Twenty-six new cost and performance
case studies
Summary and presentations from the
FRTR meeting on Vapor Intrusion (VI)
posted on the FRTR website
FRTR launched the Vapor Intrusion
Data Workgroup in partnership with
several federal agencies in March 2010
EPA released OSWER directive (OSWER
9200.2-72), "Operational and Functional
Determination and the Transfer of Fund-
Lead Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Systems
to the States" \r\ April 2009
The "DoDVapor Intrusion Handbook"
is a resource for remedial project
managers (RPM) who may need to
investigate the VI pathway at DoD
sites, and is available on line at https://
EPA has on-line resources dedicated to
VI  that are available at
* h ttp://www. clu-in. org/issues/default.
  focus/sec/Vapor_ln trusion/cat/
  Overview/, and
* http://www.epa.gov/oswer/
FRTR"What's New"website feature
contains recent publications
* EPA Region 7 published a fact sheet,
 "What you should know about Vapor
  Intrusion"'to answer frequently
  asked  questions about VI
* Three new Green and Sustainable
  Remediation Case Studies
This fact sheet summarizes the activities
of the Federal Remediation Technologies
Roundtable (FRTR) over the last year. The
FRTR is an interagency working group
that promotes cooperation among member
agencies to promote development and
use of new technologies for improved
remediation of hazardous waste sites.
Primary members of the FRTR include
the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD),
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),
the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI),
the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The roundtable meets twice each year
to share information and has done so
continuously since it was established in May
1990. Meeting summaries and presentations
are available on the FRTR website at:
www.frtr.gov.  Recent meetings focused
on Green Remediation (December 2008)
and Data Management (May 2009).  The
39th FRTR meeting,  held in November
2009, focused on vapor intrusion (VI); the
objectives of the meeting were as follows:
*  Improve communication on and
   common understanding of VI issues;
*  Share experiences and lessons learned in
   advancing best practices for VI;
*  Outline key issues and develop shared
   strategies to address VI; and
*  Develop a "charge" for future FRTR
   action related to  VI.
This factsheet highlights work that the FRTR
member agencies are doing on VI issues.
VI refers to the condition when vapors and
gases from contaminated groundwater and
soil seep into indoor spaces; these vapors
may have the potential to cause health
problems. Federal agencies are actively
working on understanding the potential
for VI at sites, as well as the cleanup and

  Vapor intrusion (VI) is the migration of volatile chemicals
  from the subsurface into overlying buildings. Volatile
  chemicals in buried wastes or contaminated groundwater
  can emit vapors that may migrate through subsurface soils
  and into indoor air spaces of overlying buildings (Office of
  Solid Waste and Emergency Response [OSWER] draft 2002 VI
  guidance). More information on VI is available at www.du-in.
           Vapor Intrusion into Indoor Air
            ass™™ A  I  Cr***W>M«  !

                Chemical Vapor Movement
possible health issues raised by VI. Some aspects of
VI investigation/mitigation include:
*  VI involves complex fate and transport
   mechanisms that move volatile organic
   compounds (VOC) from the subsurface to below-
   grade or aboveground building structures;
»  Multiple lines of evidence are useful in
   evaluating the potential for VI, including data for
   groundwater, soil gas, sub-slab gas, and indoor
»  A good site conceptual model is critical in helping
   site teams design sampling programs and define
   data quality objectives to address potential VI
»  Assessors are focusing on inhalation dosimetry
   methodology to derive appropriate VI cleanup
   levels at sites; and
*  VI mitigation approaches differ for new
   construction and existing buildings.
Currently, there are areas of uncertainty associated
with VI. These include substantial uncertainties
associated with VI fate and transport models;
difficulty in achieving streamlined monitoring to
identify a complete pathway; understanding cost-
effectiveness of mitigation approaches; challenges
associated with implementing VI monitoring in
homes because of reluctant home owners and
because other materials that could contain VOCs
may be found in homes; and difficulty in evaluating
and implementing the best institutional controls.
In March 2010, FRTR formed the Vapor Intrusion
Data Workgroup in partnership with several Federal
agencies, and subsequently invited several State
agencies to participate.  The workgroup will meet to
discuss Vl-related issues.  In addition, FRTR member
agencies are supporting several efforts and activities
to improve their ability to address VI effectively.
Examples of ongoing Vl-related efforts within FRTR
member agencies are provided below.

