540F92012
SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development .
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/540/F-92/012
June 1993
Bioremediation
Field Initiative
A cooperative effort of the U.S. EPA's Office of Research
and Development, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, and regional offices, and other federal
agencies, state agencies, industry, and universities to
expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation
technologies for Superfund and other contaminated sites.
Background
Many of today's more promising technologies for solving hazardous waste prob-
lems involve bioremediation, an engineered process that relies on microorganisms,
such as bacteria or fungi, to transform hazardous chemicals into less toxic or
nontoxic chemicals. Until recently, however, the use of bioremediation has been
limited by a lack of information on the controlled application of biodegradative
processes to environmental cleanups.
In 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the Bioreme-
diation Field Initiative as part of its overall strategy to increase the use of bioreme-
diation to treat hazardous wastes at Comprehensive Emergency Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) and other contaminated
sites. Recognizing the need to gather data on the many different waste types and
site conditions suitable for bioremediation, EPA's Superfund program made a major
investment in the Initiative. The Initiative is a cooperative effort among EPA's Office
of Research and Development (ORD), Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse (OSWER), and regional offices, and other federal agencies, state agencies,
industry, and universities. It is joined with other public and private efforts in
bioremediation through EPA's Bioremediation Action Committee (BAC), an affili-
ation of government, industry, and academic representatives working jointly to
expand the use of bioremediation.
A driving force for the Bioremediation Field Initiative is the commitment by the
Superfund program to seek the development of more cost-effective solutions, such
as bioremediation, to provide more permanent treatment of contaminated sites. Some
45 Superfund projects have already selected bioremediation. These sites demonstrate
an ongoing commitment to deploy state-of-the-art technology solutions.
Goals
The Initiative was launched with three primary goals:
• To more fully assess and document the performance of full-scale bioremediation
field applications.
• To create a data base of current field data on progress in determining the
treatability of contaminants.
^Q: Printed on paper that contains at least
Ss<7 50 percent recycled fiber.
-------
150-1
Federal Facility
6%
UST9% ^ Other 8%
RCRA14%
CERCLA 63%
Figure 1. Breakdown ofbioremediation sites by legislative authority.
• To provide technical assistance to regional and state site
managers using or considering bioremediation. Assis-
tance is provided in various stages of cleanup activities,
from site characterization to full-scale implementation.
Activities
Although most of the sites in the Initiative are Superfund
sites, bioremediation also is being used to clean up contami-
nation at federal facilities, Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act (RCRA) sites, and Underground Storage Tank (UST)
sites. The Initiative is providing support to states and regions
for intensive evaluation of bioremediation at nine selected
hazardous waste sites. These performance evaluations are
intended to generate data needed to define the capabilities of
bioremediation technology. These data will enable state and
EPA project managers, consulting engineers, and industry to
make better informed decisions about applying bioremedia-
tion in the field. For field performance evaluations, sites are
nominated and selected through the regional offices or
through the states with concurrence from the regional offices.
In addition to conducting performance evaluations, the In-
itiative has identified a rapidly growing number of other sites
across the country that are considering, planning, or currently
operating bioremediation technologies, or that have com-
pleted bioremediation activities. The Initiative currently is
monitoring progress at over 150 of these sites and creating an
electronic data base of site information. For each site, the data
base contains information on contaminants, media, type of
100i
11
Petroleum Wood Solvents Pesticides Other
Preserving
Wastes
Figure 2. Breakdown of sites by type of contamination.
100-
(0
•8
Soil
Ground Sediments Sludge
Water
Surface
Water
Figure 3. Number of sites treating each media type.
treatment, status of cleanup, capital costs, and operation and
maintenance costs.
Sites in the data base include federal facilities, Superfund
sites, RCRA sites, and UST sites. Over 60 percent of the sites
fall under CERCLA authority, but the Initiative has begun to
recognize an increasing number of sites under UST and
RCRA authority (Figure 1). Monitored sites are distributed
throughout all 10 EPA regions, with over 40 percent located
in Regions 5 and 9. Analysis of the data base reveals that
petroleum is the contaminant most frequently bioremedi-
ated, with wood preserving wastes a close second (Figure 2).
Soil and ground water are the media most frequently treated
with bioremediation technologies (Figure 3). Sites in the data
base are undergoing a range of in situ and ex situ treatments,
including land treatment, bioventing, bioreactor treatment,
nutrient addition, and many other techniques.
The Initiative publishes a quarterly bulletin, entitled Bioreme-
diation in the Field, which is distributed to over 5,000 individu-
als involved in the application of bioremediation. The
bulletin contains a matrix of information on the status of sites
identified by the Initiative, as well as updates on performance
evaluations, new technologies, resources, and regulations.
Past articles have discussed an extensive program to remedi-
ate Air Force sites using bioventing, permitting issues related
to the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), the im-
pact of new land disposal restrictions on bioremediation, and
the use of encapsulated microorganisms for bioprevention
and bioremediation.
-------
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profiles
Libby Ground Water Superfund Site
Libby, Montana
Eielson Air Force Base Superfund Site
Fairbanks, Alaska
Hill Air Force Base Superfund Site
Salt Lake City, Utah
Public Service Company of Colorado
Denver, Colorado
Park City Pipeline
Park City, Kansas
Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund Site
St. Joseph, Michigan
Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven
Brookhaven, Mississippi
Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation
Superfund Site
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund Site
Kalamazoo, Michigan
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
SITE FACTS
Location: Libby, Montana
Laboratories/Agencies: U.S.
EPA Roberts. Kerr
Environmental Research
Laboratory {RSKERL), Utah
State University
-------
in an aboveground fixed-film bioreactor; and (3) in
situ bioremediation of the upper aquifer. Each
process is being evaluated with regard to design,
operation, monitoring, and performance. Figure 1
is a plan view of the site, showing the LTU, biore-
actor, and ground water injection systems.
Field Evaluation
Surface Soil Bioremediation. The LTU consists of two
adjacent 1-acre cells, lined with low-permeability
materials to minimize leachate infiltration from the
unit (see Figure 2). Contaminated soil is applied to
the cells in 9-in. lifts and treated until target con-
taminant levels are achieved within each lift. Evalu-
ation of the effectiveness of the land treatment
includes sampling the soil in the LTU, studying
field-scale treatment and toxicity reduction, ana-
lyzing the influence of moisture and soil structure,
and calculating the mass balance of contaminants
in terms of soil and leachate.
