/H2O2

UV/03

Photo-Fenton


UV/TiO,
                Pesticides  and
                Herbicides  Removed
                       Atrazine

                        2,4-D

                        Simazine

                        Methyl  parathion,
                        metolachlor

                       Alachlor; atrazine;
                        Basagran;  Bentazon;
                        carbofuran; 2,4-D;
                        1,2-dibromo-
                        3-chloropropane;
                        dichlorvos;  Diquat;
                        Diuron;
                        monocrotophos;
                        Monuron;
                        pendimethalin;
                        propazine;  propoxur;
                        simazine
    vuv

The VUV process was evaluated in terms  of
mineralization of atrazine (22 mg/L) in synthetic
wastewater.     By-products   identified include
ammelide, ammeline, and cyanuric acid. The yield
of the by-products of atrazine degradation (for
example, cyanuric acid) from VUV photolysis was
found to be about half the yield obtained in UV/TiO2
reactions (Gonzalez  and  others  1994).

    UV/H202

Pichat and others (1993) studied UV/H202 treatment
of 2,4-D in synthetic wastewater.    The  initial
concentration of 2,4-D was 80 mg/L. At an H202
dose of 99 mg/L, mineralization  of the  compound
was nearly complete (>99 percent) within 3 hours.

    UV/03

The UV/Og process  was evaluated in oxidation  of
simazine in synthetic wastewater.    The  initial
concentration of simazine was 4 mg/L. The retention
time in  the reactor was 15 minutes.  Complete
oxidation of the compound was observed when
34 milligrams  per minute  of 0, was applied at a pH
of 7.2. By-products of the reaction included chloro-
diamino   s-triazine,    aminochloro    ethylamino
s-triazine,   diaminohydroxy  s-triazine,  amino-
dihydroxy s-triazine, and cyanuric acid (Lai and
others 199.5).
    Photo-Fen ton

The photo-Fenton reaction was used to treat
metolachlor(2-chloro-N-[2-methyl-6-ethylphenyl]-N-
[2-methoxy-1 -methylethyl]acetamide) and  methyl
parathion  in synthetic wastewater.  The  initial
concentrations of metolachlor and methyl parathion
ranged from 28 to 57 mg/L and 26 to 53 mg/L,
respectively.  The doses of H2O2 and Fe(lll) used
were 340 and 350 mg/L, respectively. Under a black
light,  metolachlor was completely  mineralized to
carbon dioxide in 6 hours; details  on methyl
parathion degradation  were not  available. Organic
by-products of  the  metolachlor reaction included
chloroacetate,   oxate,   formate,  and  serine.
By-products of methyl  parathion degradation
included  oxalic acid;  4-nitrophenol; dimethyl
phosphoric  acid; and  traces of O,O-dimethyl-
4-nitrophenyl phosphoric acid (Pignatello and Sun
1995).

    UV/TlOg

The UV/TiO2 process was evaluated  for treating
synthetic wastewater containing 2,4-D and propoxur
at 50 mg/L  each. At a pH of 4 and with a TiO2 dose
of 180 mg/L, 2,4-D and  propoxur concentrations
were reduced by 97 and  73 percent, respectively.
The primary by-products of 2,4-D degradation were
formaldehyde;  2,4-DCP;  and  2,4-DCP formate.
According to the Microtox test, which  measures
toxicity based on the quantity of light emitted by
the luminescent bacterium Photobacterium phos-
phoreum before and after exposure to an aqueous
sample, 2,4-D by-products  are more toxic than the
parent compounds  after partial degradation. These
results indicate the  importance  of completely
destroying the by-products during treatment (Lu  and
Chen  1997).

UV/Ti02 was applied to treatment of synthetic
wastewater  containing dichlorvos at an  initial
concentration  of 50 mg/L. The UV/TiO2 process was
tested at pH levels of 4 and 8 for 3 hours. Greater
removal was observed at a pH of 4. However, the
toxicity of the  solution increased 2.5 times that of the
parent compound during the irradiation period. At a
pH  of 8, although the percent removal  was lower
than it was -at a pH of 4, toxicity decreased during
the  illumination period (Lu  and others 1993).

The UV/TiO2 process was tested in terms of
oxidation of atrazine (22 mg/L), simazine (20 mg/L),
and propazine (23 mg/L)  in synthetic wastewater.
The by-products of UV/TiO2 photodegradation of all
                                             3-11

-------
three  compounds  were ammeline;  ammelide;  and
1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine-6-chloro. Cyanuric acid
was the final product of the reactions (Pelizzetti and
others  1992).

The California Department of Health Services,
Sanitation and Radiation Laboratory tested the
UV/TiO2 process  in destruction of 1,2-dibromo-3-
chloropropane (DBCP)  in contaminated  groundwater
taken  from a polluted well in the vicinity of Fresno,
California.    The  initial DBCP concentration of
2.9 /j.g/L was decreased to 0.4 ^g/L (an 86 percent
removal) using 0.25 percent Ti02 catalyst on silica
gel and UV light  (a 1-kW xenon lamp) in about
6 hours (Halmann  and others 1992).

Degradation of carbofuran (220 mg/L) in synthetic
wastewater was studied using a UV7TiO2 process.
Under  a 400-W medium-pressure mercury lamp and
TiO2-coate_d glass  plates (with a surface coverage of
2.5 x 10~5 g/cm2), complete mineralization was
achieved after 15 hours of irradiation at  a pH of 6. A
fluorescent compound appeared as  an  intermediate
during photooxidation.  The degradation rate was
relatively  low at high pH  values (Tennakone and
others  1997).

Hua     and    others    (1995) photodegraded
monocrotophos using the UV7TiO2 process. At a
flow rate of 0.030 liter per minute (L/min) and an
initial  monocrotophos concentration  of 11,000 mg/L,
51 percent of the compound degraded  after 1 hour.
Addition of H2O2 to the UV/Ti02 system significantly
enhanced  degradation, For example, when 62 mg/L
of H2O2 was  added to a  solution  containing
10,000 mg/L of monocrotophos, 10 percent more
degradation was observed after 1 hour than  was the
case with UWTiO2 alone.

Kinkennon and others (1995) studied UV/TiO2
degradation of the  herbicides Basagran, Diquat, and
Diuron in synthetic wastewater at a  concentration of
10 mg/L each. Under a 1  -kW high-pressure xenon
lamp,  Basagran, Diquat, and  Diuron concentrations
were reduced by 95 percent in 1 hour, 90 percent in
90 minutes, and 90 percent in 1 hour,  respectively.

Pramauro and others (1993) applied  the UWTi02
process to degrade Monuron, or 3-(4-chlorophenyl)-
l-l -dimethylurea, in synthetic wastewater. Light was
provided by a  1,500-W xenon lamp. With an initial
Monuron concentration of 20 mg/L, 100 mg/L of Ti02
catalyst, and a pH of 5.5,  >99.9 percent removal of
the contaminant took place in 30 to  40  minutes. The
compound 4-chlorophenyl  isocyanate was identified
as an  intermediate  that was decomposed after about
35 minutes of irradiation.
UV/TiO2 treatment of pendimethalin and alachlor at
initial  concentrations of  100  and  51 mg/L,
respectively, was evaluated. Using a 120-W, high-
pressure  mercury  lamp  and  a TiO2 dose  of
250 mg/L, 60 percent removal was achieved for
pendimethalin  in  3  hours  compared  to only
10 percent degradation in the absence of Ti02.
Alachlor was degraded much more quickly under the
same conditions  (95 percent removal in  20 minutes).
The by-products of pendimethalin degradation were
2,6-dinitro    3,4-dimethylaniIine    and   6-nitro
3,4-dimethylaniline.   The byproducts of alachlor
degradation  were hydroxyalachlor  and  ketolachlor
(Moza and others 1992).

Pelizzetti  and others (1989) studied  degradation  of
the herbicide  Bentazon, or  3-isopropyl-2,1 ,3-
benzothiadiazin-4-one-2,2-dioxide,    using   the
UV/TiO2  process in a batch  system.  Using  a
1,500-W xenon lamp and 50 mg/L of TiO2, the initial
Bentazon concentration  of 20 ^g/L was reduced  to
<0.1 /^g/L (>99.5 percent removal) after 10 minutes
of  irradiation.

3.1.5  Dioxin- and Furan-Contaminated
       Groundwa  ter

Dioxins and furans have been removed-from
synthetic wastewater using the photo-Fenton
process at the  bench-scale level. Pignatello and
Huang (1993) studied the  fate of polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxin (PCDD) and  polychlorinated
dibenzofuran (PCDF) contaminants in the herbicide
2,4,5-trichlorphenoxyacetic  acid (2,4,5-T) during
photo-Fenton treatment. PCDD and  PCDF were
initially present at concentrations  of 2.3  and
0.0016 uglL, respectively.  The  highest  removals
were observed in aerated solutions at a pH of 2.8
and with an H202 dose of 1,700 mg/L. Under these
conditions, 89 to >99.9  percent removal  of the PCDD
and  PCDF was achieved in 1  hour except for
octachloro-dibenzofuran, which was degraded by
66 percent.

3.7.6  Explosive- and Degradation
       Product-Contaminated
        Groundwa  ter

Explosives  and their degradation  products  in
groundwater  have been treated  using the UV/H2O2
process at  the commercial scale.  Removal  of
explosives and their  degradation products from
groundwater using the UV/TiO2 process has been
evaluated at  the bench scale.  The results of the
commercial- and bench-scale evaluations are
discussed  below.
                                             3-12

-------
 Commercial-Scale  Applications

 This section presents  performance data from field
 studies using the Calgon perox-pure™ and  Calgon
 Rayox® UV/H202 treatment systems to remove the
 following  explosives  and their degradation products
 from groundwater.
APO Process .
• UV/H202
Explosives and Their
Degradation Products
Rbmoved
Benzathiazole;
1,4-dithiane;NG;NQ;
1 ,4-oxathiane; RDX;
thiodiglycol;1,3,5-TNB
    Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 System

A Calgon perox-pureiM  UV/H2O2 system was used
to treat contaminated groundwater at the Old 0-Field
Site of Aberdeen Proving  Ground  in Maryland. The
groundwater contaminants at the  Old 0-Field site
included thiodiglycol; 1 ,4-dithiane; and 1,4-oxathiane
at concentrations of  480, 200, and 82  //g/L,
respectively.       Benzathiazole    and   1,3,5-
trinitrobenzene (TNB) were also present in the
groundwater at concentrations of 20 and 15 ^g/L,
respectively. Four tests were conducted at a flow
rate of 60 L/min; the  hydraulic retention time was
about 5  minutes. In  Tests 1, 2,  and 3, the H2O2
doses used were 45, 90, and 180 mg/L, respectively;
the doses in these tests were equally divided into
three parts and added by the splitter at (1) the
influent line to the first chamber, (2) the effluent line
from the first chamber, and (3) the effluent line from
the second chamber. In Test 4, a total H2O2 dose of
45 mg/L  was added to the influent line to the first
reactor;  the splitter was not used.  The treated
effluent  met federal MCLs for all compounds.
Removals of thiodiglycol; 1,4-dithiane; 1,4-oxathiane;
benzathiazole; and 1,3,5-TNB were >97, 98, 97, 82,
and 96 percent, respectively. No  cost information
was provided for the  system (Topudurti and others
1993).

Also, a Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 system was
used to treat groundwater at the  former Nebraska
Ordnance Plant in Mead,  Nebraska.     site
groundwater contained 28 ^g/L of cyclonite (RDX),
the primary ordnance compound  used at the site.
The 30-kW system used at the site consisted of six
5-kW  lamps, each mounted  horizontally above one
another in separate 6-inch reactor chambers. The
 groundwater flowed in series in a serpentine pattern
 to each reactor chamber. The field study was
 performed at a (1) flow rate of 310 L/min, (2) pH of
 7.0, (3) HA, dose of 10 mg/L, and (4) UV dose of
 0.53 kWh/m   The RDX concentration was reduced
 by more than 82 percent. The total operating cost
 for a system with a flow rate  of 29,000 Umin was
 estimated to be $0.02/m3 of water treated, which
 includes the costs of power, lamp replacement, and
 H2O2 (Calgon  1998).

    Calgon ftayox® UV/H2O2 System

'A Calgon Rayox® UV/H202 system was installed at
 the Indian Head Division, Naval Surface  Warfare
 Center, in   Indian  Head,  Maryland,  to treat
 nitroglycerin  (NG)  production wastewater and
 nitroguanidine  (NO) wastewater.     The system
 reduced  NQ  levels  from  2,700  . to  1  mg/L
 (>99.9 percent removal)  and NG levels from 1,000 to
 1 mg/L (>99.9 percent removal) using a UV dose of
 450 kWh/m3.   By-products of NG degradation
 included  1,2-dinitroglycerin (DNG); 1,3-DNG;
 mononitroglycerin  (MNG);  nitrogen;  nitrate; nitrite;
 and ammonia.  By-products of NQ degradation
 included nitrate, nitrite, and ammonia.  The treatment
 cost for NG  production wastewater was estimated to
 be $13/m3 of water treated, and the cost for treating
 NQ wastewater was estimated to be $34/m3 of water
 treated  (Hempfling 1997).

 Bench-Scale Studies

 Schmelling  and Gray (1995) examined UV/TiO2
 photodegradation of 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT) in a
 slurry reactor. When  a 50-mg/L solution of TNT was
 treated using UV/TiO2 in the presence of O2, about
 90 percent  of the TNT was  oxidized to carbon
 dioxide  in 2 hours.  Oxidative  by-products  included
 trinitrobenzoic    acid,    trinitrobenzene,    and
 trinitrophenol. In a subsequent study,  the same
 reaction was tested under conditions typically
 observed in field applications.   Schmelling and
 others  (1997) compared TNT  degradation  rates  in
the UV/TiO2 process at pH levels of 5.0 and 8.5.
The degradation rate was higher at a pH of 5.0,
where >90 percent removal was observed in 1 hour;
 3 hours was  needed  to achieve the same  removal at
 a pH of 8.5. When varying concentrations of humic
 acids (1,10, and 20 mg/L representative of low,
 medium, and high values observed in natural waters)
were added to TNT solutions,  degradation rates
 increased  with  increasing  concentrations of humic
acid.
                                             3-13

-------
3.1.7  Humic  Substance-Contaminated
       Groundwa ter

A UV/TiO2 process was used to remove a brown
discoloration in synthetic wastewater introduced  by
humic acid, which was present at a concentration of
0.1  mg/L. The batch reaction took place under a
250-W, medium-pressure mercury  lamp. During the
reaction, the discoloration decreased by  half in about
12 minutes. However, it took 1 hour to mineralize
only 50 percent of the humic substances to carbon
dioxide and H2O. Some of the reaction by-products
were highly fluorescent (Eggins and others 1997).
3.1.8  Inorganic-Contaminated
       Groundwa ter

Bench-scale treatment of cyanide (2.6 mg/L) in
synthetic  wastewater (2.6 mg/L) was  conducted
using a UV/ZnO process. At a pH of 11, and using
a ZnO dose of 8,000 mg/L, more than 95 percent of
cyanide was destroyed in 9 minutes.  Reaction
by-products  include cyanogen and the cyanate ion
(Domenech  and Peral 1988).
                                            3-14

-------
        Table 3-1.  Contaminated Groundwater  Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information

COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
rOCs (Commercial Scale)
)V/H2O2
Calgon
lerox-pure™)
IV/H2O2
Calgon
erox-pure™)
V/H2O2
Saigon
erox-pure™)
V/H2O2
'algon
jrox-pure™)
Raw Groundwater
TCE: 890 to 1 ,300 ,ug/L
PCE: 71 to150yug/L
Spiked Groundwater
TCE: 690 to 1 ,000 uglL
PCE: 63 to 92 //g/L
1.1-DCA:120to 170^9/L
1,1,1-TCA: 110to130/jg/L
Chloroform: 140 to 240 Aig/L
1,2-DCE: 200 Mg/L
Benzene: 52 yug/L
Chloroform: 41 yug/L
1 ,2-DCA: 22 ^g/L
TCE: 21 M9/L
Methylene chloride: 8^g/L
Site_E£L
1 ,2-DCE: 11,000,ug/L
PCE: 2,500 ^g/L
TCE: 1 ,700 ^g/L
vc: 1,200 ^g/L
Site
CB: 3,100 /jg/L
vc: 1. 700 /ug/L
1 ,2-DCE: 430 ,ug/L
1.6DCB: 420 yug/L
1,1-DCA:400,ug/L
TCE: 50 to 400 mg/L
Flow rate: 38 to 150 L/min
Reactor volume: 57 L (total)
Light source: six 5-kW mercury lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 30 to 240 mg/L
Influent pH: 8.0. 6.5. 5.0