Vapor Intrusion Efforts within DoD

In January 2009, DoD published the "DoD Vapor
Intrusion Handbook" to serve as a resource for
remedial project managers (RPMs) who may need to
investigate the VI pathway at DoD sites, including
active and closed U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, U.S.
Navy, and U.S. Marine Corps bases, as well as
Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). The handbook
provides a general framework for conducting VI
investigations under the Defense Environmental
Restoration Program (DERP).  Both residential and
occupational exposure scenarios are discussed, since
both groups can be affected by VI.  Based on the 2009
DoD handbook, the Air Force is developing a VI
strategy that includes a "multiple lines of evidence"
The Navy is developing various resources to guide
its RPMs on approaches to VI issues at sites. The
2008 Navy/Marine Corps VI policy describes how
to consider VI in the environmental restoration by
(1) determining whether to evaluate the VI pathway
for a site, (2) planning and implementing a VI
pathway evaluation, (3) addressing background
chemical issues, (4) evaluating human health
exposure risks posed by VI, (5) evaluating remedial
alternatives, and (6) considering previously
transferred property.  The Navy's VI Focus Group
brings together VI technical leads from the Naval
Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC), the
Naval Facilities  Engineering Service Center (NFESC),
the Navy Marine Corps Public Health Center,
Navy contractors, and industry experts to develop
resources such as the VI Conceptual Site Model


                         HIGHLIGHT OF VAPOR INTRUSION

                        COST AND PERFORMANCE REPORT
                       Detailed Field Investigation of Vapor Intrusion Processes
  DoD s ESTCP conducted a detailed demonstration study using conceptual models to investigate VI at the Altus Air Force Base
  in Oklahoma and at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The demonstration consisted of collecting high-density data at the test sites,
  analyzing the data, and using the results to develop a cost effective and accurate approach for the investigation of VI into
  buildings overlying contaminated groundwater. The primary objectives of the study were to collect data representative of
  site conditions, identify VI impacts, and develop a reliable VI investigation approach. This report describes the sampling and
  monitoring procedures, data collection, and the performance and cost assessment of the VI investigation. Data collected in
  the study include geotechnical data and indoor air concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), oxygen, and carbon
  dioxide. These data were used to assess the spatial and temporal variability in VOC concentration, movement of VOCs across key
  interfaces, and the VI impacts at the selected test sites. The results of the demonstration were used to support a step wise process
  for the investigation of VI from groundwater sources at other sites. The results also provide facility managers with investigation
  results that support a cost effective, building-specific evaluation approach of VI impacts at corrective action sites. A detailed
  report about this study is available on line at http://costperformance.org/monitoring/pdf/Vapor-lntrusion-Processes-ESTCP.pdf.