Figure 2. Land treatment unit.
LTU soil analysis data will be used to determine the
statistical significance, confidence, and extent of
biodegradation at this site. Degradation kinetics
and toxicity reduction studies will generate data
that can be used to help assess overall bioremedia-
tion effectiveness and predict performance of simi-
lar bioremediation processes at other sites.
Aboveground Fixed-Film Bioreactor. Aboveground
treatment of ground water occurs in two fixed-film
reactors, which operate in series. The effluent from
these reactors is amended with nutrients and re-
oxygenated prior to reinjection through an infiltra-
tion trench. The Initiative will be monitoring the
performance of the bioreactors, including flow
composited sampling, analysis of biofilm dynam-
ics, calculation of mass balance of contaminants,
and treatment optimization.
In Situ Bioremediation of the Aquifer. The in situ biore-
mediation system involves addition of hydrogen
peroxide and inorganic nutrients to stimulate
growth of contaminant-specific microbes. Evalu-
ation of this process will include determining dis-
solved oxygen profiles across the site, sampling
aquifer material to identify contamination and cor-
relate microbial content, distinguishing between
abiotic and biotic effects, and correlating dissolved
oxygen uptake with biodegradation and toxicity
reduction.
Status
Currently, remediation of each lift of soil applied to
the LTU takes 32 to 163 days. Based on these re-
sults, it is predicted that remediation of the 45,000
yd3 of contaminated soil will take 8 to 10 years.
Preliminary performance data on the fixed-film
bioreactors indicate that PAH and PCP removal is
taking place. Aquifer core samples have a chemi-
cally reduced condition, indicating that the site has
an abiotic as well as a biological oxygen demand.
Investigators plan several tests to differentiate be-
tween the abiotic and biotic oxygen demands.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive Superfund.site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue
Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Eielson Air Force Base Superfund site, Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site,
Salt Lake City, UT; Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reflly Tar and Chemical Corporation
Superfund site, St. Louis Park, MN; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be
added to the Initiative's mailing list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact Fran
Kremer, Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, U,S, EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King
Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S, EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, 401M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
Laboratories/Agencies: U.S.
Air Force, US. EPA Risk
Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREt), US. EPA
Region 10
Media and Contaminants:
JP-4 jet fuel in shallow
unsaturated soil
Treatment: Bioventing with
active and passive soil warming
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To examine the use
of soil-warming technologies to
enhance the effectiveness of
bioventing jet fael-contamin-
ated soil in a cold climate
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Contact: Greg Sayles, US. EPA
RREL, 26 West Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268
Regional Contact: Mary Jane
Nearman,US. EPA Region 10,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA
98101
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Eielson Air Force Base
Superfund Site
Background
Eielson Air Force Base (AFB) in Fairbanks, Alaska, is one of approxi-
mately 4,300 Air Force sites contaminated with petroleum hydrocar-
bons in soil. The Air Force currently is implementing an extensive
program to examine the use of bioventing to remediate many of these
sites. This program was developed based on preliminary results from
Eielson and Hill AFBs, where the Air Force and the U.S. EPA Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) are conducting joint field
evaluations of bioventing. (Activities at Hill AFB are summarized in
a separate fact sheet.) The results from Eielson AFB will help deter-
mine whether bioventing can be pursued at other cold-climate sites in
the northern United States.
Characterization
The soil at the Eielson site is a mixture of sand and silt contaminated
with JP-4 jet fuel from a depth of roughly 2 ft to the water table at 6 to
7 ft. Prior to bioventing, hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil gas
ranged from 600 to 40,000 mg/kg. Although the site is not in the
permafrost region, soil temperatures in winter drop to nearly 0°C.
Researchers believe that using soil-warming measures to promote
high-rate, year-round bioremediation will cost less overall than sus-
taining low-rate bioremediation at ambient temperatures for an ex-
tended period of time.
Field Evaluation
A 1-acre contaminated area was divided into three 50-ft square seg-
ments (see Figure 1). One plot, which receives bioventing without
heating, serves as a control. The two other plots each undergo one of
the following soil-warming techniques:
Passive warming. Plastic covering (mulch) is used to enhance solar
warming in late spring, summer, and early fall. During the remainder
of the year, heat is retained by applying insulation to the surface.
Active warming. Ground water is circulated to an electric heater, heated
to 35°C, and reinjected below the ground surface to the contaminated
soil. The heated water is applied at a very low rate (1 gpm) by five
-------
Passive
I©
O
Control
O
\
N
_9
o
Active
I Site Trailer
Active Warming System
@) -Ground water monitoring well
O - Air injection/withdrawal well
^ - Three-level soil gas probe
• - Three-level thermocouple probe
0 25' 50'
Scale
Figure 1. Plan view of actively heated, passively heated, and un-
heated plots.
soaker hoses, placed 2 ft below the surface. The
surface is covered with insulation year round.
The passive warming system is being operated by
the Air Force (see Figure 2). RREL is operating the
active warming system. Air injection/withdrawal
Figure 2. Passively heated plot covered rvith insulation.
wells are distributed uniformly at 30-ft intervals
among the three plots. Air is injected to each well
at a rate of 2.5 fr/min, providing the plots with
relatively uniform aeration. Three-level gas moni-
toring wells and three-level temperature probes are
distributed throughout the site.
In situ respirometry tests are conducted peri-
odically to measure the in situ rate of oxygen up-
take by the microorganisms. During these tests,
researchers shut off air injection for 4 to 8 days and
monitor the soil gas oxygen concentration over
time. The decrease in oxygen concentration, less
that observed in a background area, indicates the
rate of biodegradation in the contaminated soil.