Flow rate: 60 L/min
Reactor volume: 300 L
Light source: four 15-kW mercury
lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 doses: 45, 90. 180 mg/L
Retention time: 5 min
Siie_E=i
Flow rate: 490 L/min
Light source: 90-kW system
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 50 mg/L
Influent pH: 5.5
Retention time: 2 min
Siie_E=a
Flow rate: 940 L/min
Light source: 270-kW system
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 100 mg/L
Influent pH: 5.1
Retention time: 4 min
Flow rate: 510 L/min
Reactor volume: not available
tight source: one 15-kW UV lamp
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: not available
TCE: >99.9
PCE: >98.7
1 ,I-DCA:>95.8
1,1,1-TCA: 92.9
Chloroform: 93.6
1.2-DCE:>99
Benzene: >96
Chloroform: >97
1,2-DCA:>92
TCE: >93
Methylene chloride:
>86
Site
1,2-DCE:>99.9
PCE: >99.9
TCE: >99.9
VC: >95.8
Site
CB: >99.9
vc: >97
1,2-DCE:>99.1
1,4-DCB:>99.5
I,1-DCA:>99.5
>99.7
Effluent acutely toxic to
freshwater test
organisms
Effluent not toxic to
freshwater test
organism
None
None
i
None
Case 1 : Raw
Groundwater
Remediation cost:
$2.10/m3
Calgon perox-pure"
cost: $0.89/m3
Case 2: Spiked
Groundwater
Remediation cost:
$3.30/m3
Calgon perox-pure™
cost: $1 .50/m3
Not available
Sltfi-Ezl:
For a 75-L/min System
Equipment cost:
$115,000
O&M cost:
$2.800/month
Kite 3 '
Fora 130-L/min
System
Equipment cost:
$241 ,000
O&M cost:
$13.000/month
O&M cost: $0.08/m3
Topudurti and
others 1994
Topudurti and
others 1993
Kllnk and
ithers 1992
U.S. EPA 1993
CO
 I


en

-------
        Table  3-1.  Contaminated  Groundwater Treatment  (Continued)
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
VOCs (Commercial Scale) (Continued) •
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
Rayox )
UV/H2O2
Followed by Air
Stripper
(Calgon
Rayox®)
GAC Followed
by UV/H2O2
fCalgon
Rayox®)
JV/H2O2
[Magnum
DAV-OX®)
JV/H202
Magnum
JAV-OX®)
TCE: 4,700 ng!L
1 ,2-DCE:810;ug/L
PCE: 6.000 M9/L
1,1,1-TCA: 100 f^g/L
Methylene chloride: 60 nQlL
Methylene chloride: 6.9 /^g/L
TCE: 1 ,500 to 2,000 //g/L
Benzene: 250 to 500 ^glL
TPH: 190 mg/L
Flow rate: 1 .5 m3/min
Light source: four 15-kW UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 25 mg/L
Flow rate: 450 L/min
Light source: one 90-kW UV lamp
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2OZ dose: 25 mg/L
Flow rate: 2,700 Umin (total)
Light source: four 90-kW UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: not available
Influent pH: 5.0
CAV-OX I System
Flow rate: 2.3 L/min
Light source: six 60-W UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 23 mg/L
CAV-OX II system
Flow rate: 5.3 Umin
Light source: 5-kW and 10-kW
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 48 mg/L
Flow rate: 38 Umin
Light source: 12 60-W UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 20 mg/L
TCE: 99.9
1 ,2-DCE: 91 .4
Before Air Stripper
PCE: 99.8
1.1,1-TCA: 20
Methylene chloride:
16.7
92.6
r.AY-DY 1 System,
TCE: 99.9
Benzene: 99.9
CAV-OX II System
TCE: 99.8
Benzene: 99.8
99.9
None
Percent Not a
Air Stripper
PCE: >99.9
1,1,1-TCA: >99
Methylene chloride:
>98.3
None
None
None
i
None
Equipment cost:
$110,000
O&M cost: $0.09/m3
v a i I a b I e
For a 2,700 L/m!n
Rayox®/GAC Systsm n
Equipment cost:
$730,000
O&M cost: $0.31/m3
CAV-OX-I System
Remediation cost:
$3.80/m3
Magnum cost:
$1.50/m3
CAV-OX II System
Remediation cost:
$4.07/m3
Magnum cost:
$1 .50/m3
CAV-OX 1 System
$0.47/m3
Weir and other:
1996
Bircher and
others 1996
Bircher and
hers 1996
U.S. EPA 1994
U.S. EPA 1994
U.S. EPA 1994
CO
I


O)

-------
        Table 3-1. Contaminated Groundwater Treatment (Continued)
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
VOCs (Commercial Scale) (Continued) • •
UV/H2O2
(Magnum
CAV-K®)
UV/H2O2
(WEDECO)
LJV/O3
[WEDECO)
L)V/O3/H2O2
[U.S. Filter)
JV/O3/H2O2
US. Filter)
TCE: 1 .800 ^g/L
cis-1 ,2-DCE: 250 uglL
trans-1 ,2-DCE: 200 j/g/L
vc: 53 f/g/L
PCE: 11 ^g/L
1,2-DCA:54^g/L
ds-1 ,2-DCE: 46 f^g/L
Benzene: 310 ^g/L
Ethyl Benzene: 41 yug/L
vc: 34 uglL
TCE: 330 ^glL
PCE: 160 ng/L
TCE: 50 to 88 ^g/L
1,1-DCA:9.5to 13/jg/L
1,1,1-TCA:2to4.5A/g/L
TCE: 520 ^g/L
Flow rate and retention time: not
available
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: six 60-W UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 30 mg/L of 35 percent
H202
Flow rate: 3.8 to 15 L/min
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: two low-pressure
mercury lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: not available
Flow rate: 10 m3/h
Light source: UV-C 30-mW/L
H2O2 dose: 5 mg/L
Flow rate: 0.14 mg3/min
Light source: 24 65-W UV lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
0, dose: 1 10 mg/L
H2O2 dose: 13 mg/L
Influent pH: 7.2
Retention time: 40 min
Flow rate: 20 to 38 L/min
Reactor volume: 2,700 L
Light source: 72 65-W lamps
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
Oxidant doses: not available
TCE: 99.9
cis-1 ,2-DCE: >99.9
trans-1 ,2-DCE:>99.9
vc: >99.7
PCE: >98
1,2-DCA: 9
cis-1 ,2-DCE: >87
Benzene: 93
Ethylbenzene: 92
vc: 86
TCE: 99
PCE: 96.6
TCE: 99
1,1-DCA:.65
1,1,1-TCA: 87
>99
None
None
None
1,1-DCAand
1 .1 ,1-TCA removal due
to stripping by 0, and
oxidation
None
CAV-OX I System
$0.32/m3
(includes H2O2,
electricity,
maintenance, and lamp
replacement costs)
$0.39/m3
(includes electricity,
O&M, lamp
replacement, and H2O2
costs)
$0.1 9/m3
(includes electricity,
O&M, and equipment
costs)
Equipment cost:
$88,000 to
$320,000
O&M cost: $0.08 to
$5.60/m3
(depending on
pretreatment
requirements)
Equipment cost:
$380,000
O&M cost: $5/m3
Magnum 1998
WEDECO 1998
Leitzke and
Whltby 1990
Topudurti and
others 1993
U.S. EPA 1990
CO

-------
Table 3-1. Contaminated Groundwater Treatment (Continued)
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
(OCs (Commercial Scale) (Continued)
JV/TiO2
Matrix)
1 ,1-DCA:660to840A92
cis-1 ,2-DCE: 96
1 ,1-DCE: 97
TCE: 93
PCE: a2
Benzene: 99
Aldehydes and
haloacetlc acids
No acute toxicity
reduction for fathead
minnows and water
fleas
50 percent reduction in
equipment and
electrical energy costs
realized through H2O2
addition
Treatment cost:
$18/m3
Matrix direct cost:
$7.60/m3
Topudurti and
others 1998
VOCs (Pilot Scale)
UV/H2O2
Solar/TiO2
Solar/TiO.2/H2O2
Benzene: 35 ^g/L
TCE: 100mg/L
fotal BTEX: 2 mg/L
Flow rate: 3.2 m3/min
Light source: 360-kW reactor
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: not available
Influent pH: 6.8
Flow rate: 15 Umin
Light source: solar (>300 nm)
TiO2 dose: 800 to 900 mg/L
Influent pH: 5.6 and 7.2
Retention time: 10 minutes
Flow rate: 38 m3/day
Reactor volume: 530 L
Light source: not available
Wavelength: 380 nm
TiO2 dose: 0.5 to 1 .0 mg/L
H2O2 dose: 100 mg/L
Influent pH: 4-5
Retention time: 3 hours
98
TCE: 99 at pH 5.6;
91 at pH 7.2
50 to 75
Effluent pH adjusted
with sodium hydroxide
None
None
Not available
For 380-m3/day System
$0.83/m3
$20 to $29/m3
(including capital and
O&M costs)
Oldencrantz
and others
1997
Mehosand
Turchi 1993
Turchl and
others 1993

-------
Table 3-1. Contaminated Groundwater Treatment (Continued)
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information

COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
SVOCs (Commercial Scale)
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
perox-pure™)
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
Rayox®)
JV/H2O2
'Calgon
k 99.9
Phenol: 799.9
799.9
Flow stream to be
reinjected: 90
Flow stream to be
discharged: 99
None
None
None
None
5
For a 260-L/min
System
O&M cost: $1 .20/m3
(including electricity,
chemical, and general
maintenance costs)
Not available
For a 2,300-L/min
System
Operating cost:
$0.10/rrr
Operating cost:
0.36/m3
U.S. EPA 1993
Cater and
others 1990
Calgon 1996
Calgon 1996
'esticides and Herbicides (Pilot Scale)
JV/O3
Pesticides:
10; 100; 1,000 mg/L
(alachlor; atrazine; Bentazon;
butylate; Cyanazine; 2,4-D;
metolachlor; metribuzin;
trifluraline; carbofuran;
malathion)
Flow rate: 8-40 Umin
Light source: 66
UV lamps: 450 W
Wavelength: 254 nm
0, dose: not available
Influent pH: not available
Retention time: 20 to 60 min
Pesticides with initial
concentrations of 10
to 100 mg/L: >99.9
Pesticides with initial
concentrations of
1 ,000 mg/L: 75 to 85
None
Not available
Kearney and
others 1987
Explosives and Their Degradation Products (Commercial Scale)
JV/H2O2
Calgon
ierox-pure™)
Thiodiglycol: 480 ^g/L
1,4-Dithiane: 200jug/L
1,4-Oxathiane: 82 ^g/L
Benzathiazole: 20 ^g/L
1,3,5-TNB:15,ug/L
Flow rate: 60 Umin
Reactor volume: 300 L
Light source: four 15-kW mercury
lamps
Wavelength: not available
H2O2 doses: 45, 90, and 1 80 mg/L
Retention time: 5.3 min
Thiodiglycol: >97
1,4-Dithiane: ^98
1 ,4-Oxathiane: >97
tenzathiazole: >82
1 ,3.5-TNB: 96
Vendor: Calgon
perox-pure ™
Site: Old O-Field Site
Aberdeen Proving
Ground, Maryland
Not available
Topudurti and
others 1993

-------
        Table 3-1. Contaminated  Groundwater Treatment (Continued)
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional
Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
Explosives and Their Degradation Products (Commercial Scale) (Continued) : ••-. . ... v •• .
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
perox-pure™)
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
Rayox®)
RDX: 28 /^g/L
NG: 1 ,000 mg/L
NQ: 2,700 mg/L
Flow rate: 310 Umin
Reactoivolume: not available
Light source: six 5-kW lamps
UV dose: 0.53 kWh/m3
Wavelength: not available
H2O2 dose: 10 mg/L
pH = 7.0
Flow rate: not available (batch)
Reactor volume: not available
UV dose: 450 kWh/m3
Wavelength: not available
H2O2 dose: not available
>82
799.9
Former Nebraska
Ordnance Plant. NE
By-products
NG: 1,2-DNG; 1,3-
DNG; MNG;
nitrogen; nitrate;
nitrite; ammonia
NQ: nitrate, nitrite, and
ammonia
For a 29.000 L/min
System
$0.02/m3 (induding
power, lamp
replacement, H2O2,
and general
maintenance)
NG: $13/m3
NQ: $34/m3
Calgon 1998
Hempfling 1997
co

r^
o

-------
3.2    Industrial  Wastewater  Treatment

The effectiveness of APO technologies in treating
industrial wastewater has been evaluated for various
contaminant groups,  including VOCs, SVOCs, dyes,
inorganics, and microbes. This section discusses
the APO technology effectiveness with regard to
each of these contaminant groups.

3.2.1  VOC-Contaminated  Industrial
        Wastewater

This section discusses  treatment of VOCs in
industrial wastewater using the UV/H2O2 and photo-
Fenton processes   on  a commercial  scale.
Information   on VOC-contaminated  industrial
wastewater treatment using the UV/H2O2  and
semiconductor-sensitized  processes  at  the bench-
scale level is also included.

Commercial-Scale  Applications

This section summarizes the effectiveness of the
Calgon  perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 and Calgon Rayox®
photo-Fenton (ENOX)  treatment  systems in
removing the following VOCs from  industrial
wastewater.
APO Process
• UV/H202
Photo-Fenton
VOCs Removed
. Acetone, isopropyl
alcohol
. Various solvents
(individual VOCs not
measured)
    Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 System

 In 1992, a Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 system
 was installed at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida
 to treat industrial wastewater.    The  primary
 contaminants  in the wastewater included  acetone
 (20 mg/L) and isopropyl alcohol (20 mg/L). A10-kW
 Calgon perox-pure™ system initially treated 19,000-
 to 23,000-L batches of contaminated water at the
 site.   The system was  subsequently converted to a
 flow-through mode and was operated at a flow  rate
 of 19 L/min and with an H2O2 dose of 100 mg/L. The
 system achieved >97.5 percent removal for acetone
 and isopropyl alcohol, meeting  the treatment facility
 discharge requirement. The total estimated O&M
 cost reported by the vendor was  at $1 .10/m3 of water
 treated, which includes the  costs of electricity
 ($0.61/m3), H2O2 ($0.18/m3),  and  general
 maintenance (SO.StThf)1 {US? EPA 1993).
    Calgon Kayox® Photo-Fenton (ENOX)
    System

The Calgon Rayox® photo-Fenton (ENOX) system
was used to treat wastewater from a  liquid crystal
display equipment manufacturing plant in Puerto
Rico. The wastewater contained various solvents
used to clean electronic components; no information
on  the specific chemicals and their concentrations
was available. The wastewater COD level was
3,000 mg/L; its pH level was 11.1; and its alkalinity
level was 1,100 mg/L as calcium carbonate. A _
30-kW Rayox® photo-Fenton system was used to
treat the wastewater. At a UV dose of 160 kWh/m3,
the COD level  was reduced  to <50 mg/L, a
>98.4 percent removal. The total operating cost of
the treatment system was $44/m3 of water treated,
which  includes  the  costs of electricity, lamp
replacement, H2O2, ENOX catalyst,  and  pH
adjustment (Calgon  1998).

Bench-Scale Studies
This section summarizes the results of bench-scale
studies of the effectiveness of UV/H2O2 and
semiconductor-sensitized  processes in  removing the
following VOCs from industrial wastewater.
APO Process
*
UV/H2O2
Solar/TiO2;
Solar/ZnO
VOCs Removed ---
. Various chlorinated
VOCs (individual
VOCs not measured)
. Chloroform,
dimethylamine,
methanol
    UV/H2O2
 Smeds  and others  (1994)  evaluated  the
 effectiveness 'of the UV/H2O2 process in treating
 spent chlorination wastewater from a kraft pulp  mill.
 The wastewater contained various chlorinated
 organics  and was characterized by  measuring AOX
 (1,300 g per ton of pulp processed). The  highest
 AOX removal (86 percent) was  achieved at  a
 temperature of 100 °C over a pH range of 2 to 12;
 pH had no significant effect on AOX removal;

    Semiconductor-Sensitized  Processes

 Peyton  and DeBerry (1981) evaluated  the
 effectiveness  of semiconductor-sensitized  processes
 (solar/Ti02 and soiar/ZnO) in treating wastewater
 contaminated with dimethylamine, methanol,  and
 chloroform. At the end of a 6-hour reaction  period,
                                             3-21

-------
multiple combinations of semiconductors and
reaction pH levels yielded various percent removals
for the three VOCs: (1) Ti02 at a pH of 10 reduced
the dimethylamine  concentration  by 55 percent,
(2) TiO2 at a pH of 7 reduced the methanol concen-
tration by 51  percent, and (3) ZnO at a pH of 7
reduced the chloroform concentration by  50 percent.

3.2.2  SVOC-Contaminated Industrial
       Wastewater

This section discusses treatment of SVOCs in
industrial wastewater using the UV/H2O2 process on
a commercial scale. Information on SVOC removal
(1)  at the  pilot-scale level using the photo-Fenton
process and (2) at the bench-scale level  using  the
UV/03, photo-Fenton, and semiconductor-sensitized
processes  is also included.

Commercial-Scale Applications

This section summarizes the effectiveness of the
Calgon Rayox® and Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H2O2
systems in removing the following SVOCs from
industrial  wastewater.
APO Process
• UV/H2O2
SVOCs Removed
• NDMA, phenol, UDMH
    Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2 System

A Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2 system was used to treat
NDMA-contaminated wastewater from a rubber
manufacturing company.    The  initial  NDMA
concentration in the wastewater was 30 //g/L. The
Calgon Rayox® system, which was operated at a
flow  rate  of 45  L/min, reduced the  NDMA
concentration in the wastewater by  more than
98.3 percent. The treatment cost was estimated to
be $0.83/m3 of water treated, but details of this
estimate were unavailable  (Calgon 1996).

In  another Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2  system
application,     NDMA-contaminated     process
wastewater   from  a    specialty    chemicals
manufacturing company was treated using a
380-L/min system.   The wastewater contained
600 i^gll of NDMA and 1,000 mg/L of COD. The
system achieved >99.9 percent removal of NDMA;
no information was available on COD removal. The
treatment cost was estimated to be $1 .10/m3 of
water treated, but details of this estimate were
unavailable  (Calgon 1996).

Aerospace industry wastewater  contaminated with
NDMA  and  unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine
(UDMH) at 1,400 and 6,000 mg/L,.respectively, was
treated using a Calgon Rayox® UV/H2O2 system.
The system treated about 1,500 Uday of wastewater
(in  batch  mode) and  removed  more  than
99.9 percent of the NDMA from the wastewater. The
treatment cost was estimated to be $1 50/m3 of water
treated, but  details  of this  estimate were unavailable
(Calgon      1996).

    Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H2O2 System

The Magnum CAV-OX® II high-energy UV/H2O2
system was field-tested to  treat effluent from a
pharmaceutical plant. The wastewater contained
phenol at 20 /j.g/L. Three tests were conducted at
flow rates of 7.6, 15, and 23 L/min. H2O2 was used
at a dose of 60 mg/L. At flow rates of 7.6, 15, and
23 L/min, the percent removal of phenol was >99.9,
99,  and 96  percent, respectively. No treatment cost
information was available  (U.S.  EPA 1994).