  Conceptual Data Collection Plan for Detailed Evaluation of The Vapor Intrusion Pathway.
                                           1. Multilevel discrete depth samples upgradient, midgradient, and
                                           downgradient of the building used to characterize groundwater mass
                                           flux [three multilevel clusters]; 2. Multilevel soil gas (SG) sampling
                                           conducted below or adjacent to the building  used to characterize
                                         1  SG concentration gradients and mass flux [three multilevel clusters];
                                   IIII      3. Subslab SG samples, combined with the other data, provide an
                                   | HI      understanding of transport from the groundwater source to indoor
                                           air [three sample points]; 4. Indoor air samples [three sample points]
                                           combined with 5. Ambient air samples [three sample points], and
                                           6. Analysis of radon allows separation of indoor air sources and vapor
                                           intrusions sources; 7. Unique tracer gas released within the building
                                           allows for accurate measurement of building air exchange rate
The Army is also updating its 2006 interim VI
policy; this policy will address the Army's position
on various Vl-related issues such as regulatory
drivers that guide the use of environmental funding;
the use of existing technical guidance; assessment
procedures for the VI pathway; considerations for
buildings, undeveloped property, and transferred
property; and 5-year review considerations.  DoD's
environmental technology programs, such as the
Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (SERDP) and Environmental Security
Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), have
undertaken several initiatives to develop an
improved understanding of the VI pathway from
groundwater plumes contaminated by chlorinated
solvents. Two ongoing SERDP projects are focusing
on modeling tools to assess VI pathways. In
addition, three ongoing ESTCP demonstrations
are addressing VI, including (1) developing a
protocol for VI evaluation, (2) testing the application
of a sensor-based technology to assess VI, and
(3) developing cost-effective tools for long-term
monitoring of soil VI to indoor air.

Vapor Intrusion Efforts within EPA

On November 29, 2002, EPA's OSWER published
a notice in the Federal Register (67 FR 71169)
announcing and soliciting comment on its Draft
OSWER Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion
to Indoor Air Pathway from Groundwater and Soil
(Subsurface Vapor Intrusion Guidance) (EPA 530-
D-02-004). This draft guidance outlines a multi-
tiered approach to determine whether, or not, the
VI exposure pathway is complete and may present
a risk to human health. The recommended process
starts with a simple and relatively conservative
screening evaluation, which can progress to a more
complex assessment involving increasingly greater
use of site-specific data. Since the Draft guidance was


                       ERA'S VAPOR INTRUSION  RESOURCES
  1.  EPAs OSWER has developed a website http://www.epa.gov/oswer/vaporintrusion/ that provides basic information about
     vapor intrusion, technical and policy documents to support environmental investigations, and highlights of recent and
     upcoming activities related to vapor intrusion.
  2.  EPAs Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) has developed a website (www.du-in.org/
     issues/default.focus/sec/Vapor_lntrusion/cat/Overview) that serves as a repository of technical information related to VI.
     This website is updated regularly and draws on information from federal cleanup programs, state sources, universities,
     nonprofit organizations, peer-reviewed publications, and public-private partnerships.
  3.  EPAs Vapor Intrusion Database, available at http://iavi.rti.org, was updated in March 2008. The database holds data
     to support site-specific measurements of vapor attenuation, or the reduction in vapor concentrations as volatile
     contaminants move from soil and groundwater into indoor air.
  4.  EPA published an Engineering Issue, Indoor Air Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Approaches (EPA600-R-08-115), which presents
     the state of the science regarding management and treatment of VI into building structures (www.du-in.org/download/
   .  EPA Region 7 published a fact sheet on VI in February 2010 that provides answers to several frequently asked questions
     about VI. The fact sheet is available on line at http://www.epa.gov/region07/factsheets/2010/faq_about_vapor_
  6.  EPA published the Brownfields Technology Primer: Vapor Intrusion Considerations for Redevelopment (EPA 542-R-08-
     001), which is designed for land revitalization stakeholders concerned about vapor intrusion, including property owners,
     municipalities, and real estate developers. The report is available on line at http://brownfieldstsc.org/pdfs/BTSC%20
released, our knowledge and experience with VI has
increased considerably.
In 2009, EPA's Office of the Inspector General
(OIG) released an evaluation report: Lack of Final
Guidance on Vapor Intrusion Impedes Efforts to
Address Indoor Air Risks (Report No. 10-P-042).
The report is available at http://www.epa.gov/oig/
The OIG made the following recommendations:
1.  Identify and publicly report the portions of
   OSWER's November 2002 Draft VI guidance that
   remain valid and the portions that should be
2. 1 Issue final VI  guidance(s) that incorporates
   information on
       Updated toxicity values.
       A recommendation(s) to use multiple lines of
       evidence in evaluating and making decisions
       about risk from vapor intrusion.
       How risk  from petroleum hydrocarbons
       should be addressed
       How the guidance applies to Superfund Five-
       Year reviews.
       When or whether preemptive mitigation is
    f.   Operations and maintenance, the termination
       of the systems, and when institutional
       controls and deed restrictions are appropriate.
3. 1 Train EPA and State staff and managers, and
    other parties, on the newly updated, revised, and
    finalized guidance document (s), and
4.   Complete toxicity assessments of trichloroethene
    and perchloroethene.
EPA's OSWER will address the first three of these
recommendations.  The fourth recommendation is
being addressed by EPA's Office of Research and
Development (ORD). The status and progress of
these recommendations will be posted at http://www.
In April 2009, EPA released OSWER directive,
"Operational and Functional Determination and the
Transfer of Fund-Lead Vapor Intrusion Mitigation
Systems to the States" (OSWER 9200.2-72), to guide
when VI mitigation systems can transfer to the state
for  operation and maintenance (O&M). EPA is also
encouraging dialogue between various stakeholders
on the VI issue.  In January 2009, EPA Region 3
hosted the National Forum on VI in Philadelphia to
highlight government and stakeholder perspectives
on VI.  Proceedings from the conference are available
at www.epa.gov/osp/hstl/viforum09.htm.