Status
Researchers began venting air and trickling un-
heated water to the actively warmed plot in Sep-
tember 1991. Warming of the water began in
October 1991. In January 1992, researchers deter-
mined that all three plots were aerated adequately,
with soil gas oxygen levels ranging from 12 to 20
percent. The temperature remained above 10°C in
the actively warmed plot, while temperatures in
the passively warmed plot and the control plot
dropped to near 0°C. Measured biodegradation
rates were twice as high in the actively warmed
area as they were in the control. Furthermore, the
degradation rate of 2.9 mg/kg/day in the actively
warmed plot is comparable to rates observed at
bioventing projects in moderate climates. In Au-
gust 1992, the temperature of the passively
warmed plot was 4°C warmer than that of the
control plot, suggesting that passive warming is
somewhat effective. An economic analysis is
planned to determine which warming method, if
either, is more cost effective.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative wasestablished in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of fall-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites; Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Libby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Hffl Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt
Lake City, 0T; Escambia Wood Preserving Site-^Brookhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reflly tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund
site, St. Louis Park, MM; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be added to
the Initiative's mailing list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact Fran Kremer,
Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, U,S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
401M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Laboratories/Agencies: U.S.
Air Force, U.S. EPARisk
Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL), US. EPA
Regions
Media and Contaminants:
JP-4 jet fuel in unsaturated soil
Treatment: Bioventing
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of bioventing jet
fuel in deep vadose zone soil
Bioremediation Field initiative
Contact: GregSayies,US.EPA
RREL, 26 West Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268
Regional Contact: Robert
Stiles, U.S. EPA Region 8,
99918th Street, Denver, CO
80202-2466
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Hill Air Force Base
Superfund Site
Background
Hill Air Force Base (AFB) near Salt Lake City, Utah, is the site for one
of two projects the Bioremediation Field Initiative is undertaking in
cooperation with the U.S. EPA Risk Reduction Engineering Labora-
tory (RREL) and the U.S. Air Force to biovent JP-4 jet fuel spills. The
other, at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska, is described in a separate
fact sheet.
Bioventing is the process of supplying oxygen in situ to oxygen-de-
prived soil microbes by forcing air through contaminated soil at low
airflow rates. Because bioventing equipment is relatively noninva-
sive, this technology is especially valuable for treating contaminated
soils at military bases, industrial complexes, and gas stations, where
structures and utilities cannot be disturbed.
At Hill AFB, the objectives of the Initiative are to gain experience in
bioventing large volumes of soil and determine the effect of airflow rate
on biodegradation and volatilization rates. The challenges at this site are
(1) to biodegrade contamination that extends deep beneath the surface
and (2) to biovent the fuel plume under roads, underground utilities, and
buildings.
Characterization
The Hill AFB site is contaminated with JP-4 fuel from a depth of
approximately 35 ft to the ground water, which occurs at 95 ft below
the surface. The contaminated soil is a mixture of sand, silty sand, and
sand interspersed with gravel and clay. Soil samples taken in Septem-
ber 1991 revealed an average total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH)
level of 890 mg/kg, ranging up to 5,000 mg/kg at certain depths.
Ground water samples showed an average TPH concentration of 1.5
mg/L, with TPH concentrations in some wells as high as 10 mg/L.
The contaminated area extends beneath a tool maintenance building,
engine storage yard, and fuel storage yard (see Figure 1).
Field Evaluation
Bioventing performance is being evaluated at three different air injec-
tion rates. Unlike soil venting or soil vacuum extraction technologies,
-------
WW9
(10.*
• WW = Ground Water Monitoring Well
O CW = Soil Vapor Cluster Well
IW = Injection Well
(1.5) = TPH in Ground Water (mg/L) (9/81)
A-A' = Cross Section Trace
Figure 1, Plan view of contaminated area.
bioventing uses low airflow rates to stimulate
biodegradative activity while minimizing volatili-
zation of contaminants in the soil. Higher air injec-
tion rates stimulate faster and more widespread
biodegradation but also release more volatile emis-
sions to the surface. Figure 2 shows an air injection
well at the site. Twice a year, the rate of air injection
is reduced to study the tradeoff between the loss in
area of influence of the injected air for bioremedia-
tion and the decrease in volatilization of organics
at the soil surface.
To determine the rate of hydrocarbon loss due to
bioventing, RREL conducts semiannual in situ res-
piration tests. Air injection is shut off for 4 to 8 days,
during which soil gas oxygen levels are carefully
monitored. The rate of oxygen uptake by microor-
ganisms in the contaminated soil, relative to
oxygen loss observed in an uncontaminated area,
indicates the rate of biodegradation.
RREL has conducted an inert gas tracer study to
determine the transport of gas through the soil.
During this study, researchers temporarily injected
helium instead of air into the vent well. By moni-
toring for the inert gas at the various soil gas wells,
researchers determined how efficiently the injec-
tion well delivers air to the soil.
Status
The U.S. Air Force began bioventing operations in
January 1991. Between July and September 1991,
RREL installed additional wells to monitor biore-
mediation performance over the entire 100-ft depth
of the contaminated vadose zone. The first flow
rate change and in situ respiration test, and the
inert gas tracer study took place in fall of 1992. Final
soil hydrocarbon analyses will be conducted in
summer of 1993. These results will be compared
with the initial soil analysis to document overall
hydrocarbon loss due to bioventing.
Figure 2. Air injection well at the surface.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Ubby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Eielson Air Force Base Superfund site,
Fairbanks, AK; Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund
site, St. Louis Park, MN; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be added to
the Initiative's mailing list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediat Jon Field Initiative, contact Fran Kremer,
Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. "
-------
&EFA
SITE FACTS
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Public Service Company
of Colorado
Location: Denver, Colorado
Laboratories/Agencies: US.
EPA Robert S.Kerr
Environmental Research
Laboratory (RSKEKL), US, EPA
Region 8
Media and Contaminants:
BTEX in ground water
Treatment: In situ
bkwemediation of ground water
with nutrient and hydrogen
peroxide addition
Date of Initiative Selection;
Spring 1991
Objective; To evaluate the
effectiveness of in situ
bioremediation of used oil and
the potential for future
environmental impact from
residual contaminants
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Contact: John Wilson, US> EPA
RSKERL, EO. Box 1198, Ada,
OK 74820
Regional Contact: Suzanne
Stevenson, US, EPA Region 8,
99918th Street, Denver, CO
80202-2466
Background
In 1987, Public Service Company of Colorado (PSC), an electric utility,
determined that used oil had leaked from a 75-gallon tank at the
company's facility at 2701 West 7th Avenue in Denver, Colorado. The
tank served as a temporary catch basin for used automotive oil in the
facility's garage. A discrepancy between the volume of oil deposited
in the tank and the volume pumped out for disposal lead PSC to
suspect the leak. Though it is unclear when the leak first occurred, the
tank had been in service for 29 years before the leak was discovered.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative has conducted a retrospective
evaluation of the performance of in situ bioremediation of oil leaked
from the tank.