Pilot-Scale Application

This section  summarizes removal  of 3,4-xylidine
from industrial wastewater at the pilot-scale level
using the photo-Fenton process.    Wastewater
containing 3,4-xylidine at  an  initial  concentration of
2,700 mg/L  was treated using the  photo-Fenton
process in a recirculating  batch reactor. A total of
500 L of wastewater was treated in each batch. With
a UV dose of 20 W/L, an H202 dose of 4,200 mg/L,
a ferrous sulfate dose of 3,000 mg/L, and a pH of 3,
more than 99.9 percent of the 3,4-xylidine had been
removed after 30 minutes of treatment. The H2O2
concentration had  less effect than the ferrous  sulfate
concentration on 3,4-xylidine  removal (Oliveros and
others  1997).

Bench-Scale Studies

This section  summarizes the  results of bench-scale
studies of the effectiveness of UV/O3, photo-Fenton,
and   semiconductor-sensitized  processes  in
removing the following  SVOCs from industrial
wastewater.
                                            3-22

-------
APO Process £
. UV/03

Photo-Fenton

. Solar/ZnO
VOCs Removed
. 4-CP, phenol, several
reactive azo dyes,
several unspecified
svocs
. 4-CP, several reactive
azo dyes
. Phenol
    UV/03

Beltran and  others (1997a,  1997b) evaluated the
UV/O3 process's effectiveness in treating distillery
and tomato processing  plant  wastewaters containing
phenols and other chemicals. The UV/O3 process
achieved 90 percent COD  removal from tomato
processing plant wastewater compared to 30  to
50  percent using ozonation alone. The UV/O3
process also achieved the highest COD removal for
distillery wastewater; the percent removal was  not
reported. For both wastewaters, the UV/O3  process
was found to be significantly  more effective than UV
photolysis and UV/H2O2 processes.

    Photo-Fenton

Industrial dye wastewater containing 4-CP and a
mixture of reactive azo dyes was used to compare
the effectiveness of UV/O3, UV/H2O2, UV/TiO2, and
photo-Fenton  processes.     Under laboratory
conditions, 4-CP had been degraded  by 75 percent
after 90  minutes of wastewater treatment in the
photo-Fenton process; this process was also found
to be the most effective mineralizing 4-CP (Ruppert
and others 1994).

Chen and others (1997) evaluated  various APO
processes, including the UV/H2O2 and photo-Fenton
processes, for phenol and COD removal from
industrial wastewaters. They concluded that  the
photo-Fenton process achieved the highest phenol
and COD removal rates of the processes evaluated.
Phenol  at an initial concentration of 25 mg/L was
reduced  by  more than 99.9 percent  in 10 minutes
under the following test  conditions: a UV-A light
intensity of 4  kilowatts  per liter; H2O2 dose of
70  mg/L; and ferric chloride dose  of 8.1 mg/L. No
details  on COD removal were available.

    Semiconductor-Sensitized Processes

Peyton  and  DeBerry  (1981)  evaluated  the
effectiveness of semiconductor-sensitized processes
(solar/TiO2  and solar/ZnO) in treating wastewater
contaminated with phenol. At the end of a 6-hour.
                                                 reaction period,  the highest  phenol removal
                                                 (53 percent) was achieved using ZnO at a pH of 7.

                                                 3.2.3  Dye-Contaminated  Industrial
                                                        Wastewater
Dyes have been removed from industrial wastewater
using  UV/H2O2,   UV/O3,  and  semiconductor-
sensitized processes.  This section describes the
use of these processes in pilot-scale applications
and bench-scale studies.

Pilot-Scale Applications

This section summarizes the removal of the following
dyes from industrial wastewater at the pilot-scale
level using the UV/H2O2 process.
APO Process
• UV/H202
Dyes Removed
Reactive Blue 21,
Reactive Red 195,
unspecified
A pilot-scale UV/H202 system was installed at a pulp
and paper mill in South Carolina to remove colored
organics  from   industrial wastewater.     The
wastewater also contained chlorinated organics; the
specific chemicals  and their concentrations  are
unknown.  A UV dose of 80  milliwatts  per square
centimeter-second (mW/cm2-sec) was  maintained.
An 80 percent color removal was achieved at an
H2O2 dose of 840 mg/L and a flow rate of 190 L/min.
In general, increasing H2O2 concentration resulted in
an increase in color removal.  Color reduction was
not influenced by pH, indicating that the bleaching
operation wastewater did not  have to be pretreated
for pH adjustment. Specific treatment cost estimates
were not available (Smith and  Frailey 1990).

Also on the pilot scale, the UV/H2O2 process was
applied to spent reactive  dyebath wastewater
containing Reactive  Blue 21 and Reactive Red  195
at initial  concentrations  of 300 and 20  mg/L,
respectively. The  highest removals  were achieved
at H2O2 doses of 3,000 and 1,000 mg/L  for Reactive
Blue 21 and  Reactive Red 195, respectively. The
UV/H202 process was 'most effective with a neutral
pH. Specific  percent removals were not available
(Namboodri and Walsh 1996).

Bench-Scale Studies

This section summarizes information  on removal  of
the following dyes from actual  and simulated
industrial wastewaters at the bench-scale level using
                                              3-23

-------
UV/H2O2? UV/O3, and semiconductor-sensitized
processes.
 APO Process    D
yes  Removed
     UV/H202
     UV/03


     UV/TiO,
     UV/Ti02/SnO2
    Acid Black 1,
     Reactive Black 5,
     Reactive Orange 16,
    Vat Blue 6,
    Vat Red 10
 .  Several unspecified
    dyes
 .   Acid Blue 40, Basic
    Yellow 15, Direct
     Blue 87, Direct Blue
     160,  Reaction
     Red 120, several
     unspecified  dyes

 Acid  Orange 7
    UV/H202

Shu and others (1994) evaluated the effect of pH on
UV/H2O2 process effectiveness in treating synthetic
wastewater  containing azo  dyes; they used Acid
Black 1  as the model compound.    Optimum
degradation was observed in the pH range of 3.0 to
5.2. Other information, such as  percent removal
data,  was unavailable.

Unkroth and others  (1997) used an excimer laser as
an alternative to  mercury  lamps in treating
commercial coloring agents for linen. The laser was
used to  irradiate four dyes-Reactive Orange  16,
Reactive Black 5, Vat Red 10, and  Vat Blue 6-at
UV wavelengths of 193 nm (argon-fluorine) and
248 nm  (krypton-fluorine). Greater decolorization
was achieved at the shorter wavelength. When laser
irradiation at 193 nm was coupled with use of H2O2,
almost complete oxidation of the dyes was achieved
with 2 to 7 times less energy. Vat dyes, which need
about 10  times higher energy doses for removal than
do reactive  dyes, were  reduced from 25 mg/L to
about 2 mg/L, a 92 percent removal. Irradiation with
mercury  lamps heated the wastewater to 60  °C,
while laser irradiation did not alter the wastewater's
temperature.

    UV/03

 Biologically pretreated paper  mill wastewater
containing 70 to 600 mg/L of COD as  a result of dye
 processes was treated using the UV/03 process.
 Reaction by-products formed  include sulfuric acid
and oxalic acid. High temperatures (40 °C) and high
pH values (9 and above) resulted in  high  03
consumption. A temperature increase from 25 to
40 °C and variations in pH levels did not significantly
affect the process's effectiveness. The estimated
UV/03 treatment  cost,  based  on  biologically
pretreated effluent with 400 mg/L of COD and
80 percent COD removal,  was $2.38/m3 of water
treated, which includes electricity, capital, and
maintenance costs (Oeller and others 1997).

Semiconductor-Sensitized Processes

Li and Zhang (1996) evaluated the effectiveness of
the UV/TiO2 process in treating synthetic wastewater
containing eight dyes at an initial concentration of
100  mg/L each.   Under a black light in a batch
reactor and with a TiO2 dose of 1,000 mg/L, color
removal was >95 percent after 4 to 6 hours of
treatment.    COD and TOC  removals from the
wastewater ranged from 30 to 70 percent,  depending
on the dyes present. Biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) increased  as COD and TOC decreased,
suggesting that  UV/TiO2 photooxidation  may
enhance the biodegradability of the wastewater and
may require postbiological treatment.

Tang  and  An (1995a,  1995b)  studied UWTiO2
treatment of synthetic wastewater containing five
commercial dyes: Acid Blue 40, Basic Yellow  15,
Direct Blue 87, Direct  Blue  160, and  Reaction
Red 120.  The initial concentration of each dye was
about 100 mg/L. More than 5 hours was required to
completely mineralize the dyes. At higher dye
concentrations, reaction  rates  and percent removals
were lower. The oxidation rate  decreased as  the
number of azo linkages in a dye molecule increased.

A UV/TiO2 process was used in batch  studies to
remove COD in and decolorize the wastewater from
5-fluorouracil manufacturing. Complete decolori-
zation and significant COD removal were achieved
in 20 hours of reaction time. Addition of H2O2 to the
UV/TiO2  system   significantly  increased  the
decolorization and COD  removal rates.  Diluting the
wastewater also increased the COD removal  rate.
Direct photolysis resulted in no COD reduction but
did  achieve color reduction (Anheden and others
 1996).

Textile dye effluent containing Acid Orange 7 was
treated using UV/TiO^tin oxide (SnO2) process. At
an initial concentration of 42 mg/L, the dye was
degraded by  95 percent  after irradiation  for.
30 minutes.  The  optimum mass  ratio of the  two
semiconductors for fastest degradation of Acid
Orange 7 was 2:1, Sn02 to TiO2 (Vinodgopal  and
 Kamat 1995).
                                              3-24

-------
3.2.4  Inorganic-Contaminated
       Industrial  Wastewater

This  section  presents  information on the  following
inorganics removal from industrial wastewater at the
bench-scale  level  using  semiconductor-sensitized
processes.     No commercial-  or pilot-scale
information is available.
APO Process
Solar/TiO2
• UV/TiO2
Inorganics Removed
Free and complexed
cyanide, hexacyanate
Ferricyanide
Rader and others (1993) achieved >99.9 percent
cyanide removal in 11 days while using a solar/TiO2
process to treat hexacyanate  solution. In a later
study, Rader and others (1995) were able to achieve
>99.9 percent free and complex cyanide removal
from precious  metal mill effluent containing cyanide
at 48 mg/L in  3 days.   In both cases, nitrate
formation was observed,  indicating complete
oxidation  of cyanide.

Aqueous  ferricyanide solution (26 mg/L  as cyanide)
was treated using TiO2 and a 4-W UV lamp or solar
radiation in a bench-scale study.   The highest
removal  rate was observed at  a  pH of 10.
Photodegradation of ferricyanide using a 4-W UV
lamp resulted in 93 percent degradation after
9 hours, while with solar radiation,  more than
99.9 percent of the ferricyanide was removed  in
1.5 hours (Bhakta and others 1992).

3.2.5  Microbe-Contaminated  industrial
       Wastewater

This section discusses  removal  of  microbes
(Salmonella) from industrial wastewater at the
commercial-scale level using  a  Magnum CAV-OX®
UV/H2O2  system.    No' pilot-  or bench-scale
information was  available.
The Magnum CAV-OX® UV/H2O2  system was
evaluated  during  treatment of pathogens  in
wastewater associated with chicken farming. The
primary contaminant  of concern in the wastewater
was the bacterium Salmonella. The concentration of
this bacterium in the influent  was about 1  million
colony-forming units  per milliliter (cfu/mL). Tests
were conducted at Perdue Farms in Bridgewater,
Virginia, using a CAV-OX® I low-energy unit and a
CAV-OX® II high-energy unit.  The wastewater was
processed through the CAV-OX® units at a flow rate
of 3.8 L/min. The CAV-OX® I unit was operated with
six 60-W UV  lamps,  and  the CAV-OX® I! unit was
operated with two UV lamps of 2.5 to 5-kW intensity.
The H2O2  dose was 80 mg/L.   Under these
conditions,  the CAV-OX® II unit performed much
better than  the CAV-OX®  I  unit.    The final
concentration of Salmonella exiting the CAV-OX® II
unit was  0.01 cfu/mL (>99.9 percent removal). No
cost information was provided  (U.S. EPA 1994).
                                            3-25

-------
        Table 3-2. Industrial Wastewater Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
VOCs (Commercial Scale)
UV/H2O2
(Calgon
perox-pure™)
Photo-Fenton
(Calgon Rayox
ENOX)
Acetone: 20 mg/L
Isopropyl alcohol:
20 mg/L
COD: 3,000 mg/L
Individual VOC
concentrations unknown
Flow rate: 19 Umin
Light source: 10-kW
Wavelength broad1 band1 wflft a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 100 mg/L
Flow rate: batch/recycle
Reactor volume: not available
UVdose:160kWh/m3
Wavelength: not available
H2O2 dose: not available
nfluent pH: 11.1
Alkalinity: 1 ,1 00 mg/L as calcium
carbonate
Acetone: >97.5
sopropyl alcohol: >97.5
>98.4
Treatment of Kennedy
Space Center wastewater
Treatment of electronics
industry wastewater
Met COD regulatory limit
'$1 .10/m3 (including
electricity, H2O2, and
maintenance costs)
$44/m3 (including
electricity, lamp
replacement, H2O2,
ENOX catalyst, and pH
adjustment costs)
REFERENCE

I.S. EPA 1993
lalgon 1998
SVOCs (Commercial Scale) j
UV/H202
(Calgon Rayox )
UV/H2O2
(Calgon Rayox )
UV/H2O2
(Calgon Rayox )
UV/H202
(Magnum
CAV-orii)
NDMA: 30 /jg/L
NDMA: 600 /jg/L
COD: 1,000 mg/L
NDMA: 1,400 mg/L
UDMH: 6,000 mg/L
Phenol: 20 ^g/L
Flow rate: 45 Umin
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: proprietary UV lamps
Wavelenath: not available
H2O2 dose: not available
Flow rate: 380 Umin
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: proprietary UV lamps
Wavelength: not available
H-,Oo dose: not available
Flow rate: not applicable (batch)
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: proprietary UV lamps
Wavelength: not available
H,O, dose: not available
Flow rate: 7.6 L/min
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: 2 UV lamps of 2.5 to
5-kW intensity
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H2O2 dose: 60 mg/L
>98.3
NDMA: >99.9
COD: not available
MDMA: >99.9
JDMH: not available
>99.9
Treatment of rubber
manufacturing industry
wastewater
Treatment of specialty
chemical industry
wastewater
Treatment of aerospace
industry wastewater
Treatment of
pharmaceutical industry
wastewater
$0.83/m3
$1 .10/m3
$150/m3
Not available
Calgon 1996
Calgon 1996
Dalgon 1996
J.S. EPA 1994
CO

M
CD

-------
        Table 3-2. Industrial  Wastewater Treatment (Continued)
PROCESS CONTAMINANT
(SYSTEM) CONCENTRATION TEST CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal
Additional Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
SVOCs (Pilot Scale)
Photo-Fenton



3,4-Xylidine: 2,700 mg/L



Flow rate: not applicable
(recirculating batch)
Reactor volume: 500 L
Reaction time: 30 minutes
Wavelength: not available
UV dose: 20 W/L
H2O2 dose: 4,200 mg/L
Ferrous sulfate dose: 3,000 mg/L
Influent pH: 3
>99.9



Not available



Not available



Dyes (Pilot Scab
UV/H2O2

Microbes (Comn
UV/H2OZ
(Magnum
cAv-oni)

Colored and chlorinated
organics: not available

Flow rate: 190 Umin
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: two Teflon-based UV
lamps
Wavelength: 254 nm
UV dose: 80 mW/cm2-sec
H2O2 dose: 840 mg/L
Influent pH: 10-11
Colon 80
Chlorinated organics:
not available

None

Not available

Oliveros and
Ars 1997
1
1
l_
Smith and
Frailey 1990

srcial Scale) : : : ^ : \A • •''.'••
Salmonella:
1 million cfu/mL

Flow rate: 3.8 L/min
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: 2 UV lamps of 2.5- to
5-kW intensity
Wavelength: broad band with a peak
at 254 nm
H,O, dose: 80 mg/L
>99.9

Treatment of poultry
industry wastewater

Not available

U.S. EPA 1994

GO
N>

-------
3.7    References

Alberici,  R.M.,  and  W.F.  Jardim.     1994.
    "Photocatalytic Degradation of Phenol and
    Chlorinated Phenols Using Ag-TiO2 in a Slurry
    Reactor."   Water Research.   Volume 28,
    Number 8.  Pages 1845 through  1849.

Anheden, M.,  D.Y. Goswami, and G. Svedberg.
    1996.  "Photocatalytic Treatment  of Wastewater
    from 5-Fluorouracil Manufacturing." Journal of
    Solar Energy Engineering.    Volume 118.
    Pages 2 through 8.

Armon, R., N. Laot, N. Narkis, and I. Neeman. 1996.
    "Photocatalytic  Inactivation of Different Bacteria
    and Bacteriophages  in Drinking Water at
    Different TiO2 Concentration and With or Without
    Exposure  to O2."  Abstracts, The Second
    International Conference on TiO2 Photocatalytic
    Purification and Treatment of Water and Air.
    Cincinnati, Ohio. October 26  through  29, 1996.
    Page 57.

Barreto, R.D.,  K.A. Gray, and K. Anders. 1995.
    "Photocatalytic  Degradation  of Methyl-tert-butyl
    Ether  in  TiO2  Slurries: A Proposed Reaction
    Scheme."   Water Research.   Volume 29,
    Number 5.  Pages 1243 through  1248.