Characterization
PSC found soil concentrations of oil and grease beneath the tank
ranging up to 9,600 mg/kg. Soil samples also showed BTEX com-
pounds in the following concentrations: toluene, 3,200 ug/kg; ethyl
benzene, 820 ug/kg; and xylenes, 29,600 ug/kg. Ground water sam-
pling detected low levels of BTEX compounds, though levels of
xylenes exceeded EPA's proposed drinking water standards.
Field Evaluation
In July 1989, PSC installed an in situ bioremediation system to reme-
diate the contaminated ground water and promote biodegradation of
contaminants in the soil above and below the water table and in the
aquifer. The treatment took place in several stages. First, ground water
was pumped from a recovery well downgradient of the leaking tank
at the rate of 11 gallons per minute to ensure the capture and content
of contaminants. The recovered water then was treated by carbon
adsorption to remove dissolved hydrocarbons before being pumped
to a nutrient gallery. In the nutrient gallery, the ground water was
amended twice: first with ammonium and phosphate compounds to
provide inorganic nutrients; then with hydrogen peroxide to increase
the water's level of dissolved oxygen. The amended ground water
-------
was then reinjected upgradient of the leaking tank,
thereby delivering the nutrients and oxygen
needed to sustain aerobic biodegradation in the
saturated zone. Figure 1 is a computer-generated
model of ground water flow from the injection
wells to the recovery well. Figure 2 shows the actual
flow of nutrients beneath the leaking oil tank.
To speed remediation of the contaminated soil in
the vadose zone, FSC also added batches of nutri-
ents directly to the soil and installed a bioventing
system to induce a dynamic flow of ambient air
above the water table to highly contaminated areas
in the subsurface.
Status
By 1991, concentrations of BTEX in the monitoring
wells were approaching the cleanup goals. In
PSC Simulated Streamlines
200
100
Recovery Well
Nutrient
. Recharge
Gallery
If
Ground Water
Recharge
Gallery
-100
(feet)
Figure 1. Computer-generated model of ground water flow from
injection wells to recovery well.
EWG
round Water
Ttefrharge
Gallery
Vault
Equipment
Shed •
WWG
Legend
A Recovery Well
• Nutrient Addition Point
— Contour Interval in Feet
Figure 2. Schematic of site showing flow of nutrients in ground
water under leaking tank.
March of 1992, PSC submitted an application for
closure to the State of Colorado. The site currently
is in the monitoring phase. In July of 1992, the U.S.
EPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Labo-
ratory (RSKERL) conducted an evaluation of the
site, including soil coring to determine the quantity
and distribution of residual oil downgradient of
the leaking tank, chemodynamic modeling to pre-
dict the maximum concentration of BTEX that
could partition from residual oil to ground water,
and hydrogeologic monitoring to predict the con-
centration of BTEX in a hypothetical well at the site
boundary downgradient of the leaking tank. The
results of this evaluation still are being analyzed,
but RSKERL's interim conclusion is that, while
some hydrocarbons remain at the site, they are not
contributing at this time to substantial contamina-
tion of ground water in the aquifer.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently Is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites; Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Libby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive,
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Bielson Air Force Base Superfund site,
Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt Lake City, UT; Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven, Brookhaven!
MS; and Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund site, St. Louis Park, MM. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or
to be added to the Initiative's mailing list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact
FranKremer, Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, US. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, 401M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
-------
Libby Ground
Water Site
Location: Libby, Montana
Laboratories/Agencies:
US. EPA Robert S.Kerr
Environmental Research
Laboratory (RSKERLX, Utafi
State University (USU), '.
US. EPA Region 8
Media and Contaminants:
Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in
soil and ground water,
Treatment: Surface soil
bioremediation, above-
ground fixed-film bioreac-
tor, in situ bioremediation
Date of Initiative Selection:
Fall 1990
Objective: To evaluate the
performance of three f
biotreatment processes tot-
degradation of PCP and
PAHs
Hii! AFB
Location; Salt Lake City,
Utah \
Laboratories/Agenctes:
US. Air Force, US. EPA %
Risk Reduction Engineering,
Laboratory (RREL), US. v
EPA Region 8 ^~
Media and Contaminants: :>,
JP-4 jet fuel in unsaturated
soil
Treatment: Bioventing
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of bioventirfg
jet fuel in deep vadose zone
soil
Reiily Tar and
Chemicai Corp.
jrles/Agencies:
' ' Ufcoratories/Agencies;
USl EPA itobeitS, fer'.
Environmental Research
Laboratories/Agencies:
U.S. Air Force, U.S. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL), US.
EPA Region 10
Media and Contaminants:
JP-4 jet fuel in shallow
unsaturated soil
Treatment: Bioventing
with active and passive soil
warming
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To examine the
of soil-warming
mologies to enhance the
effectiveness of bioventing
jet fuel-contaminated soil in
a cold climate
US.EPA1
Environmental Research
Laboratory (
EPA Region &. Va|
Media and r* •"*-
BTEX in ground water
Treatment: In situ
bioremediation of ground
water with nutrient and
hydrogen peroxide addition
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of in situ
bioremediation of used oil
and the potential for future
environmental impact from
residual contaminants
less of
three technologies for
treating refined petroleum
hydrocarbons from a
leaking pipeline
-------
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Evaluation Sites
Location: St. Joseph,
Michigan
Laboratories/
U.S. EPA Roberts,
bior§aedia«0tt
Date of Initiative Selection:
Objective: To evaluate the
itidnin
West KL Avenue
Landfill
Location: Kalamazoo,
Michigan
Laboratories/Agencies:
U.S, EPA Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
, US. EPA Robert S.
Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory
(RSKERL), Center for
' Michigan State University
(MSU), U.S. EPA Region 5,
Michigan Department of
Natural Resources
Media and Contaminants:
Solvents in landfill and
ground water
Treatment: In situ
bioremediation of landfill
material and ground water
Date of Initiative Selection:
October 1992
Objective: To evaluate the
feasibility of bioremediating
the ground water and
landfill material
KEY TO SITE
CONTAMINANTS
Agriculture
LaboratorylFPtj,
Innovative Technology
Evaluation (SITE) Program,
U.S. EPA Region 4
Media and Contaminants;
Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
and creosote sludge in soil
Treatment: White-rot fungi
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of white-rot
fungi treatment for wood
preserving wastes
:*
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
oEPA
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Park City Pipeline
SITE FACTS
Location: Park Gty, Kansas
Laboratories/Agencies: US.
EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research
Laboratory {RSKERL), US. EPA
Region 7
Media/Contaminants; Refined
petroleum (BTEX) in ground
water
Treatment: B1EX fermentation,
BTEX deniirification, BTEX
denitrification supplemented
wife oxygen
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
relative effectiveness of three
technologies for treating refined
petroleum hydrocarbons from a
leaking pipeline
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Contact: John Wilson, US. EPA
RSKERL, P.O. Box 1198, Ada, .
OK 74820
Background
In the 1970s, a buried pipeline at an oil refinery in Park City, Kansas,
started leaking a variety of refined petroleum products and petroleum
feedstocks into the water table aquifer. By February 1980, the spill had
contaminated ground water near Park City's municipal well #6. To
intercept the flow of hydrocarbons from the pipeline to the well, two
trenches were excavated to the water table for free product recovery.
As a means of disposal, the petroleum in the trenches occasionally
was set afire. The west trench was backfilled in August 1982; the east
trench was filled in August 1984. The U.S. EPA Robert S. Kerr Envi-
ronmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL) is performing a field
evaluation of three treatments for the contaminated ground water.
Characterization
In 1989,18 monitoring wells and two sets of five piezometers were
installed to define the extent of contamination and the direction of
ground water flow. In spring of 1991,12 more monitoring wells and
two sets of piezometers were added to better define the distribution
of the oil. The contamination is in the floodplain of the Arkansas River,
where 15 to 20 ft of clay overlie a sand aquifer (see Figure 1). The water
table is near the interface of the sand and the clay, and the bedrock is
Figure 1. Geological setting of the site.
-------
45 to 50 ft below the surface. Hydrocarbon contami-
nation is confined roughly to an interval between
the base of the clay layer and the top of the present
water table (see Figure 2).
Total Petroleum
Hydrocarbon
3000 6000
Figure 2. Relationship between spilled hydrocarbons, layers of
geological materials, the water table, and monitoring wells.
Field Evaluation
In 1990, more than 400 shallow injection wells were
installed at the site. These wells are constructed on
a 20-ft grid and cover the entire area affected by the
spill. Researchers have divided an area affected by
the homogeneous fuel spill into three discrete
blocks of about 1 acre each and will apply one of
the following experimental treatments to each block:
• BTEX fermentation alone
• BTEX denitrification alone
• BTEX denitrification supplemented with oxygen
Water from a municipal supply well will be
pumped to the surface, amended, and recirculated
to the aquifer through the injection wells. Each of
the three experimental plots will receive approxi-
mately 125 gpm. At that rate, the water is estimated
to require an average of 6.4 days to recirculate. To
maintain the demonstration in a cone of depres-
sion, water also will be pumped from a second
nearby well.
The water distributed to all three plots will be
amended with ammonium chloride at 5 mg/L.
Two plots also will receive nitrate at 10 mg/L as
nitrogen. The third plot will receive oxygen at 2
mg/L. To act as a tracer, and to enable researchers
to estimate the volume of water in the recirculation
loop, the recirculated water will be amended with
sodium bromide at 50 mg/L.
Status
Researchers have completed microcosm studies on
the two denitrification technologies to predict the
duration of remediation required. Aquifer core
samples from two locations originally showed av-
erage BTEX concentrations of 42.6 mg/kg and 24.3
mg/kg, respectively. Toluene, ethylbenzene, m-
xylene, p-xylene, 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, and
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene degraded to less than 5
jxg/L within 20 days in the clean aquifer micro-
cosms amended with nitrate. About half of the
o-xylene was removed. Benzene and 1,2,3-
trimethylbenzene were recalcitrant. Based on these
findings, researchers predict that 210 days of treat-
ment will be required to supply enough nitrate
to remediate the aquifer. Remediation began in
December 1992.
The Bioremedirtion Field Initiative was established to 1990 toexpand the nation's field experience inbioreinediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more folly document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatabllity studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Libby Ground Water Superfuttd site,, tibby, Mf; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West
KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, Mfc Eielson Air force Base Superfund site, Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base
Superfund site, Salt Lake City, UT; Escarabia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reilly Tar and Chemical
Corporation Superfund site, St, Louis Park, MM; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional
sites or to be added to the Initiative's mailing lis^ -call 513-569-7562, For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative,
contact Fran Ktemer, Coordinator, Btetemedlation Held Initiative, U,S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin
Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH ,452$$; or Narusy Dean, V.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, 401M Street, SW,, Washington, DC 20460,
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: St. Joseph, Michigan
Laboratories/Agencies: US,
EPA Robert S,Kerr
Environmental Research
Laboratory {RSKERL), Western
Region Hazardous Substance
Research Center (WRHSRC) at
Stanford University, U.S. EPA
Region 5, Michigan Department
of Natural Resources
Media and Contaminants;
Vinyl chloride (VC),
dichloroethylene (DCE), and
trichloroethylene (TCE) in
ground water
Treatment; In situ
bioremediation
Date of Initiative Selection:
Fail 1990
Objective: To evaluate the in
situ remediation oif VC and TCE
contamination in ground water
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Contact: John Wilson, U.S. EPA
RSKERL, P.O. Box 1198, Ada,
OK 74820
Regional Contact: John
Kuhns, US, EPARegion §,
Waste Management Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Bendix Corporation/Allied
Automotive Superfund Site
Background
In 1982, two contaminated ground water plumes with mg/L concen-
trations of trichloroethylene (TCE), vinyl chloride (VC), and cis- and
fnws-l,2-dichloroethylene (c- and f-DCE) were found to be emanating
from the Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive industrial site in St.