Beltran, F.J., J.M. Encinar, and J.F. Gonzalez.
    1997a.    "Industrial  Wastewater  Advanced
    Oxidation.   Part 2. Ozone Combined with
    Hydrogen Peroxide  or UV Radiation." Water
    Research. Volume 31, Number 10. Pages 2415
    through 2428.

Beltran, F.J., M. Gonzalez, and J.F. Gonzalez.
    1997b.   "Industrial  Wastewater  Advanced
    Oxidation. Part 1. UV Radiation in the Presence
    and Absence  of  Hydrogen  Peroxide." Water
    Research. Volume 31, Number 10. Pages 2405
    through 2414.

Bhakta, D., S.S. Shukla, M.S. Chandrasekharaiah,
    and J.L. Margrave.    1992.     "A  Novel
    Photocatalytic Method for Detoxification of
    Cyanide  Wastes." Environmental Science &
    Technology. Volume  26. Pages  625  and 626.

Bhowmick, M.,  and M.J.  Semmens.    1994.
    "Ultraviolet Photooxidation for the Destruction of
    VOCs in Air."  Water Research. Volume 28,
    Number 11. Pages 2407 through 2415.

Bircher, K.G.,  K.  Simms, and W. Lem.  1997.
    "Rayox®  UV/Oxidation —  An  Integrated
   Approach."  Chemical Oxidation: Technology for
   the  Nineties.  Volume 6.  Edited by W.W.
   Eckenfelder, A.R. Bowers,  and J.A. Roth.
   Technomic Publishing Co.,  Inc. Lancaster,
   Pennsylvania. Pages 288 through  297.

Calgon Carbon Corporation (Calgon). 1996.  "The
   AOT Handbook." Volume 1, Number 1.

Calgon.  1998. Letter Regarding Case Studies on
   perox-pure™  and  Rayox   UV Oxidation
   Processes.  From Rob  Abernethy,  Manager of
   Sales and  Marketing. To Kumar Topudurti,
   Environmental Engineer, Tetra  Tech EM Inc.
Campos, D.   1997.    "Field Demonstration of
   UV/H2O2 on the Treatment of Groundwater
   Contaminated  with  HMPA."  Chemical  Oxidation:
    Technology for the Nineties. Volume  6. Edited
   by W.W. Eckenfelder,  A.R. Bowers,  and
   J.A. Roth. Technomic Publishing Co., Inc.
   Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Pages 19 through 26.

Canonica, S., and J.  Hoigne. 1995. "Enhanced
   Oxidation of Methoxy Phenols at Micromolar
   Concentration Photosensitized  by Dissolved
   Natural Organic Material."   Chemosphere.
   Volume  30. Pages 2365 through 2374.

Cater,  S.R., K.G. Bircher, and R.D.S.  Stevens.
   1990.    "Rayox®:   A Second Generation
   Enhanced Oxidation Process for Groundwater
   Remediation."   Proceedings,  Symposium  on
   Advanced Oxidation  Processes for  the
    Treatment of Contaminated Water and Air.
   Toronto, Canada. June 4 and 5,1990.

Chen,  J., W.H. Rulkens, and  H. Bruning.  1997.
   "Photochemical Elimination of Phenols  and  COD
   in Industrial Wastewaters."  Water Science &
    Technology. Volume 35, Number 4. Pages 231
   through  238.

Dieckmann,  MS., K.A. Gray, and P.V. Kamat. 1992.
   "Photocatalyzed  Degradation of Adsorbed
   Nitrophenolic Compounds  on  Semiconductor
   Surfaces."    Water Science & Technology.
   Volume  25, Number 3. Pages 277 through 280.

Dieckmann, M.S.,  and K.A. Gray.   1996. "A
   Comparison of the  Degradation of 4-Nitrophenol
   via Direct and Sensitized Photocatalysis in TiO2
   Slurries."   Water Research,    Volume 30.
   Pages 1169 through 1183.
                                            3-32

-------
D'Oliviera, J.C., A.S. Ghassan, and P. Pichat. 1990.
   "Photodegradation of 2- and 3-Chlorophenol in
   Ti02 Aqueous  Suspensions." Environmental
   Science & Technology. Volume 24. Pages 990
   through  996.

Domenech, J., and J. Peral. 1988. "Removal of
   Toxic Cyanide from  Water by Heterogeneous
   Photocatalytic  Oxidation over ZnO." Solar
   Energy. Volume 41,  Number I. Pages 55
   through  59.

Eggins, B.R., F.L. Palmer, and J.A. Byrne. 1997.
   "Photocatalytic Treatment  of Humic Sub-
   stances in Drinking Water."  Wafer Research.
   Volume 31,  Number 5.     Pages 1223
   through  1226.

Gonzalez, M.C., A.M. Braun, A.B. Prevot,  and E.
   Pelizzetti. 1994. Vacuum-Ultraviolet (VUV)
   Photolysis  of Water: Mineralization of Atrazine."
   Chemosphere.    Volume  28, Number  12.
   Pages 2121 through  2127.

Halmann, M.,  A.J.  Hunt,  and D. Spath. 1992.
   "Photodegradation  of     Dichloromethane,
   Tetrachloroethylene,    and    1,2-Dibromo-3-
   chloropropane in Aqueous Suspensions of TiO2
   with Natural, Concentrated, and Simulated
   Sunlight."  Solar Energy Materials and Solar
   Cells. Volume 26. Pages  1 through 16.

Heller, A.,  M.  Nair,  L. Davidson, Z. Luo,  J.
   Schwitzgebel,  J. Norrell, J.R.  Brock, S.E.
   Lindquist;   and J.G.   Ekerdt.       1993.
   "Photoassisted Oxidation of Oil and Organic
   Spills on Water." Photocatalytic Purification  and
    Treatment of Wafer and Air.  Edited by D.F. Ollis
   and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier Science Publishers
   B.V. Amsterdam. Pages 139 through  153.

Hempfling,  C. 1997. "Ultraviolet/Oxidation   Treat-
   ment of Explosive Wastewaters  Using a
   Commercial Process." Environmental Progress.
   Volume  16, Number 3. Pages 164 through 170.

Hirvonen, A., T. Tuhkanen, and  P. Kalliokoski.
   1996.    "Treatment of TCE-  and PCE-
   Contaminated Groundwater Using UV/H202 and
   O3/H202 Oxidation Processes." Wafer Science
   & Technology.   Volume 33.   Pages 67
   through  73.
Hua, Z., Z. Mapping, X. Zongfeng, and G. Low.
    1995.   Titanium  Dioxide  Mediated Photo-
    catalytic Degradation of Monocrotophos." Wafer
    Research.    Volume 29.     Pages 2681
    through  2688.

Huang, I-W., C-S. Hong,  and B. Bush.  1996.
    "Photocatalytic  Degradation  of RGBs in
    TiO2 Aqueous Suspensions."  Chemosphere.
    Volume 32, Number 9.     Pages 1869
    through  1881.

Jardim, W.F., S.G. Morales, and M.M.K. Takiyama.
    1997. "Photocatalytic  Degradation  of Aromatic
    Chlorinated  Compounds-Using TiO2: Toxicity of
    Intermediates." Wafer Research. Volume 31,
    Number 7.  Pages 1728 through 1732.

Kearney, PC.,  M.T. Muldoon,  and C.J. Somich.
  1987.    "UV-Ozonation of Eleven  Major
    Pesticides as a Waste Disposal Pretreatment."
    Chemosphere. Volume 16, Numbers  10  through
    12. Pages  2321 through-2330.

Kim, S., S. Geissen,  and  A.  Vogelpohl.  1997.
    "Landfill  Leachate Treatment by  a Photoassisted
    Fenton Reaction."    Water Science  &
    Technology. Volume 35,  Number 4.  Pages 239
    through  248.

Kinkennon, A.E., D.  B.  Green, and B. Hutchinson.
    1995. "The Use of Simulated or  Concentrated
    Natural  Solar Radiation  for the TiO2-Mediated
    Photodecomposition of Basagran, Diquat,
    and Diuron."   Chemosphere.  Volume 31.
    Pages 3663 through 3671.

Klink,  L.,   M.  Campbell, and  J.  Coho.  1994.
    "Treatability Study  of Enhanced  Oxidation for
    Groundwater Contaminated with Chlorinated
    Organics."  Chemical  Oxidation:  Technologies
    for the Nineties. Volume 2.' Edited by W.W.
    Eckenfelder, A.R. Bowers, and J.A. Roth.
    Technomic Publishing Co., Inc. Lancaster,
    Pennsylvania.. Pages  377  through 395.

Kondo,  M.M., and W.F.  Jardim.     1991.
    "Photodegradation of Chloroform and Urea
    Using  Silver-Loaded Titanium Dioxide as
    Catalyst."    Wafer Research.    Volume 25,
    Number 7.  Pages 823 through  828.

Ku, Y., and C-B Hsieh. 1992. "Photocatalytic
    Decomposition    o f  2,4-Dichlorophenol in
    Aqueous Titanium  Oxide Suspensions.,, Wafer
    Research. Volume 26, Number  11. Pages 1451
    through  1456.
                                           3-33

-------
Lai, M.S., J.N. Jensen, and A.S. Weber. 1995.
   "Oxidation  of Simazine:  Ozone,  Ultraviolet, and
   Combined  Ozone/Ultraviolet Oxidation.,,  Wafer
   Environment Research. Volume 67, Number 3.
   Pages 340 through 346.

Lee, S., K. Nishida, M. Otaki, and S. Ohgaki. 1997.
   "Photocatalytic Inactivation of Phage Qp by
   Immobilized Titanium Dioxide  Mediated
   Photocatalyst." Wafer Science & Technology.
   Volume 35, Numbers 11 and 12. Pages 101
   through 106.

Leitzke, 0., and G.E. Whitby. 1990. "The Combined
   Application of Ozone and UV Irradiation for the
   Treatment  of Water." Proceedings, Symposium
   on Advanced Oxidation Processes for the
    Treatment of Confaminafed Wafer and Air.
   Toronto, Canada. June 4 and 5,1990.

Li, X.Z., and M. Zhang. 1996. "Decolorization and
   Biodegradability of Dyeing Wastewater Treated
   by a TiO2-Sensitized Photooxidation Process."
    Wafer Science &  Technology. Volume  34.
   Pages 49 through 55.

Li, X.Z., M.  Zhang,  and H.  Chua.    1996.
   "Disinfection for Municipal Wastewater by
   Sensitized Photooxidation." Wafer Science &
    Technology. Volume 33, Number 3. Pages 111
   through  118.

Lin,  Y.,  G.  Gupta,  and  J.  Baker.     1995.
   "Photodegradation  of Polychlorinated  Biphenyl
   Congeners  Using Simulated  Sunlight and
   Diethylamine."  Chemosphere. Volume  31.
   Pages 3323 through 3344.

Lipczynska-Kochany, E. 1991. "Novel Method for a
   Photocatalytic Degradation  of 4-Nitrophenol in
   Homogeneous Aqueous  Solution."  Environ-
   mental Technology. Volume 12. Pages 87
   through  92.

Lu, M., and  J. Chen. 1997. "Pretreatment of
    Pesticide  Wastewater  by  Photocatalytic
   Oxidation."   Wafer Science & Technology.
   Volume 36, Numbers 2 and 3. Pages 117
   through  122.

Lu, M-C., G-D. Roam, J-N. Chen,  and C-P. Huang.
    1993. "Microtox Bioassay  of Photodegradation
    Products  from Photocatalytic Oxidation of
   Pesticides."    Chemosphere.    Volume 27,
    Number 9. Pages 1637 through 1647.
Luo. Y.. and D.F.  Ollis. 1996. "Heterogeneous
   Photocatalytic Oxidation of Trichloroethylene
   and Toluene Mixtures in Air: Kinetic Promotion
   and  Inhibition,  Time-Dependent  Catalyst
   Activity." Journal of Catalysis. Volume 163,
   Number 1. Pages 1 through 11.

Magnum Water Technology, Inc. (Magnum). 1998.
   Fax Regarding Case Studies on CAV-OX®
   Cavitation Oxidation Process.    From Jack
   Simser. Vice President. To Kumar Topudurti,
   Environmental Engineer, Tetra Tech EM Inc.
   April  24.
Matsunaga,  T.,  and  M. Okochi.
1995.
   "TiO2-Mediated Photochemical Disinfection of
   Escherichia  co/i  Using  Optical  Fibers."
   Environmental   Science    &  Technology.
   Volume 29, Number 2. Pages 501 through 505.

Mehos, MS.,  and C.S. Turchi.  1993. "Field Testing
   Solar   Photocatalytic     Detoxification  on
   TCE-Contaminated Groundwater." Environ-
   mental Progress.   Volume  12, Number 3.
   Pages 194 through 199.

Minero, C.,  E.  Pelizzetti,  P. Piccinini, and M.
   Vincenti.  1994. "Photocatalyzed Transformation
   of  Nitrobenzene  o  n  TiO2  and  ZnO."
   Chemosphere. Volume  28.    Pages 1229
   through 1244. In Phofocafalyfic Purification and
   Treatment of Wafer and Air. Edited by D.F. Ollis
   and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier Science Publishers
   B.V. Amsterdam.

Moza, P.M., T.K.  Muster, S. Pal, and P. Sukul. 1992.
   "Photocatalytic Decomposition  of Pendimethalin
   and Alachlor." Chemosphere.  Volume 25,
   Number 11.  Pages  1675 through 1682.

Namboodri,  C.G.,  and W.K. Walsh.    1996.
   "Ultraviolet Light/Hydrogen  Peroxide System for
   Decolorizing Spent Reactive Dyebath Waste
   Water."      American Dyestuff Reporter.
   Volume 85. Pages 15 through 25.

Oeller, H.J.,  I. Demel, and  G. Weinberger.  1997.
   "Reduction  in Residual COD in Biologically
   Treated  Paper Mill Effluents by  Means of
   Combined  Ozone and Ozone/UV Reactor
   Stages."     Wafer Science & Technology.
   Volume  35,  Numbers  2  and 3. Pages 269
   through 276.
                                            3-34

-------
Oldencrantz,  J.E.,  D. Tobocman, and S. Duggan.
    1997. "Gateway Center Water Treatment Plant,
    Los Angeles:  Controlled  Hydrogen Peroxide
    Treatment of Hydrogen Sulfide and VOC
    Affected  Groundwater."  Chemical  Oxidation:
    Technologies for the Nineties. Volume 5.
    Edited by W.W. Eckenfelder, A.R. Bowers, and
    J.A. Roth. Technomic Publishing Co.,  Inc.
    Lancaster,   Pennsylvania.      Pages  159
    through  174.

Oliveros, E., 0. Legrini, M. Hohl, T. Muller, and A.M.
    Braun. 1997. "Large Scale Development  of a
    Light-Enhanced Fenton Reaction by Optimal
    Experimental  Design."    Wafer Science &
    Technology. Volume 35, Number 4. Pages 223
    through  230.

Pelizzetti, E., V. Maurino, C. Minero, 0. Zerbinati,
    and E.  Borgarello.   1989.    "Photocatalytic
    Degradation of Bentazon  by Titanium Dioxide
    Particles."     Chemosphere.    Volume 18,
    Numbers 7 and 8.  Pages 1437 through 1446.

Pelizzetti, E., C. Minero, V. Carlin, M. Vincenti, and
    E.  Pramauro.     1992.    "Identification of
    Photocatalytic  Degradation Pathways of 2-CI-s-
    Triazine Herbicides and  Detection of their
    Decomposition  Intermediates."  Chemosphere.
    Volume 24. Pages  891 through  910.

Peyton, G.R., and  D.W. DeBerry. 1981.  "Feasibility
    of  Photocatalytic Oxidation for Wastewater
    Clean-up and  Reuse: Report for 4 Mar 81-31
    Mar 81."  SumX Corporation, Austin, Texas.
    Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior,
    Office of Water Research and Technology.
    Washington, DC. OWRT/RU-81/1.

Pichat, P., J.-C. D'Oliveira, J.-F. Maffre, and D. Mas.
    1993.   "Destruction of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxy-
    ethanoic acid (2,4-D) in Water by TiO2-UV,
    H2O2-UV or Direct Photolysis." Photocatalytic
    Purification and Treatment of Wafer and Air.
    Edited by D.F. Ollis and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier
    Science    Publishers  B.V.    Amsterdam.
    Pages 683 through  688.

Pignatello,  J.J., and  L.Q.  Huang.     1993.
    "Degradation  of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-
    dioxin and Dibenzofuran Contaminants in 2,3,5-
    T by Photoassisted Iron-catalyzed Hydrogen
    Peroxide."   Wafer Research. Volume 27,
    Number 12. Pages 1731 through 1736.
Pignatello, J.J.,  and Y. Sun. 1995. "Complete
   Oxidation of Metolachlor and Methyl Parathion in
   Water  by the Photoassisted Fenton  Reaction."
    Wafer Research.  Volume 29.  Pages  1837
   through 1844.

Prados, M., H.  Paillard, and P. Roche. 1995.
   "Hydroxyl Radical Oxidation  Processes for  the
    Removal of  Triazine from Natural Water.,'
    Ozone Science and Engineering. Volume  17.
    Pages  183 through  194.

Pramauro, E., M. Vincenti, V.  Augugliaro, and L.
    Palmisano.  1993.  "Photocatalytic Degradation
   of Monuron  in Aqueous Titanium Dioxide
    Dispersions."     Environmental Science &
    Technology.      Volume  27,  Number  9.
    Pages  1790 through 1795.

Rader, W.S., L. Solujic, E.B.  Milosavljevic, and  J.L.
    Hendrix.    1993.    "Sunlight-Induced Photo-
   chemistry of  Aqueous  Solutions of  Hexa-
   cyanoferrate(II)  and -(II) Ions." Environmental
    Science  &  Technology.      Volume  27.
    Pages  1875 through 1879.