Joseph, Michigan (see Figure 1), and the site was placed on the
National Priority List. In early 1991, the Western Region Hazardous
Substance Research Center (WRHSRC) at Stanford University, in
cooperation with U.S. EPA Region 5 and the U.S. EPA Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory (RSKERL), began a series of
studies to examine the feasibility of a proposed in situ treatment for
the contaminated ground water.
100 Meters
10|ig/L Contours
Figure 1. Plan view of site, showing contaminated plumes of TCE, VC, and DCE.
Field Evaluation
Researchers previously had discovered that c-DCE, t-DCE, and VC
could be biodegraded in situ by mixing ground water and a solution
of oxygen and methane. In the field, however, simply injecting solu-
tions of oxygen and methane into an aquifer does not adequately mix
them with the contaminated ground water. To remedy this problem,
WRHSRC proposed using an in situ treatment unit that enhances this
-------
mixing. Figure 2 presents a schematic of this sys-
tem. The unit consists of a well with two screens, a
pump, and mixing apparatus. One well screen is
located at the bottom of the aquifer and the other
Oxygen—TJ— Methane
Reclrculatlon Unit —•
VadoseZorte
-Seal:
Ground Water
Figure 2. Schematic of the mixing and recirculation system.
is at the water table. Contaminated ground water
is drawn into the well through the lower screen,
where oxygen and methane are added, then
pumped back into the aquifer through the water
table screen. The pumping rate in the treatment
unit can be adjusted to recirculate the plume
through the treatment unit as many times as is
necessary to meet cleanup standards.
RSKERL began by sampling and chemically ana-
lyzing two transects extending across the plume
perpendicular to the flow of ground water. These
samples revealed relatively high concentrations of
all contaminants within 20 m of the plume's center.
Maximum concentrations were 138 mg/L for TCE,
128 mg/L for c-DCE, and 56 mg/L for VC. Concen-
trations of TCE were much higher than expected,
leading researchers to suspect that TCE might in-
hibit the growth of methanotrophic bacterial popu-
lations needed to remediate the aquifer.
To investigate this possibility, WRHSRC conducted
microcosm studies of aquifer solids. The micro-
cosms showed complete methane utilization re-
gardless of VC or TCE concentration and removal
rates of 25 to 80 percent for VC. The studies also
showed, however, that TCE is not effectively trans-
formed by the methanotrophic process. Based on
these results, WRHSRC speculated that the pro-
posed mixing system might actually dissolve more
TCE than it degraded by circulating ground water
past highly concentrated, oily-phase TCE. This
led WRHSRC to recommend that the proposed
system be installed only in areas where TCE con-
centrations are low and VC is the downgradient
contaminant.
Status
Researchers currently are conducting another site
characterization to identify regions of the contami-
nated site with low concentrations of TCE. Pre-
vious research has shown that low concentrations
of TCE can be transformed in situ to environmen-
tally benign ethene by adding methanol and ace-
tate to the aquifer. A combination of this treatment
for TCE and the originally proposed methanotro-
phic treatment for VC might be used to remediate
regions of the site with low TCE concentrations.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to mote fully document the performance ol Mi-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently i$ performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites; Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Libby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; West KL Avenue Landfill Superf und site,
Kalamazoo, MI; Bielson Air Force Base Superfund site, Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt Lake City, UT;
Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Bwwkhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund site, St. Louis
Park, MM; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO, f o obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be added to the Initiative's
mailing list, call 513-569-7562, For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact F*an Kremer, Coordinator,
Bioremediatiott Field Initiative, US. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: Brookhaven,
Mississippi
Laboratories/Agencies: U.S.
EPA Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory (RREL),
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Products Laboratory
(FPL), Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program, US. EPA Region 4
Media and Contaminants:
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) and
creosote sludge in soil
Treatment: White-rot fungi
Date of Initiative Selection:
Spring 1991
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of white-rot fungi
treatment for wood preserving
wastes
Bioremediation Field initiative
Contacts: John Glaser and
Richard Brenner, U.S. EPA
RREL, 26 West Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268
Regional Contact:
De'Lyntoneus Moore, U.S. EPA
Region 4, Waste Management
Division, 345 Courtland Street,
Atlanta, GA30365
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Escambia Wood Preserving
Site—Brookhaven
Background
The Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven in Brookhaven,
Mississippi, is a former wood preserving facility that used pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP) and creosote to treat wooden poles. The site contains
two pressure treatment cylinders, a wastewater treatment system,
five bulk product storage tanks, and seven condenser ponds, includ-
ing a 3,000,000-gallon, unlined primary surface impoundment. Prior
to the installation of the wastewater treatment system in 1983, un-
treated process wastewater and sludge from the facility were pumped
into the primary surface impoundment to evaporate excess water. In
1985, PCP-contaminated sediment and sludge from the condenser
ponds were excavated and deposited in the primary surface im-
poundment. In April 1991, U.S. EPA Region 4 initiated a removal
action to eliminate all sources of potential releases to the environment.
In the fall of 1991, PCP-contaminated soil from the condenser ponds
was excavated and transferred to test plots to serve as a medium for
an 8-week feasibility study on white-rot fungi treatment. A second,
5-month study of one particular strain of white-rot fungus took place
from June to November 1992. Both studies were conducted by the
U.S. EPARisk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) under
the Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program
and the Bioremediation Field Initiative.
Characterization
In June 1991, as part of the Field Initiative's feasibility study, site
investigators systematically sampled a flat, approximately 18-m by
18-m section of a waste sludge pile of material from the condenser
ponds. Laboratory analysis of each sample found PCP concentrations
ranging from 25 mg/kg to 342 mg/kg, with an average of 143 mg/kg.
Investigators also analyzed composite samples consisting of soil from
each of the sample locations for volatile and semi-volatile organics.
The composite samples contained elevated concentrations of 44
organic compounds, 12 of which are hazardous constituents of K001
waste. Contaminant concentrations varied greatly within the waste
-------
pile; the soil in the feasibility study had particularly
high pollutant levels.
Field Evaluation
The feasibility study compared 10 treatments,
combining three fungal species, three inoculum
loading levels, and the appropriate controls. The
experimental method combined a randomized
complete block (RGB) design without replication
and a balanced incomplete block (BIB) design with
treatment replicated four times. Eleven 10-ft by
10-ft plots, each holding about 4 tons of soil, were
constructed. In the RGB design, six of the plots each
received a separate treatment. In the BIB design,
each of the five remaining plots was divided by
interior borders into four 2.5-ft by 2.5-ft split plots.
The interior plots were used to evaluate one of the
treatments from the RGB design and four addi-
tional treatments.
Investigators excavated soil from the original sam-
pling location on the waste sludge pile to a depth
of approximately 30 cm. After excavation, the soil
was mechanically sieved to pass through a 2.5-cm
screen, mixed, then placed in the plots to a depth
of 25 cm. On September 18, 1991, the plots were
inoculated with the fungi. After inoculation, each
plot periodically was irrigated and tilled with a
garden rototiller. Wood chips were added to each
plot to provide a substrate to sustain growth of the
fungi. Figure 1 is a schematic of the soil prepara-
tion, showing the treatment plots.
Status
Both the SITE program and investigators from FPL
collected soil samples during the feasibility study.
Sampling and analyses for PGP and polycyclic
SCREENING
TREATMENT PLOTS
Figure 1. Schematic of soil preparation, from excavation to screen-
ing, mixing, placement in treatment plots, and inoculation with
fungi.
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were performed by
methods previously used by each group. Initial
PGP concentrations in the 10 treatment plots
ranged between approximately 300 and 1,000
mg/kg. Results indicated losses of PGP in the treat-
ment plots of up to 89 percent of the initial concen-
trations. This level of remediation was considered
adequate to justify the initiation of a larger scale
investigation.
A larger scale investigation of Phanerochaete sordida
for remediation of the PGP-contaminated soil was
initiated in June 1992. Researchers inoculated a
100-ft by 70-ft plot with the fungal species. Two
control plots also were established—one with con-
taminated soil only and the other with contami-
nated soil and the fungal spawn mix. Sampling was
conducted through November 1992 to monitor the
transformation of PGP and PAFfs. The data cur-
rently are being evaluated.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience inbioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of Mi-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Libby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Eielson Air Force Base Superfund site,
Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt Lake City, UT; Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund site, St.
Louis Park, MM; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional Sites Of to be added to the
Initiative's mailing list, call 513*569-7562, For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact Fran Kremer,
Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, U,S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460,
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: St. Louis Park,
Minnesota
Laboratories/Agencies: U.S.
EPA Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory (RREL),
Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program, U.S. EPA Region 5,
Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency
Media and Contaminants:
Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in soil
Treatment: Bioventing
Date of Initiative Selection:
October 1992
Objective: To evaluate the
effectiveness of bioventing
PAH-contaminated soil
Bioremediation Field Initiative
Contacts: Paul McCauley and
Richard Brenner, U.S. EPA
RREL, 26 West Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, OH
45268
Regional Contact: Daryl
Owens, U,S, EPA Region 5,
Waste Management Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
Reilly Tar and Chemical
Corporation Superfund Site
Background
This Bioremediation Field Initiative project is under way in St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, at the former site of Reilly Tar and Chemical Corpo-
ration's coal tar distillation and wood preserving plant. From 1917 to
1972, wastewater discharges and dumping from this plant contami-
nated about 80 acres of soil and the underlying ground water with
wood preserving wastes. In 1978, the Minnesota Department of
Health discovered significant concentrations of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in six municipal drinking water wells neigh-
boring the Reilly Tar plant. St. Louis Park currently is pumping and
treating the contaminated ground water plume, but without an effort
to control the source of PAHs, pumping and treating might be neces-
sary for several hundred years.
This Initiative project is evaluating bioventing of PAH-contaminated
soil through the U.S. EPA Superfund Innovative Technology Evalu-
ation (SITE) Program and the U.S. EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory's (RREL's) Biosystems Program. Bioventing has proven
effective at remediating lightweight petroleum distillates such as JP-4
jet fuel; this is the first evaluation of bioventing's effectiveness for
remediation of larger molecular weight hydrocarbons.
Characterization
The SITE program conducted a preliminary site characterization,
including soil sampling, soil gas monitoring, and in situ respiration
testing, in August 1992. Soil sampling revealed PAH contamination
in sandy vadose soil ranging from 2 to 10 ft below the surface. Soil
gas monitoring and respiration tests indicated that the soil's aerobic
microbial activity and air permeability are high enough for successful
bioventing.
Field Evaluation
In November 1992, baseline soil sampling was conducted and a
full-scale bioventing system installed on a 50-ft by 50-ft plot (see
Figure 1). A control plot of equal size and contaminant levels also was
established to gauge the effectiveness of the bioventing system. The
-------
Delineated Plot Boundary
Flow
Control
Rotometer
Gl - Gas Injection Vent
GS - Gas Sample Probes
T - Temperature Probes
WL - Water Level Well
Figure 1. Layout ofbioventing installation on experimental plot.
system consists of one air injection well with
screening 5 to 10 ft below ground level (see Figure
2), a 2.5 hp blower, a network of 48 soil gas sam-
pling probes, and a system to monitor soil tempera-
ture and ground water elevation. The blower and
vent well deliver 100 ft3 of air per hour to the
contaminated soil.
Personnel from the City of St. Louis Park will moni-
tor subsurface temperature, as well as oxygen and
carbon dioxide levels, every 2 weeks. In situ respi-
ration tests will be conducted four times per year.
At the completion of the project, final soil samples
will be collected from the experimental and the
control plots.
Pressure Gauge
PVC Pipe
2" OD, Schedule 40
Sand Pack
Screened
Section
Figure 2. Schematic of air injection vent well.
Status
The demonstration project is expected to last 3
years, at which point it is estimated that soil core
samples will show at least a 27 percent reduction
in PAH levels. If bioventing successfully remedi-
ates PAHs at this rate, complete remediation of the
site would take 10 to 15 years should large-scale
bioventing be undertaken. The results of this study
will determine whether bioventing can be consid-
ered at Superfund sites as a cost-effective treatment
technology for remediating PAH-contaminated soil.