Rader, W.S., L.  Solujic, E.B. Milosavljevic, J.L.
    Hendrix, and  J.H. Nelson. 1995.  "Photocatalytic
    Detoxification  of   Cyanide   and    Metal
    Cyano-species  from   Precious-Metal   Mill
    Effluents." Environmental Pollution. Volume 90,
    Number 3. Pages 331 through 334.

Richard, C., and  P. Boule. 1994. "Is the Oxidation
    of Salicylic Acid to 2,5-Dihyroxybenzoic Acid a
    Specific Reaction of Singlet Oxygen?,, Journal
    of Photochemistry Photobiolology  A: Chem.
   Volume 84.   Pages 151  through 152. In
   Photocatalytic Purification and  Treatment of
    Wafer and Air. Edited by D.F. Ollis  and  H. AI-
    Ekabi.    Elsevier Science  Publishers B.V.
   Amsterdam.
Richardson, S.D., A.D. Thruston, Jr., and T.W.
    Collette. 1996.   "Identification of TiO2-UV
    Disinfection  Byproducts in Drinking Water."
    Environmental   Science &   Technology.
    Volume  30, Number  II.     Pages 3327
    through 3334.

Ruppert,  G., R. Bauer, and G. Heisler. 1994.
    "UV-03,   UV-H202,   UV-Ti02    and   the
    Photo-Fenton     Reaction:   Comparison  of
    Advanced Oxidation Processes for Wastewater
    Treatment."     Chemosphere,     Volume 28,
    Number 8. Pages 1447 through 1454.
                                            3-35

-------
Schmelling,  D.C.,  and  K.A.  Gray.     1995.
    "Photocatalytic      Transformation      and
    Mineralization of 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) in
    Ti02 Slurries."  Water Research. Volume 29,
    Number 12. Pages 2651 through 2662.

Schmelling, D.C., K.A.  Gray,  and P.V. Kamat. 1997.
    "The Influence of Solution Matrix  on the
    Photocatalytic Degradation of TNT in TiO2
    Slurries."    Water Research.   Volume 31,
    Number 6. Pages 1439 through 1447.

Shu, H.Y., C. P. Huang, and M.C. Chang.  1994.
    "Photooxidative Degradation of Azo Dyes in
    Water Using Hydrogen Peroxide and UV
    Radiation."   Proceedings,  26th Mid-Atlantic
    Industrial Waste Conference.  University  of
    Delaware, Newark. Pages 186 through  193.

Sjogren, J.C., and R.A. Sierka.  1994. "Inactivation
    of Phage MS2  by Iron-Aided Titanium Dioxide
    Photocatalysis."    Applied  and Environmental
    Microbiology.     Volume  60,  Number  1.
    Pages 344 through 347.

Smeds, A.,  B.  Holmbon, and C.  Pettersson. 1994.
    "Chemical-Stability of Chlorinated  Components
    in Pulp  Bleaching Liquors."   Chemosphere.
    Volume 28.  Pages 881 through 895.

Smith, J.E., and M.M. Frailey. 1990. "On-Site
    Evaluation  of a  Teflon-Based Ultraviolet  Light
    System and Hydrogen  Peroxide  for the
    Degradation of Color and Chlorinated Organics
    in Pine E0 from Kraft Mill Bleach Plant Effluents."
    Proceedings,   1990  TAPPI Environmental
    Conference. Seattle,  Washington.  Pages 101
    through 110.

Spacek, W., 'R. Bauer, and  G. Heisler. 1995.
    "Heterogeneous  and Homogeneous  Wastewater
    Treatment — Comparison between Photo-
    degradation with TiO2 and the Photo-Fenton
    Reaction."   Chemosphere.    Volume 30.
    Pages 477 through 484.

Stefan,  M.I., A. R. Hoy, and J.R. Bolton. 1996.
    "Kinetics and Mechanism of the Degradation and
    Mineralization  of Acetone in Dilute Aqueous
    Solution Sensitized by the UV Photolysis of
    Hydrogen Peroxide."  Environmental Science &
    Technology.    Volume 30.    Pages 2382
    through 2390.
Tang,  W.Z., and H.  An.    1995a.  "UV-TiO2
    Photocatalytic Oxidation of Commercial Dyes in
    Aqueous    Solutions."        Chemosphere.
    Volume 31,  Number 9.   Pages 4157
    through  4170.

Tang, W.Z., and  H. An. 1995b. "Photocatalytic
    Degradation Kinetics and Mechanism of Acid
    Blue 40 by TiO2-UV in Aqueous Solution."
    Chemosphere.     Volume  31, Number 9.
    Pages 4171  through 4183.

Tennakone, K., C.T.K. Tilakaratne, and I.R.M.
    Kottegoda.    1997.   "Photomineralization  of
    Carbofuran by TiO2-supported Catalyst." Water
    Research. Volume 31, Number  8. Pages 1909
    through  1912.

Topudurti,    K.,    M.    Wojciechowski,  S.
    Anagnostopoulos, and  R. Eilers. 1998. "Field
    Evaluation of  Matrix Photocatalytic Oxidation
    Technology."    Proceedings,  International
    Association on Water Quality 19th Biennial
    International Conference. Vancouver,  British
    Columbia, Canada.  June 21  through 26, 1998.
    Pages 116 through  124.

Topudurti, K., M. Keefe,  P. Wooliever, and N. Lewis.
    1994.    "Field Evaluation of Perox-Pure™
    Chemical Oxidation Technology."    Water
    Science & Technology.  Volume  30, Number 7.
    Pages 95 through 104.

Topudurti, K.V.,  N.M. Lewis, and S.R. Hirsh. 1993.
    The Applicability of  UV/Oxidation Technologies
    to    Treat    Contaminated    Groundwater."
    Environmental  Progress. Volume 12, Number 1.
    Pages 54 through 60.

Tuhkanen, T.A., and  F.J.  Beltran.    1995.
    "Intermediates  of the Oxidation  of Naphthalene
    in Water with the  Combination of Hydrogen
    Peroxide and  UV  Radiation."  Chemosphere.
    Volume  30.  Pages  1463 through 1475.

Turchi, C.S., J.F. Klausner,  D.Y. Goswami, and  E.
    Marchand.  1994.  "Field Test Results for the
    Solar Photocatalytic Detoxification of Fuel-
    contaminated Groundwater."       Chemical
    Oxidation:  Technologies for the Nineties.
    Volume 3.  Edited by W.W.  Eckenfelder, A.R.
    Bowers, and J.A. Roth. Technomic Publishing
    Co.,  Inc. Lancaster,  Pennsylvania,
                                            3-36

-------
US. Environmental Protection Agency  (U.S. EPA).
    1990. "Ultrox International Ultraviolet Radiation/
    Oxidation Technology:  Applications Analysis
    Report." Office of Research and Development,
    Superfund  Innovative Technology Evaluation
    (SITE) Program.  Washington, DC. EPA/540/
    A5-89/012. September.

U.S. EPA. 1993. "Perox-pure™  Chemical Oxidation
    Technology,   Peroxidation  Systems,  Inc.:
    Applications Analysis  Report."   Office  o f
    Research and Development, SITE Program.
    Washington,  DC. EPA/540/AR-93/501. July.

US. EPA. 1994. "CAV-OX® Cavitation Oxidation
    Process Magnum Water Technology, Inc.:
    Applications Analysis  Report."   Office of
    Research and Development, SITE Program.
    Washington,  DC. EPA/540/AR-93/520. May.

Unkroth, A., V. Wagner, and R. Sauerbrey. 1997.
    "Laser-Assisted  Photochemical  Wastewater
    Treatment."   Water Science &  Technology.
    Volume 35, Number 4. Pages  181  through 188.

Vidal, A., J. Herrero, M.  Romero,  B. Sanchez, and
    M.  Sanchez.     1994.      Heterogeneous
    Photocatalysis: Degradation  of Ethylbenzene in
    TiO2 Aqueous Suspension.    Journal of
    Photochemistry and Photobiology, A: Chemistry,
    Volume 79. Pages 213  through 219.

Vinodgopal, K., and P.V. Kamat.  1995. "Enhanced
    Rates of Photocatalytic  Degradation of an Azo
    Dye Using SnO/TiOj Coupled Semiconductor
    Thin Films."     Environmental Science  &
    Technology. Volume 29, Number 3. Pages 841
  through 845.
Vollmuth,  S., and R. Niessner. 1995. "Degradation
    of PCDD, PCDF,  PAH, PCB, and Chlorinated
    Phenols During the Destruction-Treatment of
    Landfill Seepage  Water in Laboratory Model
    Reactor  (UV, Ozone,  and  UV-Ozone)."
    Chemosphere.    Volume 30, Number 12.
    Pages 2317 through 2331.

WEDECO UV-Verfahrenstechnik (WEDECO).  1998.
    Letter Regarding Case.Studies on WEDECO UV
    Oxidation Process.  From Horst Sprengel. To
    Kumar Topudurti, Environmental Engineer, Tetra
    Tech  EM Inc. April 21.

Weichgrebe,  D., A. Vogelpohl, D. Bockelmann, D.
    Bahnemann. 1993.  "Treatment of Landfill
    Leachates by Photocatalytic Oxidation Using
    Ti02:   A  Comparison   with    Alternative
    Photochemical  Technologies."  Photocatalytic
    Poritication and Treatment of Water and Air.
    Edited by D.F. Ollis and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier
    Science    Publishers  B.V.   Amsterdam.
    Pages 579 through 584.

Weir, B.A., C.R. McLane, and R.J. Leger. 1996.
    "Design of a UV Oxidation  System for Treatment
    of  TCE-Contaminated  Groundwater." Environ-
    mental Progress.   Volume 15, Number 3.
    Pages 179 through 186.

Zhang, P.,  R.J. Scrudato, J.J. Pagano, and R.N.
    Roberts. 1993. "Photocatalytic  Decomposition
    of PCBs in Aqueous Systems with Solar Light."
    Photocatalytic Purification and  Treatment of
    Water and Air. Edited by D.F. Ollis and H. AI-
    Ekabi.    Elsevier Science  Publishers B.V.
    Amsterdam. Pages 619 through 624.
                                            3-37

-------

-------
                                        Section 4
                            Contaminated Air Treatment
APO has been demonstrated to be  an effective
technology for treatment of contaminated air.
Matrices to which APO has been applied include the
following: (1) soil vapor extraction (SVE) off-gas,
(2) air stripper off-gas, (3) industrial emissions, and
(4) automobile emissions.  Collectively, APO has
been applied to the following types of airborne
contaminants: VOCs, SVOCs,  explosives and their
degradation products, and  nitrogen oxides (NO,).

To assist an environmental  practitioner in the
selection  of  an  APO  technology  to  treat
contaminated    air,   this    section   includes
(1) commercial-scale system evaluation results for
the UV/03, UV/catalyst, and UV/TiO2 processes and
(2) pilot-scale system evaluation results for the
UV/TiO2, solar/TiO2, and UV/O3 processes. This
section  also presents supplemental information from
bench-scale studies of APO processes.

As  described  in  Section 1.2, this handbook
organizes the performance  and cost data for each
matrix  by contaminant group,  scale of application
(commercial, pilot,  or bench),  and APO system or
process  used.    In general, commercial- and
pilot-scale applications are discussed in detail. Such
discussions  include,  as  available, a system
description,  operating conditions, performance data,
and  system costs. Bench-scale studies of APO
processes are described in less detail and  only if
they provide  information  that  supplements
commercial- and pilot-scale evaluation results. At
the end of each matrix section, a table is provided
that summarizes operating conditions and
performance results for each commercial- and
pilot-scale study discussed'in the text.

4.1     SVE  Off-Gas Treatment

APO has been shown to be an effective treatment
technology for VOC-contaminated off-gas from SVE
systems. Treatment systems based on UV/O3,
UV/catalyst, and UV/TiO2 processes have been
developed  at the commercial scale. A treatment
system based on the UV/Ti02 process  has been
demonstrated at the pilot-scale level.  Bench-scale
studies of the VUV, UV/O3, and UV/TiO2 processes
also have been performed.   Commercial- and
pilot-scale VOC treatment system performance and
cost data,  where available,  are provided below.
Summaries of the  bench-scale studies follow the
commercial- and pilot-scale system discussions.
Commercial-Scale Applications

Treatment of VOC-contaminated SVE off-gas using
APO has been demonstrated at the commercial
scale at a  wide range of concentrations (1 to
4,000  ppmv).      This section  discusses the
effectiveness of the  PTI  UV/O3,  KSE  AIR
UV/catalyst, and Matrix UV/Ti02 treatment systems
in removing the following VOCs from SVE off-gas.
APO Process
UV/O3
•UV/Catalyst
• UV/TiO2
VOCs Removed
. cis-1,2-DCE;PCE;
TCE; toluene;
total VOCs
Carbon tetrachloride,
methane, PCE, TCE,
toluene,
trimethylbenzene,
xylene
. PCE;1,1,1-TCA;TCE
 In application of these systems, removals exceeding
 90 percent for TCE; PCE; 1,1,1-TCA; and toluene
 have been achieved. Removals of cis-1,2-DCE and
 methane have  not met with the same success. As
 discussed below, VOC removal is a function of the
 system used as well as the contaminant type and
 concentration.  Of the three systems that have been
 demonstrated, cost data was available only for PTI's
 UV/03 system.

    PTI UV/O3 System

 A PTI UV/O3 system  was  field-tested  using
 VOC-contaminated off-gas drawn from an SVE
 system at Site  9 of Naval Air Station North Island in
 San Diego County, California (PTI  1998). Feed gas
 for the PTI system was supplied by a slipstream of
 off-gas from the SVE system. Before entering the
 PTI  system, the SVE off-gas passed through an
 air-water separator to remove any free moisture.
 Make-up air was also used to vary the flow and
 concentration  of contaminants.

 The primary contaminants in the SVE off-gas at
 Site 9  included PCE; TCE; cis-1,2-DCE; and  toluene.
 Total  VOCs entering the  PTI system ranged in
 concentration from  1,000  to 1,100  ppmv as carbon.
 The primary VOCs in the feed gas were as follows:
 PCE  (31 ppmv);  TCE  (28 ppmv); cis-1,2-DCE
 (22 ppmv); and toluene (14 ppmv). For the test, the
                                             4-I

-------
PTI system operated at steady state for about
18 days, during which time the system achieved
89 percent  on-line availability. The  maximum flow
rate treated  was 12 scmm.

During the field test,  the average removal for total
VOCs was  95.9 percent. Average removals for
primary  VOCs were as follows: 89.7  percent for
PCE; 80.8 percent for TCE;  74.0 percent for
cis-1,2-DCE; and 93.1 percent for toluene. Reaction
by-products analyzed for during the test included
hydrochloric acid (HCI), chlorine,  phosgene, and
carbon  monoxide (CO).     HCI,  chlorine, and
phosgene were measured at the PTI system outlet
at 0.18,  0.04, and 11 parts per billion by volume
(ppbv), respectively. The amount  of CO  produced in
the PTI  system was determined  to be between 31
and 56 ppmv.

Although PTI did not report  treatment costs  for the
system demonstrated, it used results  from the test to
scale up costs for an 85-scmm system; 85 scmm
was the  flow capacity of the SVE system at  Site 9.
PTI's estimated equipment and operating cost at the
site was $3.80/pound of VOC treated, assuming
(1) use  of an 85-scmm system; (2) treatment of
95,000 pounds of VOCs per year for 3 years; and
(3) 95 percent removal of the VOCs treated.

    KSE AIR UV/Catalyst System

The KSE AIR UV/catalyst system was demonstrated
using VOC-contaminated off-gas from an SVE
system at  Loring  Air Force  Base in  Aroostook
County, Maine  (Kittrell  and others 1996a). This
demonstration was conducted in coordination with
the U.S. EPA SITE Emerging Technology Program.
KSE's AIR system  contains KSE's  proprietary
catalyst and 60 UV lamps.  Information on the
composition  of the catalyst and the wavelength of the
UV lamps was  not available.

The primary contaminants  in .the SVE off-gas
included PCE and  methane. Over a 30-day  period
of system evaluation,  PCE concentrations in the SVE
off-gas  varied significantly, diminishing from
150 ppmv during the first few days to <1  ppmv at the
end  of the  demonstration.  Methane concentrations
ranged from 2,000 to 4,000 ppmv  throughout the
demonstration. Additional VOCs identified  at low
levels <1 ppmv in the off-gas  included toluene,
xylene,  TCE,  trimethylbenzene,  and  carbon
tetrachloride. The flow rates  treated ranged from 1.4
to 2.0 scmm.

For most of the demonstration, the KSE system
achieved >99 percent removal  of PCE,  while
methane removal was minimal. KSE attributed the
minimal  methane removal  to  the  catalyst
composition, which had been selected for PCE
removal.

    Matrix UV/Ti02 System

The Matrix UV/TiO2 system was field-tested using
VOC-contaminated off-gas drawn  from an  SVE
system located at the U.S. Department of Energy
Savannah River Superfund site in Aiken, South
Carolina (Anonymous  1995). The  Matrix system
consisted  of  a fluorescent  lamp (with UV output of
300 to 400 nm) encased by a fiberglass mesh sleeve
coated with  Ti02 catalyst.    Before entering the
system, SVE off-gas passed through  a cyclone
separator .  and filter to  remove  moisture  and
particulates, respectively.

The primary contaminants in the SVE off-gas at the
site included  TCE; PCE; and 1 ,1 J-TCA. TCE and
PCE concentrations in the SVE off-gas ranged  from
110 to 190 ppmv and  700  to  1,200  ppmv,
respectively. The feed stream concentration of
1 ,1,1-TCA was not reported. The flow rates treated
for the test  ranged from 0.0028 to  2.8  scmm;
however, performance data  is  available for  only
three flow rates:  0.71, 1.4,  and 2.1 scmm.

VOC removals varied widely during the test period.
For instance, TCE removal  varied from 49.5 to
98.1 percent.    The highest  TCE  removal
(98.1 percent) was achieved when, the feed stream
TCE concentration was  160 ppmv and the flow rate
was 0.71 scmm. Similarly, PCE removals varied
widely,, ranging from 52.7 to 95.2 percent.  The
highest PCE removal (95.2 percent) was achieved
when the feed  stream PCE concentration  was
1,200 ppmv  and the flow rate  was 0.71  scmm. The
Matrix system did not remove 1,1,1 -TCA.

Small quantities  of carbon  tetrachloride, chloroform,
dichloroacetyl chloride  (DCAC),  hexachloroethane,
methylchloroformate,    pentachloroethane,    and
trichloroacetyl chloride  were identified  as reaction
by-products.  The  chemical-specific concentrations
were not available.

Pilot-Scale Application

A  pilot-scale UV/TiO2   system developed  by
researchers at the University  of Wisconsin in
Madison was field-tested  using  VOC-contaminated
off-gas drawn from an SVE extraction well in the
M area of the Savannah River site  in Aiken, South
Carolina (Read and others  1996). The UV/TiO2
system consisted of two photoreactor flow  cells
                                             4-2

-------
(each 9.2 x 10"4 m3) packed with TiO2 catalyst.
Positioned in the middle of each flow cell was a
long-wave, 40-W fluorescent UV black light lamp.
The UV output was not reported.

The  primary contaminants in the SVE off-gas
included TCE (56 to 290 ppmv) and PCE (2,300 to
3,860 ppmv). Additional VOCs present at lower
levels were 1,1,1-TCA (up to 38 ppmv) and 1  ,1-DCE
(up to 150 ppmv). System performance was also
evaluated  using  diluted VOC concentrations.
Dilution of the SVE  off-gas was achieved  by adding
ambient air to the feed stream upstream from the
UV/TiO2 system. Dilution resulted in the following
chemical-specific  feed stream concentrations:
<80 ppmv for TCE; <800 ppmv for PCE; below
detection limit (1  ppmv) for 1,1,1 -TCA and 1,1 -DCE.
During  8 days of system operation,  system
temperature ranged from 75 to 110 °C, and the flow
rate ranged  from 5.0 x 10"4 to 6.0 x 10~3 scmm. 0,
was added to the system at 5.0 x 10"4 scmm near
the end of the field test to evaluate its effect on
system  performance.

Under both undiluted and diluted feed stream
conditions,  removals exceeding  97 percent were
observed for TCE; PCE; 1,1,1-TCA; and  1 ,1-DCE.
Treatment of the undiluted  off-gas,  however,  yielded
significantly  more reaction by-products. The reaction
by-products    identified    included    phosgene,
chloroform,  carbon tetrachloride,  pentachloroethane,
and hexachloroethane. After the  feed stream  was
diluted with  ambient  air to reduce the total VOC
concentration to below  1,000 ppmv, reaction
by-products  identified under undiluted conditions,
except for hexachloroethane, were reduced to below
1  ppmv;  hexachloroethane  was detected at
concentrations of <10 ppmv.   The highest VOC
removals occurred when supplemental 0, was
added to the system.  Specifically, TCE  and PCE
removals exceeded 99.9 percent when  their
concentrations in the feed stream were 66 and
502 ppmv, respectively. The concentrations of all
reaction by-products previously identified, including
hexachloroethane, were reduced 'to <1 ppmv.
However, according to Read  and others  (1996),
addition of 0, would not be cost effective for a
full-scale system.

Bench-Scale Studies

The  treatment  of VOCs using VUV, UV/03,  and
UV/Ti02 processes has been evaluated at the
bench-scale level using synthetic matrices. Many
bench-scale studies have been conducted to
evaluate the effect of several key UV/Ti02 process
variables.     In  contrast,  the  VUV and UV/O,
processes have received much less attention despite
bench-scale results  indicating that these processes
provide effective treatment of certain types of
contaminants. This section  provides information  that
supplements commercial- and pilot-scale evaluation
results for removing the following VOCs from
contaminated air  matrices including SVE off-gas,.
 A P O  P r o c
ess  VOCs Removed
       UV/O,
     Carbon tetrachloride,
     chloroform,
     trichlorofluoroethane
     Carbon tetrachloride;
     chloroform; PCE;
     1,1,1-TCA; TCE
     Acetic acid, acetyl
     aldehyde;  acetone;
     benzene; 1 -butanol;
     butylraldehyde;  ethanol;
     formaldehyde;  formic acid;
     methyl mercaptan;  PCE;
     2-propanol; 1,1,1 -TCA;
     TCE; toluene;  xylenes
    VUV Photolysis

Treatment of three  halogenated methanes  (carbon
tetrachloride, chloroform, and  trichlorofluoroethane
[CFC-113]) was studied by Loraine and Glaze (1992)
using a VUV system. For this study, VUV conditions
were established using a xenon-xenon excimer lamp
with a maximum UV output at 172 nm. The study
showed that carbon tetrachloride and  chloroform
were removed by a  pseudo-first-order process, while
CFC-113 was  removed  by a zero-order process.
Removals of 95 percent were  achieved for all three
VOCs using the following run  times: 25  minutes for
carbon  tetrachloride, 16 minutes for chloroform, and
238 minutes for CFC-113.    The initial  VOC
concentrations and reaction by-products were not
reported.

    UV/03

The removal kinetics of three saturated VOCs
(carbon tetrachloride; 1 ,1,1-TCA; and chloroform)
and two unsaturated VOCs (TCE and PCE)  using
the UV/O3 process were studied by Bhowmick and
Semmens  (1994). For this study, two UV lamps
were used: one UV lamp with its predominant output
at 254 nm and with a small  output at 185 nm (about
5  percent), and one UV lamp with output only at
254 nm. For the saturated VOCs, the study showed
that removal rates were higher for the lamp with
output at 254 and 185 nm  and that the rates were
                                             4-3

-------
unaffected  by addition of 0,.  The removal rates
were also higher for unsaturated VOCs using the
lamp with output at 245 and  185 nm; however,
addition of 0, improved the removal rates for TCE
and PCE up to 30 and 12 percent, respectively. 0,
was  most effective for removing the unsaturated
compounds at concentrations between 2 and
3 mg/L. Removals of both the unsaturated and
saturated VOCs followed first-order kinetics, and the
rate constants were an  order of  magnitude higher for
the unsaturated VOCs than for the saturated VOCs.
In addition,  moisture was found to favor the
chloroform; 1 ,1,1 -TCA; and TCE removal kinetics but
had no impact on the  PCE and carbon tetrachloride
removal  kinetics.  Phosgene was  identified  as a
reaction  by-product.

    UV/Ti02

Treatment of VOCs using the UV/Ti02 process at the
bench-scale  level has received significant attention.
Bench-scale studies  of interest have focused  on
evaluating the effects of the following  key process
variables: supplemental oxidants (0,, O3, and H2O2),
water vapor, co-catalysts, reaction pressure, and
co-contaminants. Additional bench-scale UV/TiO2
studies have  evaluated removal of high-level  VOC
concentrations   and   formation of  reaction
by-products.   Summaries of these bench-scale
UV/TiO2  studies are provided below. Some of the
studies evaluated more than one process variable;
such studies are described with emphasis on the
process variable for which  supplemental information
is called for herein.

Effect of Supplemental Qxidants

Several bench-scale studies have demonstrated that
oxidants such as O2, O3, and H p 2 can enhance
VOC removals by the UV/Ti02 processes. For
instance, Wang and Marinas  (1993) evaluated the
effect  of adding  0, on removal of TCE by the
UV/TiO2  process. This study was conducted with
reactor inlet TCE and 0, concentrations ranging
from  5  to  7 ppmv  and 24 to 2,700  ppmv,
respectively, and in the absence of humidity. The
study showed that TCE removals increased from 30
to 88 percent with increasing 0, concentrations up
to 500 ppmv. At higher 0, concentrations,  TCE
removal remained relatively constant, ranging from
86 to 91  percent.

Similarly, supplemental 0, and H2O2 were shown to
enhance removal of  VOCs (2-propanol, benzene,
toluene,  xylene,  and ethanol) by the UV/Ti02
process (Nimlos and  others 1995).   In this study,
removal  of 2-propanol increased from 39 percent
without 0, to >99.7 percent with supplemental 0,.
When subjected to a mixture of benzene,.toluene,
and xylene, the TiO2 catalyst was deactivated:
however,  once 0, was added,  removals of 79, 95,
and >99.7 percent were achieved for benzene,
toluene, and xylene, respectively. The  individual
effects of supplemental 0, and  H2O2 on removal  of
ethanol by the UV/TiO2 process were also  evaluated.
The study showed that ethanol removal increased by
more than an order of magnitude  (to >90 percent
removal) after individual additions  of 0, and H2O2.
Information on the initial  VOC concentrations and on
the concentrations of 0, and H2O2  additions was not
clearly   provided.

Effect of Water Vapor

Based  on studies  conducted  at the bench-scale
level, water vapor appears  to have differing effects
on removal of VOCs by the UV/TIO2 processes.  In
general, the effects appear  to depend on the water
vapor  concentration as well as the type and
concentration of the target VOC. For instance,
Anderson and others (1993) observed that the
presence of water vapor in  the reactant gas stream
decreased the initial reaction rates  of TCE  (specific  ••
values were not reported) below the rates observed  ~
under water-free  conditions; however, water vapor
was required  to maintain photocatalytic activity for
extended  periods.    For the water-free reactant
stream, the  TCE reaction rate  decreased  by
50 percent after 2 hours of  irradiation. The decrease
in photocatalytic activity was attributed to fewer OH-
in a water-free environment to adsorb on the surface
of the TiO2 catalyst, as OH0  is the primary oxidant for
photochemical oxidation of  TCE. The reaction  rate
of TCE was independent of water vapor over the
water vapor/TCE mole ratio of 4.2  x ifl"4 to 0.027.
Raupp and others (1994)  also observed that the
presence  of water vapor in reactant gas streams
decreased  the initial reaction rates of TCA,  benzene,
and  acetone below the rates observed under
water-free  conditions; however, water was  required
to maintain photocatalytic activity for extended
periods.

The effect of water vapor on removal of TCE  at
various concentrations  by  a UWTiO2 process  was
evaluated  by Berman and  Dong (1994).  The study
showed that when the initial TCE concentration was
800 ppmv, TCE removal exceeded  99.9 percent  as
water  vapor concentrations increased  up  to
50,000 ppmv;  however,  when  the  initial TCE
concentration was 4,500 ppmv, TCE  removal
decreased from about 98  to 87 percent as water
vapor concentrations increased  over the same
range.  The negative effect  of water vapor on TCE
                                             4-4

-------
removal was attributed to competition between TCE
and water vapor for sites on the TiO2 catalyst.

Peral and Ollis (1992) observed that the effect of
water vapor on removal of VOCs (acetone,
1 -butanol, butyraldehyde; and m-xylene) using the
UV/TiO2 process also depends on  the type  of
chemical being treated. For acetone at an  initial
concentration of about 84 ppmv, the study showed
that  water vapor inhibits  acetone  removal.
Specifically,  the removal  rate for acetone decreased
from about 1 to 0.16 ^g/cn^-min as the water vapor
concentration was increased from about 40  to
14,000 ppmv. In contrast, the removal rate for
m-xylene was found to increase from about 0.12 to
0.20 Aig/cm2-min as the water vapor concentration
increased from  0 to about 1 ,400 ppmv. At  higher
water vapor concentrations (7,500 ppmv) the
removal   rate  decreased,    reaching   about
0.07 Mg/cm2-min. Variations in  water vapor concen-
tration were shown  to have no significant effect on
the removal rates of l-butanol and butyraldehyde.
The initial concentrations for m-xylene, 1-butanol,
and  butyraldehyde were not clearly reported.

Effect of Co-Cat&.&

The effect of co-catalysts and various fluorescent
light sources on VOC removal by  the UV/TiO2
process was investigated by Watanabe and others
(1993). For this study, the individual effects of
various  metals, including   copper (II),  Fe(ll),
platinum (II), strontium (II), cobalt (II), nickel (II), and
palladium (II), coated on a TiO2 catalyst at 0.1  to
1  molar percent were evaluated with regard  to
methyl mercaptan removal under various fluorescent
light sources. Under black light conditions, addition
of platinum (II), strontium (II), cobalt (II), nickel (II), or
palladium (II) as  a co-catalyst was demonstrated to
diminish removal  of methyl mercaptan,  while addition
of copper (II) and  Fe(ll) enhanced removal. The
highest methyl mercaptan removal was achieved
after addition of copper  (II). The study  also showed
that the percent  removal of methyl mercaptan  in the
absence of  light,  under pink light, and under  regular
fluorescent  light was an order of magnitude lower
than under  black light.  Under black light conditions,
removal of methyl mercaptan was shown to increase
from about 1 5 percent without a co-catalyst to about
90 percent with  addition of copper  (II)  as a
co-catalyst at 1 .0 molar percent.
Fffert nf Reaction
The effect of reducing reaction pressure on TCE
removal in a UV/TiO2 system was evaluated by
Annapragada and others (1997).    The initial
concentrations of TCE and water vapor were
adjusted for reaction pressure changes such that
their initial concentrations under standard conditions
were the same in  all  experiments. For example,
7.2 micromoles per  liter (/zmol/L) of TCE  and
1,400 //moj/L of water vapor at 21.5 pounds per
square inch absolute pressure (psia) are equivalent
to 1.6 ^mol/L of TCE and 320 ^mol/L of water vapor
at 4.9  psia;  both conditions  would correspond to
4.9 //mol/L of TCE  and 980 ^mol/L of water vapor
under standard conditions.  The study  showed  that
as reaction pressure was reduced from 21.5 to
4.9 psia, TCE removal increased  from 59 to
85  percent. The increase in TCE removal  was
attributed to reduced competition  between  TCE  and
water vapor for adsorption sites on the TiO2 catalyst.
At reduced pressure, the amount of  water vapor that
condenses  is less, resulting in relatively more
adsorption sites for  TCE.

Competitive Effect of Co-Contaminants

The single-contaminant and multiple-contaminant
kinetics  of TCE and toluene were studied  using the
UV/TiO2 process by Luo and Ollis (1996). In a gas
stream containing TCE at concentrations up to
140 ppmv,  >99.9 percent TCE  removal  was
achieved. In a gas  stream containing toluene, 20 to
8 percent removals  were achieved for concentrations
ranging from about 20 to 140 ppmv, respectively.
Study of TCE and toluene  mixtures revealed a
strong  promotion-inhibition  behavior in  which  TCE
enhances toluene removal and toluene  reduces  TCE
removal.    When  the TCE concentration  was
140 ppmv and the  toluene  concentration was below
26  ppmv, almost complete removal was achieved for
both  toluene and TCE.     When the  toluene
concentration was increased to levels above
42  ppmv, TCE was hardly removed,  and toluene
removal exhibited only a slight increase. When the
TCE  concentration was decreased to 42 ppmv,
toluene  and TCE  removals both dropped significantly
(to  >60 percent).

Removal of Hiah-l evel VOC Concentrations

Several  bench-scale studies indicate that the ability
to  remove  VOCs using  the  UV/TiO2  process
depends strongly on the type and  concentration of
the compound being treated.  For example, AI-Ekabi
and  others  (1993)  observed  chemical-   and
concentration-dependent effects  on photochemical
oxidation of high-level TCE  and PCE concentrations.
The study showed  >99 percent removal of TCE for
initial TCE concentrations ranging from 7,400 to
11,000  ppmv. TCE removal  decreased and varied
from 92 to 94 percent for initial TCE concentrations
                                              4-5

-------
ranging from 17,000  to 23,000  ppmv. Similarly,
>99 percent removal of PCE was observed for an
initial PCE concentration of 3,100 ppmv, but for initial
PCE concentrations ranging  from  4,600  to
9,200 ppmv, PCE removal was reduced and varied
from 93 to 96  percent.   In addition, Holden and
others (1993)  observed that benzene removal
increased from 10 to 73 percent in a UWTiO2 system
after the  initial concentration of benzene was
reduced from 140,000  to 2,200 ppmv.

Reaction By-Product Formation

A quantitative and qualitative evaluation  of TCE
reaction by-products in a UV/TiO2 system as a
function of flow  rate (retention time) was conducted
by Holden and  others (1993). For this study, the
reaction by-products from complete removal  of TCE,
which was present at an  initial  concentration  of
24,500 ppmv, were evaluated after the flow rates
through the  reactor were set at 1  * 10"4,  5 * 10~5,
2.5 x 1 O'5, and  1 .O *  10"5 scmm.  For each of the
flow rates  evaluated, the following  by-products were
identified in varying distributions: DCAC, phosgene,
carbon dioxide, chlorine, CO, HCI, and oxides of
chlorine. The study showed that  as the flow rates
decreased (1  .0  x 10" to 2.5 x irj5 scmm}, phosgene
concentrations increased  and DCAC  concentrations
decreased,  indicating  that DCAC was being
converted  to phosgene.    When  the flow rate
was further decreased  from 2.5  x  IQ-S  to
1  .0 x 1 O"5 scmm,  DCAC was completely removed,
and the phosgene concentration was relatively
lower.   Collectively, this change in distribution
suggests that DCAC is the primary reaction
by-product of TCE photochemical oxidation. This
change also suggests that at sufficiently low flow
rates,  both DCAC and phosgene may not be  present
as final  by-products of TCE photochemical oxidation.