The Bioremediation Tieldlnitiative was established in 1990 to expand thenation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatabiUty studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Libby, MT; Park Qty Pipeline, Park City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; West KL Avenue Landfill Superfund site, Kalamazoo, MI; Eielson Air Force Base Superfund site,
Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt Lake City, UT; Escambia Wood Preserving Site-^Brookhaven, Brookhaven,
MS; and Public Service Company, Penver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be added to the Initiative's mailing
list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact Fran Kremer, Coordinator, Bioreme-
diation Field Initiative, U.S, EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45268;
or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Washington, DC 20460
vvEPA
SITE FACTS
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Laboratories/Agencies: US. EPA
Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory (RREL), US. EPARobert
S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory (RSKERL), Center for
Microbial Ecology at Michigan State
University (MSU), US. EPARegion 5,
Michigan Department of Natural
Resources
Media and Contaminants:
Solvents in landfill and ground
water
Treatment: In situ bioremediation
of landfill material and ground
water
Date of Initiative Selection:
October 1992
Objective: To evaluate the
feasibility of bioremediating the
ground water and landfill material
Bioremediation Reid initiative
Contacts: John Wilson, US. EPA
RSKERL, P.O. Box 1198, Ada, OK
74820; Steve Safferman and Fred
Bishop, U.S. EPA RREL, 26 West
Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Regional Contact: DanCozza,
US. EPA Region 5, Waste
Management Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 1L
60604
Bioremediation Field
Initiative Site Profile:
West KL Avenue Landfill
Superfund Site
Background
During the 1960s and 1970s, the West KL Avenue Landfill in Kalamazoo,
Michigan, was the repository for an estimated 5 million yd of refuse and
undetermined amounts of bulk liquid and drummed chemical waste. In 1979,
the 87-acre site was closed permanently due to the discovery of contaminants
in nearby residential drinking water wells. In 1983, the site was placed on the
National Priority List due to the discovery of acetone, methyl ethyl ketone,
methyl isobutyl ketone, dichloroethane, benzene, and other contaminants in
ground water near the site. The U.S. EPA Risk Reduction Engineering Labo-
ratory (RREL), the U.S. EPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Labora-
tory (RSKERL), and the Center for Microbial Ecology at Michigan State
University (MSU) currently are examining the feasibility of bioremediating
the landfill material and underlying contaminant plume.
Characterization
Research conducted in 1990 indicated that the surface system and the aquifer
are hydraulically connected, so soluble contaminants leach vertically from
the landfill to the saturated zone. The plume of contamination has two lobes
that are moving west from the landfill. Figure 1 shows the location of the
landfill, nearby lakes, and monitoring wells, as well as the water table
surface contour.
Field Evaluation
Research is being conducted under three tasks. The first task, to be con-
ducted by RSKERL, is site characterization and modeling. RSKERL will drill
wells in six locations to evaluate the geochemical and hydrological charac-
teristics of the contaminated ground water plume and to monitor the fate
and transport of the contaminants. RSKERL will provide site charac-
terization data so that MSU can select appropriate depth intervals to sample
for microbial activity.
The second task, to be conducted by MSU, involves the use of microcosms
to evaluate the biodegradative capacity of the ground water. Serum bottles
with aquifer material and ground water will be used to test for the presence
of microorganisms able to degrade representative contaminants. MSU also
will use soil-column microcosms to simulate the dynamics of the aquifer
environment and estimate the rates of contaminant degradation. Microcosm
studies are scheduled to commence in May 1993.
In the third task, which is under way, RREL is using three landfill lysimeter
systems to assess the biodegradation of landfill material. One system
-------
Scale in Feet
Legend
• Shallow Domestic Well • Deep Monitoring Well
© Deep Domestic Well A Test Well
Q ^ Monitorjng Wfj||
(next to well if replaced)
D Shallow Monitoring We,,
Figure 1. Water table surface contour map showing the location of the landfill, nearby lakes, and monitoring wells.
simulates the effects of a Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) cap on the biodegradation of the
fill and leachate. A second system serves as a control to
assess the biodegradative capacity of the landfill mate-
rial, simulating existing conditions without a cap. The
third system simulates the effects of enhancing natu-
rally occurring bioremediation to optimize biodegrada-
tion and biotransf ormation of the hazardous pollutants
in the landfill. RREL obtained landfill samples and
loaded the lysimeter systems in January 1993.
Status
A Record of Decision (ROD) was signed by EPA Region
5 in September 1990. The ROD calls for the installation
of a RCRA-type landfill cap and a ground water pump-
and-treat system utilizing aboveground fixed-film
bioreactors. A Consent Decree, entered in the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Michigan on
November 17,1992, ordered the potentially responsible
parties to perform the actions described in the ROD.
Designs for the landfill cap and the ground water pump-
and-treat system are being conducted concurrently with
the Bioremediation Field Initiative's evaluation. The ac-
tions described in the ROD will be performed unless the
ROD is amended based on the results of the Initiative's
evaluation of the site.
Preliminary site assessment suggests that natural deg-
radation is occurring in the form of anaerobic dechlori-
nation under sulfate-reducing conditions. Pilot-scale
bioremediation of the site will involve anaerobic treat-
ment of leachates under methanogenic and sulfate-
reducing conditions. Further site characterization,
modeling, and microcosm studies will be conducted in
spring of 1993. Laboratory, pilot, and field study results
are scheduled to be reported in November 1993.
The Bioremediation Field Initiative was established in 1990 to expand the nation's field experience in bioremediation technologies.
The Initiative's objectives are to more fully document the performance of full-scale applications of bioremediation; provide
technical assistance to regional and state site managers; and provide information on treatability studies, design, and operation of
bioremediation projects. The Initiative currently is performing field evaluations of bioremediation at eight other hazardous waste
sites: Libby Ground Water Superfund site, Ubby, MT; Park City Pipeline, Patk City, KS; Bendix Corporation/Allied Automotive
Superfund site, St. Joseph, MI; Eielson Air Force Base Superfund site, Fairbanks, AK; Hill Air Force Base Superfund site, Salt Lake
City, UT; Escambia Wood Preserving Site—Brookhaven, Brookhaven, MS; Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation Superfund site,
St. Louis Park, MM; and Public Service Company, Denver, CO. To obtain profiles on these additional sites or to be added to the
Initiative's mailing list, call 513-569-7562. For further information on the Bioremediation Field Initiative, contact Fran Kremer,
Coordinator, Bioremediation Field Initiative, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, 26 West Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268; or Nancy Dean, U.S. EPA, Technology Innovation Office, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
•&U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1993 - 750-071/80001
-------
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use, $300
EPA/540/F-92/012
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
------- |