Reaction by-products formed during ethanol removal
were studied by Nimlos and others (1996) using the
UV/TiO2 process. The study revealed that removals
exceeding  99 percent could be achieved  for ethanol
concentrations ranging from 40 to  200 ppmv.  Acetyl
aldehyde,  formaldehyde,  and carbon dioxide were
identified as the primary reaction  by-products;  acetic
acid, formic acid, ethyl acetate, methyl formate, ethyl
formate, and methyl acetate were identified at lower
concentrations. To better examine the  kinetics of
ethanol,  the study also evaluated (in  individual tests)
by-product formation from UV/TiO2 photolysis of
acetyl  aldehyde, formaldehyde,  acetic acid, and
formic acid. For acetyl. aldehyde  concentrations
ranging  from 50 to 200 ppmv, >99 percent removal
was achieved; identified by-products included
formaldehyde, acetic acid,  and methyl formate.
Removal of formaldehyde concentrations ranging
from 80 to 400 ppmv exceeded 80  percent;  formic
acid, methyl formate, and methanol were identified
as  reaction by-products.   Acetic acid removal
exceeded 99 percent for concentrations ranging from
80 to 180 ppmv; reaction by-products included
primarily formaldehyde.   Carbon dioxide was
identified as the reaction by-product of formic acid.
                                              4-6

-------
Table 4-1. SVE Off-Gas Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST
CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal Additional Information
VOCs (Commercial Scale)
UV/O3
(PTI)
UV/Catalyst
(KSE AIR)
UV/TiO2
[Matrix)
Total VOCs: 1,000 to 1.100 ppmv
as carbon
PCE: 31 ppmv
TCE: 28 ppmv
cis-1,2-DCE: 22 ppmv
Toluene: 14 ppmv
PCE: 150 to 1 ppmv
Methane: 2,000 to 4,000 ppmv
PCE: 1,200 ppmv
TCE: 160 ppmv
1 ,1,1-TCA: not available
Flow rate: 12 scmm
Reactor volume: not
available
Light source: low-pressure
UV lamps with output at
185 to 254 nm
Flow rate: 1 .4 to 2.0 scmm
Reactor volume: not
available
Light source: 60 UV lights;
intensity and
wavelength not
available
Flow rate: 0.71 scmm
Reactor volume: not
available
Light source: one fluorescent
lamp with UV output at
300 to 400 nm
Total VOCs: 95.9
PCE: 89.7
TCE: 80.8
Cis-1 ,2-DCE: 74.0
Toluene: 93.1
PCE: >99
Methane: minimal
PCE: 95.2
TCE: 98.1
1,1.1-TCA: not
removed
Reaction By-products
HCI: 0.18 ppbv
Chlorine: 0.04 ppbv
Phosgene: 1 1 ppbv
CO: 31 to 56 ppmv
Not available
Reaction By-products
Carbon tetrachioride
Chloroform
DCAC
Hexachioroethane
Methylchloroformate
Pentachloroethane
Trichioroacetyl chloride
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)

For an 85-scmm System
$3.80/pound of VOCs
treated
Not available
Not available
REFERENCE

PTI 1998
Kittrell and
others 1996a
Anonymous
1995
VOCs (Pilot Scale)
jvmo2
TCE: 66 ppmv
PCE: 502 ppmv
1,1-DCE: below detection limit
1.1 ,1-TCA: below detection limit
Flow rate: 5.0 x 10"4 scmm
Reactor volume: two
9 2 x ICrtn3 flow cells
Light source: two 40-W
fluorescent UV black
light lamps
Temperature: 100 °C
O2 addition: 5.0 x 10~* scmm
TCE: >99.9
PCE: >99.9
1 ,1-DCE: not available
1.1,1-TCA: not
available
He
Reaction By-products
Phosgene: <1 ppmv
Chloroform: <1 ppmv
Carbon tetrachlortde:
<1 ppmv
Pentachioroethane:
<1 ppmv
xachloroethane:
<1 ppmv
None
I
Read and others
1996

-------
4.2    Air  Stripper  Off-Gas Treatment

APO has been shown to be  an  effective treatment
technology for air stripper off-gas contaminated with
low-level  VOC concentrations. At the  commercial
scale, KSE's AIR UV/catalyst system has achieved
nearly 99 percent removal  of low-level 1,2-DCA
concentrations. At the pilot-scale level, a UV/TiO2
system achieved 93 percent removal of low-level
ethanol concentrations. Cost information was not
available for either  of  these two  systems.
Bench-scale studies of VOC removal using  the
UV/Ti02 process are described in Section 4.1. The
commercial- and pilot-scale  systems that have been
used to  treat VOCs in air  stripper off-gas are
described  below.

Commercial-Scale Application

This  section discusses the effectiveness  of the  KSE
AIR UV/catalyst commercial-scale treatment system
in removing VOCs from air  stripper off-gas.  The
KSE system was demonstrated using  air stripper
off-gas contaminated -with low-level 1,2-DCA
concentrations at Dover Air  Force Base  in Delaware
(Kittrell  and  Quinlan  1995a). KSE's system
consisted of a single vessel containing a proprietary
catalyst and varying numbers of black light UV lamps
(the system  had  a  60-lamp  capacity). The
composition of the catalyst and the wavelength and
intensity output of the UV bulbs were not reported.
The system received contaminated air via a
slipstream directly from the combined effluent of two
air stripping towers without  further treatment.

During  the 1 0-week period  of system operation,  the
inlet air stream was saturated  with water vapor and
contained 1,2-DCA concentrations ranging from 0.9
to 3 ppmv. The flow  rate through the  reactor ranged
from 1.4 to  1.7 scmm and averaged  1.2 scmm.
During  the initial stages of the demonstration when
30 of the 60 black light UV lamps were illuminated,
1,2-DCA removal  averaged  96  percent. By
illuminating additional lamps in the later stages of the
demonstration, KSE was able to increase 1,2-DCA
removal; specifically, when seven and later eight
more lamps were illuminated, 1,2-DCA removal
averaged >96 percent and  about 99 percent,
respectively.     Reaction  by-products were not
analyzed for during the demonstration.

Pilot-Scale Application

This section discusses the  effectiveness of  a
pilot-scale UV/TiO2 system in removing  VOCs from
air stripper off-gas. A pilot-scale UV/TiO2 system
was  field-tested by National  Renewable Energy
Laboratory  (NREL) researchers using ethanol-
contaminated  off-gas  from  an air stripper at the
Coors Brewery in Golden, Colorado (Nimlos and
others 1995).  The waste treatment areas at the
facility contained several holding pits that held
beer-laden wastewater prior to biological treatment.
The UV/TiO2 system was tested using a sidestream
of off-gas from a  blower assembly that had been
installed to strip ethanol from one of the pits. The
system, a recirculating  batch reactor, consisted of a
series of three 8,-inch Pyrex tubes coated on the
inside with TiO2 and illuminated with  four banks of
black lights with their UV output at 360 nm (the
intensity was not reported),

For this study, which was conducted over 2 days, the
inlet  off-gas was  saturated with water vapor (to
achieve 100 percent relative humidity)  and  contained
initial  concentrations of ethanol  ranging  from  6.4  to
40 ppmv. Ethanol removal over this concentration
range varied from about 78 to 93 percent. The
highest ethanol  removal (93 percent) was observed
at an initial concentration of 15 ppmv and with  a
retention time of 0.4 second.
                                              4-8

-------
         Table 4-2. Air Stripper  Off-Gas Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST
CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal Additional Information
VOCs (Commercial Scale)
UV/Catalyst
(KSE AIR)
1 ,2-DCA: 0.9 to 3 ppmv
Flow rate: 1 .4 to 1 .7 scmm
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: about 45 UV black
light lamps; intensity not
available
Water vapor: 100 percent relative
humidity
VOCs (Pilot Scale)
UWTiO2
Ethanol: 15 ppmv
Flow rate: not available
(recirculating batch)
Reactor volume: three 8-inch Pyrex
tubes
Light source: four banks of UV
lamps with UV output at
360 nm; intensity not available
Water vapor: 100 percent relative
humidity
Retention time: 0.4 second
About 99
Not available
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)

Not available
REFERENCE

Kittrell and Quinlan 1995a

About 93
tot available
Not available
Nimlos and others 1995
CO

-------
4.3    Industrial  Emissions Treatment

Although only a limited number of applications have
been developed, APO has been shown to be an
effective treatment technology for VOCs, SVOCs,
and explosives in industrial  emissions.  At the
commercial-scale level, APO systems based on
UV/catalyst and  UV/TiO2 processes have  been
developed for treatment of VOCs and explosives and
their degradation  products,  respectively. Pilot-scale
systems for treatment of VOCs using the solar/Ti02
process and SVOCs  using the UV/03 process have
been demonstrated.  Bench-scale studies of  VOC
removal using UV/TiO2 and UV/O3 processes are
described in Section 4.1. In  addition to performance
data,  system  cost  information is available for
commercial-scale systems designed to treat VOCs
and  explosives.  The commercial-  and pilot-scale
systems available to treat  industrial emissions are
described  below.

4.3. 1  VOC-Confaining  Industrial
       Emissions

This section discusses removal of VOCs in industrial
emissions using the UV/catalyst process at the
commercial scale. Additional  information on  VOC
removal using  the solar/Ti02 process at the
pilot-scale  level is also included.

Commercial-Scale Applications

This section discusses the effectiveness of the KSE
AIR UV/catalyst treatment system in removing the
following VOCs from industrial emissions.
APO Process
• UV/Catalyst
VOCs Removed
Aliphatic hydrocarbon,
pentane
 KSE's AIR system was demonstrated  using
 high-level     voc    (aliphatic    hydrocarbon)
 concentrations in emissions from the Chering-Plough
 Corporation contact lens manufacturing facility in
 Cidro, Puerto Rico  (Kittrell and others 1996b).  The
 source of the VOCs was an aliphatic hydrocarbon
 (Shell Sol B  HT) solvent used in the lens vats within
 the facility. KSE's AIR system contains a proprietary
 catalyst and UV lamps. The number of lamps  and
 their wavelength and intensity were not reported.
 The system  received contaminated air from exhaust
 hoods that  drew solvent  vapor emissions  from the
 surface of the vats.
Over the 2-week demonstration  period, the system
achieved high  removals (>99  percent) for feed
stream  total VOC concentrations  ranging  from  1,900
to 2,000 ppmv.  The flow rate through the  system
ranged from 0.3 to  0.8 scmm and corresponded to
retention times <1 second.   The  highest  VOC
removal was achieved with an  initial feed stream
total VOC concentration of 2,000 ppmv  and a flow
rate of 0.3 scmm. Using gas chromatography, KSE
observed that no reaction by-products were formed
during  the  demonstration.    Compound-specific
detectors  were  used  to monitor for  CO,
formaldehyde, and  acetaldehyde, and  none of the
compounds was detected.

KSE's estimated capital cost for a 1.8-scmm system
with a  percent removal >99 percent was $53,320.
Monthly energy  and annual  maintenance costs  for
the system at the Chering-Plough Corporation facility
were estimated  at <$376 and $1,672, respectively.
KSE's AIR  UV/catalyst system   was  also
demonstrated  using pentane  emissions  from  an
expandable polystyrene plant (Kittrell and others
1996b). During this demonstration, high pentane
removals (99.2 to 99.9  percent) were achieved  for
feed stream pentane concentrations ranging  from
340 to 3,600 ppmv at 20 percent  relative  humidity.
The rate of flow through  the system ranged from  0.3
to 0.9 scmm and corresponded to retention times
<1 second. The demonstration  showed that relative
humidity, which varied from 20 to  100 percent, had
no impact on system  performance. Specifically,
when KSE  increased the relative humidity to
100  percent,    pentane   removal   " exceeded
99.9 percent with an initial pentane concentration of
2,100 ppmv and a system flow rate of 0.8 scmm.
Using gas chromatography, KSE observed that no
reaction by-products  were formed during the
demonstration.  Compound-specific detectors  were
used to  monitor for  CO, formaldehyde, and
acetaldehyde,  and none  of the compounds was
detected.

Based on the demonstration, KSE's estimated
capital cost for a 4.4-scmm system with pentane
removal >99  percent  was $183,000.   Annual
operating costs were estimated at $7,800.

Pilot-Scale Application

This  section  discusses the  effectiveness of a
pilot-scale   solar/Ti02  system   in    treating
VOC-contaminated   industrial emissions.  A
pilot-scale system was field-tested by  NREL
researchers using  VOC-laden paint booth emissions
                                             4-10

-------
at E/M Corporation's North Hollywood painting plant
(Nimlos and others 1995). VOCs identified-in the
emissions included ethanol, toluene, and  methyl
ethyl ketone. The system used for the study was a
modified version  of the recirculating batch  reactor
used by NREL for treating air stripper off-gas
contaminated with ethanol (see Section 4.2, Pilot-
Scale  Application).  Specifically, the system was
modified to use sunlight as the UV light source, and
supplemental 0, was added to the feed  gas at
concentrations ranging  from 500 to 2,600 ppmv.
The study showed that 99 percent removal  of total
VOCs  ranging in concentration from  250 to
350 ppmv was achieved in 3 to 4 seconds when the
concentration  of 0, exceeded 1,000 ppmv.

4.3.2  SVOC-Containing  Industrial
        Emissions

This section discusses  the effectiveness of a
pilot-scale  UV/O3 system in  treating  SVOC-
contaminated  industrial emissions. A  pilot-scale
UV/O3 system was field-tested using chlorophenol
emissions from a  plant making selective weed killers
(Barker and Jones 1988). The system  (a  gas
scrubber) consisted of a 150-L spray section and a
15-L sump section. Located in the sump were I I
I S-W low-pressure mercury lamps supplying 1 I W/L.
The  UV output of the low-pressure mercury lamps
was not reported. 0, was supplied to the sump
section by an 0, generator. The sump  liquor was
maintained at a pH of 5 to 6 and a temperature of 40
to 50 "C. The feed gas was supplied to the interface
of the sump  and spray sections at a flow rate of
either 1.2 or 2.0 scmm.

The  demonstration showed that UV light had  very
little effect on removal of chlorophenol. In the
presence of UV light and O,, whose concentra-
tion varied from 10 to 30 g/m , removals exceeding
99   percent were   achieved for chlorophenol
concentrations ranging from  I to 130 ppmv. The
highest chlorophenol removal (>99.9  percent)  was
achieved  when the  inlet  chlorophenol  and
0, concentrations were 34 ppmv and 30 g/m3,
respectively. Chlorophenol removals in the absence
of UV light still exceeded 99  percent for inlet
concentrations ranging from 3 to 5 ppmv and with 0,
concentrations ranging from 10 to 30 g/m3. Based
on TOC analyses, however, the study revealed that
the combination of UV light and 0, was important for
removing compounds other than chlorophenol  in the
feed stream.
4.3.3  Explosive- and Degrada tidn
       Product-Containing  Industrial
       Emissions

This section discusses the effectiveness of the
Zentox UV/Tf02 commercial-scale treatment system
in  removing NG from industrial emissions. Zentox's
system  was demonstrated  using NG-containing
emissions from a propellant annealing oven at the
U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head
Division Extrusion Plant (Turchi and Miller 1998).
Stack gas from  the heating process was drawn from
the oven stack to the Zentox system.

Days I and  2 of the 4-day demonstration were used
to  (I) determine whether addition of supplemental 0,
improves NG removal and (2)  evaluate the relative
advantages of germicidal lamps (50 W with UV
output at 254 nm) and black light lamps (64 W with
UV output at 350 nm). Results indicated that 0,
addition at 45 to 120 ppmv in combination  with either
germicidal or black light lamps was required to
achieve  rapid oxidation of NG  to NO,. Black lights,
however, were found to  perform better in  converting
NG to nitrogen  dioxide. Use of  the germicidal lamps
resulted in formation of an organic film on the lamps
because of direct  photolysis  of higher  molecular
weight  compounds  present in the feed gas. Based
primarily  on these results,  black lights  and
supplemental 0, were selected  for subsequent tests
under steady-state conditions during days 3 and 4.

Results from days 3 and 4 demonstrate  that the
Zentox system is capable  of achieving high
(>97 percent) NG removals. On day 3, the system
was operated with  28 lamps,  four catalyst banks,
and a flow rate of  1.4 scmm.  0, concentrations in
the feed gas were maintained at 140  ppmv,  and inlet
NG  concentrations  ranged from 1.6 to 2.1 ppmv.
Under these conditions, NG removal exceeded
97 percent. The highest removal (99.2 percent) was
observed when  the initial NG concentration was
I .7 ppmv.    The target  removals  for the
demonstration were 80 to 85 percent,  so Zentox
increased the loading rate on day 4 by increasing the
flow through the  reactor to 2.1 scmm, reducing the
number of  catalyst  banks by half, and reducing the
number of  UV  lamps to 17. 0,  concentrations in the
feed gas were  maintained at 45 ppmv, and inlet NG
concentrations  ranged from 1.7 to 3.3 ppmv. Under
these conditions, NG removal exceeded 80 percent.
On  both days 3 and 4, NO,  was observed as a
reaction by-product  at concentrations <25  ppmv.
                                             4-11

-------
Zentox's  estimated capital costs for a 650-scmm    $100,000 to $150,000. Operating costs were not
full-scale system with an NG percent removal    reported. According to Zentox, the capital costs are
>97 percent range from $175,000 to $260,000.    expected to be lower  once more field tests have
Estimated capital costs for the same size system    been conducted to identify the  optimum 0, feed
with an NG percent removal >80 percent range from    concentration and catalyst formation.
                                             4-12

-------
        Table 4-3. Industrial Emissions Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
TEST
CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal Additional Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
'DCs (Commercial Scale)
JV/Catalyst
KSEAIR)
Total VOCs: 2,000 ppmv
Pentane: 2,100 ppmv
Flow rate: 0.3 scmm
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: UV lamps
(wavelength and intensity
not available)
Retention time: <1 second
Flow rate: 0.8 scmm
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: UV lamps
(wavelength and intensity
not available)
Retention time: <1 second
Relative humidity: 100 percent
>99
>99.9
Treatment of emissions
from a contact lens
manufacturing plant
Reaction by-products not
detected
Treatment of emissions
from an expandable
polystyrene plant
Reaction by-products not
detected
For a 1.8-scmm System with
>99 Percent Removal
Capital cost: $53.320
Energy cost: $376/month
Maintenance cost: $1,672/year
For a 4.4-v
>99 Percent Removal
Capital: $183,000
Annual operating: $7,800
Kittrell and others
1996b
Kittrell and others
1996b
'OCs (Pilot Scale)
iolar/TiO2
VOCs (Pilot
IV/03
Total VOCs (ethanol,
toluene, and methyl
ethyl ketone): 250 to
350 ppmv
Scale)
Chlorophenol: 34 ppmv
Flow rate: not available
(recirculating batch)
Reactor volume: three 8-inch
Pyrex tubes
Light source: sunlight
0, addition: >1 ,000 ppmv
Retention time: 3 to 4 seconds

Flow rate: 1 .2 or 2.0 scmm
Reactor volume: not available
Spray section: 150 L
Sump section: 15 L
Light source: 11 15-W
low-pressure mercury
lamps
0, addition: 30 g/m3
pH: 5 to 6
Temperature: 40 to 50 °C
99

>99.9
Treatment of paint booth
emissions

Treatment of emissions
from a chemical weed
killer manufacturer
i
Not available

Not available
Nimlos and other:
1995

Barker and Jones
1988
xplosives and Their Degradation Products (Commercial Scale)
V/Ti(y03
.entox)
NG: 1.70 ppmv
Flow rate: 1 .4 scmm
Reactor volume: not available
Light source: 28 64-W black
lights with output at
350 nm
Temperature: ambient
0, addition: 140 ppmv
99.2
Treatment of NG
emissions from an
annealing oven
Reaction Ry-product
NO,: <25 ppmv
Capital Cost for a 650-scmm
System with >97 Percent
Removal
$175,000 to $260,000
Turchi and Miller
1998
GO

-------
    Water and Air. Cincinnati, Ohio. October 26
    through 29, 1996.

Turchi, C., and R. Miller.  1998.  "Photocatalytic
    Oxidation of Energetic Compounds from a
    Propellant Annealing   Oven."      Eighth
    International Symposium on Chemical Oxidation
    Technologies for the  Nineties.    Nashville,
    Tennessee. April 1 through 3,  1998.

Wang, K., and B.J. Marinas. 1993.  "Control of VOC
    Emissions   from   Air-stripping   Towers:
    Development of Gas-phase Photocatalytic
    Process."     Photocatalytic Purification and
    Treatment of Wafer and Air. Edited by D.F. Ollis
    and H. AI-Ekabi. Elsevier Science Publishers
    B.V. Amsterdam. Pages  733 through 739.

Watanabe,  T., A.  Kitamura,  E.  Kojima,  C.
    Nakayama,  K. Hashimoto, and A. Fujishima.
    1993. "Photocatalytic Activity of TiO2 Thin Film
    under Room Light." Photocatalytic Purification
    and Treatment of Wafer and Air,  Edited by D.F.
    Ollis and H. AI-Ekabi.    Elsevier Science
    Publishers  B.V. Amsterdam.    Pages 747
    through  751.
                                             4-16

-------
                                         Section 5
                          Contaminated Solids Treatment
APO  has been demonstrated to be an effective
technology for treating contaminated solids,  primarily
at the bench-scale level. Most evaluations  involved
generation of a leachate or slurry by washing the
contaminated solids with water, surfactant  solution,
or an organic solvent and then applying an APO
process to treat the contaminated leachate  or slurry
in a manner similar to contaminated water treatment.
Use of an APO  process to treat contaminated slurry
may  require frequent APO system  maintenance
because solids in the slurry will coat the light source
and inhibit transmission  of light.

Solid matrices to which APO has been  applied
include  the following: (1) contaminated  soil,
(2) contaminated  sediment, and (3)  contaminated
ash. Collectively, APO has been applied to the
following types of contaminants:   (1)  svocs,
(2) PCBs,  (3)  pesticides and herbicides,  and
(4) dioxins and furans.   One commercial-scale
application of an APO process (Calgon perox-pure™
UV/H2O2) for treating contaminated solids is  reported
in the literature.    This section describes the
commercial-scale application  of this process and
several bench-scale evaluations of APO  processes
for treating contaminated solids.    A table
summarizing operating conditions and performance
results for the  commercial-scale Calgon perox-
pure™ UV/H2O2 system is included this section.

5.1    Contaminated  Soil  Treatment

The effectiveness  of APO  technologies in  treating
contaminated soil  has been evaluated  for various
contaminant groups, including SVOCs, PCBs,
pesticides  and  herbicides,  and dioxins and  furans.
This  section discusses  APO treatment technology
effectiveness  with  regard to each  of these
contaminant  groups.

5.7.7  S VOC-Contamina ted Soil

SVOCs in soil  have been treated using  sensitized
photochemical processes at the  bench-scale level.
The effectiveness  of these processes in removing
the following SVOCs from contaminated soil  is
described below.
 APO Process
     Photo
     sensitization
     UV/TiO,
SVOCs Removed
  Anthracene, biphenyl,
    9H-carbazole, m-cresol,
    fluorene, PCP,
    phenanthrene,  pyrene,
    quinoline

  Acenaphthene,
    acenaphthylene,
    anthracene,
    benzo(a)anthracene,
    benzo(a)pyrene,
    benzo(b)fluoranthene,
    benzo(g,h,i)perylene,
    benzo(k)fluoranthene,
    chrysene, 2-CP,
    dibenzo(a,h)anthracene,
    fluoranthene,   fluorene,
    indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
    naphthalene,
    phenanthrene,  pyrene
Dupont  and others   (1990)  evaluated the
effectiveness of various sensitizers (methylene blue,
riboflavin, peat moss,  diethylamine, and  anthracene)
under UV or  visible  light in  removing SVOCs from
contaminated  slurries  at the  bench-scale level. The
study also evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the
UV/H2O2 process in decontaminating the slurries.
Three types of soil (silty clay, sandy  loam, and silty
loam) were spiked with several SVOCs, including
anthracene,  biphenyl,  9H-carbazole, m-cresol,
fluorene, PCP, phenanthrene,  pyrene,  and quinoline,
at 500 milligrams per gram each. Soil slurries were
generated by mixing the contaminated soils with
methylene chloride and water. Anthracene was
found to be the most effective sensitizer; other APO
processes did not show a  statistically significant
improvement over direct  photolysis. On the contrary,
diethylamine  inhibited photodegradation of other
SVOCs. The study  concluded that soil type is a
significant factor  in photodegradation  of compounds,
indicating the need for site-specific assessments of
soil-phase   photodegradation.
                                             5-1

-------
In another bench-scale study, Ireland and others
(1995) evaluated the effectiveness of the UV/TiO2
process in decontaminating soil slurries containing
16 PAHs, including fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)-
anthracene,    chrysene,    benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, and benzo(a)pyrene. Soil
contaminated with motor oil (1) was spiked with the
PAHs  at  concentrations ranging from  1.6  to
6.4 milligrams per kilogram,  (2) extracted using
triethylamine, and (3) slurried using water. The
concentrations of PAHs in the slurry varied from 580
to 660 mg/L. Two 15-W bulbs providing  light with
wavelengths from 300 to 400 nm were placed 1 cm
from a 40-milliliter slurry aliquot. Within 24 hours of
irradiation, all PAHs except chrysene and  pyrene
were degraded by more than 85 percent; chrysene
and pyrene were degraded by 33  and 66 percent,
respectively.
                        (1992)  evaluated  the
                      2 process in treating  soil
Pelizzetti  and  others
effectiveness of UV/TiO
slurries contaminated with 2-CP at 20 mg/L. At a
colloidal TiO2 dose of 500 mg/L and after 60 minutes
of UV irradiation, about 95 percent of the 2-CP was
removed.

5.1.2   PCB-Contaminated Soil

PCBs in contaminated soil have been treated using
the photo-Fenton process at the bench-scale level.
McLaughlin and  others (1993) investigated  the effect
of temperature on removal of PCBs in diatomaceous
earth slurries using the photo-Fenton process. PCB
congener  (2,2',5-trichlorobiphenyl  and 2,2',4,5,51-
pentachlorobiphenyl) removals were studied at two
temperatures (27 and 60 "C). At an H2O2 dose of
0.8 mg/L, an Fe(ll) dose of 2 mg/L, and a pH of 3,
and in  5 hours  of reaction time, the investigators
observed (1) 2,2',5-trichiorobiphenyI removals of 84
and 96  percent  at 27 and 60 °C, respectively;  and
(2) 2,2',4,5,5'-pentachlorobiphenyl  removals of 80
and 85  percent at 27 and 60 °C, respectively. They
concluded that the rate  of the PCB removal is a
function of PCB concentration in solution and the
number of chlorine  atoms in the  PCB  (the removal
rate decreases with  an increasing  number of chlorine
atoms).

5.7.3  Pesticide- and Herbicide-
        Contaminated Soil

This section discusses treatment of the  following
pesticides and herbicides in soil using (1) the
UV/H2O2 process on a commercial-scale  level  and
(2) the  UV/Ti02 process at the bench-scale level,
APO Process
. UV/H2O2
• UWTi02
Pesticides and Herbicides
Removed
. Disulfoton, oxadixyl,
parathion, propetamphos,
thiometon
. Atrazine
A 180-kW Calgon perox-pure™ UV/H2O2 system
was  used to treat soil contaminated with disulfoton,
thiometon, parathion,  propetamphos, and oxadixyl.
The influent to the perox-pure™ system, which was
generated by an on-site soil washing system,
primarily contained  0.49,  1.1, and 3.9 mg/L of
disulfoton, thiometon, and oxadixyl, respectively.
Parathion and propetamphos were present in the
influent at relatively low levels (0.8 mg/L or less).
The perox-pure™ system was operated at flow rates
ranging from 6 to 20 m3/h (corresponding to retention
times of 12 to 3 minutes), an H2O2 dose of 50 mg/L,
and  a pH of 7. A sand filter was used to remove
suspended solids from the influent to the perox-
pure™. system. The system achieved removals of
up to 99.5 percent. However,  suspended solids that
were not captured by the filter caused frequent
scaling of UV lamps, which  resulted in frequent
shutdown of the system (Egli  and others  1994).

At the  bench-scale level, atrazine was found to be
effectively  removed in soil slurries (about 2 percent
solids) using the UV/TiO2 process. In soil slurries
containing 20 mg/L of atrazine, at a colloidal TiO2
dose of 500 mg/L, and after 60 minutes of UV
irradiation,  atrazine removal of about 95 percent was
achieved  (Pelizzetti and others 1992).

5.1.4  Dioxin- and Furan-Contamina ted
       Soil

Dioxins and  furans in soil have been treated using
UV7TiO2  and UV/anthracene processes at  the
bench-scale  level.  The effectiveness of these
processes in removing the following dioxins and
furans from contaminated soil  is described  below.
APO Process
• UV/Ti02
. UV/
Anthracene
Dioxins and Furans '
Removed
2,7-
Dichlorodibenzodioxin
• Dibenzofuran
                                              5-2

-------
Pelizzetti  and  others  (1992)  evaluated  the    In  another bench-scale study, Dupont and others
effectiveness  of the UV7TiO2 process  in degrading    (1990) found that dibenzofuran could be removed
2,7-dichlorodibenzodioxin in soil slurries (about 2    from  soil  slurries  using  UV  irradiation  and
percent solids) at the bench-scale level. At an initial    anthracene, a sensitizer. In this process, the half-life
concentration  of  10 mg/L and  a TiO2 dose of    of dibenzofuran was estimated to be about 80 days.
500 mg/L, about 90 percent of the  2,7-dichloro-    More information on use of sensitizers is included in
dibenzodioxin  was removed in about 15  hours of UV    Section 5.1 .1.
irradiation.
                                                5-3

-------
        Table  5-1. Contaminated Soil  Treatment
PROCESS
(SYSTEM)
CONTAMINANT
CONCENTRATION
Pesticides and
UV/H202
(Calgon
perox-pure™)
TEST
CONDITIONS
RESULTS
Percent Removal Additional Information
COST
(1998 U.S. Dollars)
REFERENCE
Herbicides (Commercial Scale) : •
Disulfoton: 0.49 mg/L
Thiometon: 1.1 mg/L
Oxadixyl: 3.9 mg/L
Reactor volume: 1 m3
Flow rate: 6 to 20 rrvVn
Light source: high-pressure mercury
vapor lamps (1 80 kW)
Wavelength: not available
H2O2 dose: 50 mg/L
Reaction time: 3 to 12 min
pH: 7
Disulfoton: 97.9
Thiometon: 99.1
Oxadixyl: 99.5
Suspended solids in
influent coated the UV
lamps, causing frequent
system shutdown
Not available
Egli and others 1994
en

-------
 5.2    Contaminated   Sediment
        Treatment

 Limited  information is available on the effectiveness
 of APO in treating  contaminated sediment. No
 commercial- or pilot-scale results were available.
 This  section describes  the effectiveness of  a
 UV/TiO2 process in treating PCB-contaminated
 sediment at the bench-scale level.

 Chiarenzelli  and others  (1995) evaluated the
 effectiveness of  the  UV/TiO2  process  in
 decontaminating sediment  collected from a shallow
 embayment  of the St.  Lawrence River  near
 Massena, New  York.     The sediment  was
 contaminated with PCBs at concentrations of 27 to
 38  milligrams per kilogram. The UV/TiO2 process
 achieved about  88 percent PCB  removal when the
 contaminated sediment slurry was irradiated for
 about 48 hours  using UV-A light in the presence of
 Ti02.

 5.3     Contaminated  Ash  Treatment

 Limited  information is  available on the effectiveness
 of  APO  in treating contaminated  ash.  No
 commercial- or  pilot-scale results were available.
 This  section describes the effectiveness  of a
 UV/Ti02 process in treating PCB-contaminated ash
 at the bench-scale level.

 Chiarenzelli and others (1995) evaluated the
 effectiveness    of  the   UV/TiO2   process in
decontaminating a slurry consisting of furnace ash,
core sands, and slag from an aluminum foundry.
The initial  concentration of PCBs in the slurry was
about  220  mg/L. Only 45 percent PCB removal was
observed when  the slurry  was irradiated for  about
24 hours using UV-A light  in the presence of TiO2.
 However, 88 percent  removal was achieved  when
UV-C  light was used instead of UV-A light. The
inability of  UV-A  irradiation to achieve  high removals
suggests that the solar/TiO2 process may not be an
effective alternative to the UV/TiO2 process for
treating  some wastes, particularly ash to  which
PCBs  are  strongly bound.
 5.4  References

 Chiarenzelli, J.,  R.  Scrudato, M. Wunderlich, D.
    Rafferty, K. Jensen, G. Oenga, R. Robers, and
    J.  Pagano.  1995.   "Photodecomposition of
    PCBs Absorbed on Sediment and Industrial
    Waste: Implications for Photocatalytic Treatment
    of Contaminated Solids."    Chemosphere.
    Volume  31. Number  5.     Pages 3259
    through 3272.

 Dupont, R.R.,  J.E. McLean, R.H. Hoff, and W.M.
    Moore. 1990. "Evaluation of the Use of Solar
    Irradiation for the Decomposition of Soils
    Containing  Wood Treating Wastes." Journal of
    Air    Waste    Management   Association.
    Volume 40. Pages 1247 through 1265.

 Egli, S., S. Lomanto,  R. Galli, R. Fitzi, and C. Munz.
    1994. "Oxidative  Treatment of Process Water in
    a Soil Decontamination Plant: II. Pilot Plant and
    Large Scale  Experiences." Chemical  Oxidation
    Technologies for the Nineties. Volume 2.
    Edited by W.W.  Eckenfelder, A.R. Bowers,  and
    J.A. Roth. Technomic Publishing Company,  Inc.
    Lancaster,    Pennsylvania.      Pages  264
    through 277.

 Ireland, J.C., B. Davila, H. Moreno, S.K. Fink, and S.
    Tassos.  1995.  "Heterogeneous  Photocatalytic
    Decomposition of  Polyaromatic  Hydrocarbons
    over Titanium  Dioxide."     Chemosphere.
    Volume 30. Number 5.  Pages 965 through  984.

McLaughlin, D.B.,  D.E. Armstrong, and A.W. Andren.
    1993. "Oxidation of Polychlorinated  Biphenyl
    Congeners Sorbed to  Particles." 48th Purdue
    Industrial  Waste Conference Proceedings.
    Lewis Publishers,      Chelsea,   Michigan.
    Pages 349  through 353.

Pelizzetti, E., C. Minero, V. Carlin, and E. Borgarello.
    1992.  "Photocatalytic Soil  Decontamination."
    Chemosphere.  Volume  25.     Number 3.
    Pages 343  through 351.
                                            5-5

-------
              APPENDIX



TECHNOLOGY VENDOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Vendor'
Dalgon Carbon Oxidation
Technologies
KSE, Inc.
Magnum Water Technology
Matrix Photocatalytic, Inc.
Process Technologies, Inc.
U.S. Filter/Zimpro, Inc.
iWEDECO
Zentox Corporation
Contact Person
Robert Abernethy
J. R. Kittrell
Dale Cox or
Jack Simser
Bob Henderson
John Ferrell or
Michael Swan
Rick Woodling
H. Sprengel
Rich Miller
Address
130 Royal Crest Court
Markham, ON L3R OA1
Canada
P.O. Box 368
Amherst, MA 01004
600 Lairport Street
El Segundo, CA 90254
22 Pegler Street
London, Ontario N5Z 2B5
Canada
1160 Exchange Street
Boise, ID 83716-5762
2805 Mission College Blvd.
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Diamlerstra(3e 5
D-4900 Herford
Germany
2140 NE 36th Ave.
Suite 100
Ocala, FL 34470
Phone No.
(905) 477-9242
(413)549-5506
(310) 322-4143 or
(310) 640-7000
(519) 660-8669
(208) 385-0900
(408) 727-7740
(05221) 391 1
(353) 867-7482
                 A-1

-------