A major activity of the roundtable throughout
the year is to collect and distribute information
from federal and state agencies on the use of new
technologies at their sites. Each year, the roundtable
compiles reports and makes them available at
the website www.frtr.gov. The "What's New"
section regularly provides notices about meetings,
conferences,  and publications of relevance to FRTR
and is updated monthly.
The FRTR website provides case studies and reports
in four categories:  Remediation Technology, Site
Characterization and Monitoring, Long-Term
Monitoring and Optimization, and Remediation
Technology Assessment. The case studies share data
collected by member agencies and are based on real
experiences and lessons learned in selecting and
implementing site characterization and treatment
technologies to delineate and remediate soil and
groundwater contamination at hazardous waste
sites. Remediation case study reports describe the
performance and cost of technology applications at
full-scale and large-scale demonstration projects.

Remediation Technology Cost And
Performance Case Studies

More than 400 Remediation Technology Cost and
Performance Case Studies (treatment or containment)
are available on the FRTR website. Recently, ten new
cost and performance case studies for remediation
technologies have been added. These case studies
address the use of in situ remediation technologies
for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
Six reports prepared by DoD's ESTCP provide data
on cost and performance for bioremediation of dense
non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL), chlorinated
hydrocarbons, and perchlorate.  In addition, one
report developed by ESTCP addresses the use
of activated carbon to stabilize polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB) in contaminated sediment.  Three
reports developed by EPA describe (1) in situ
bioremediation and soil vapor extraction to  treat

                                PERFORMANCE REPORT
      Field Application of a Permeable Reactive Barrier for Treatment of Arsenic in Groundwater
  The ASARCO East Helena plant was a smelter located south of East Helena, Montana. The plant began operations in 1888 and
  operated for more than 100 years. It was listed on the EPAs National Priorities List (NPL) in 1984. Lead operations at the site
  contaminated the groundwater with arsenic. ASARCO shut down its operations in 2001, and plant demolition is under way.
  A pilot study was conducted at the site to evaluate the performance and efficiency of a zero valent iron permeable reactive
  barrier (PRB) for treatment of the arsenic contaminated groundwater. The PRB consists of granular zero valent iron that runs 9.1
  meters (m) long, 13.7 m deep, and 1.8 to 2.4 m wide. The PRB was installed over 3 days using bio-polymer slurry methods and
  excavation equipment. Forty groundwater monitoring wells were installed
  in July 2005, and groundwater samples were collected at month 1,4,12,15,
  and 25 of operation.
  The results concluded that the permeable reactive barrier is effective
  at treating arsenic contaminated groundwater.  Monitoring results
  indicated that groundwater upgradient of the barrier contained arsenic
  at concentrations of more than 25 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and that
  groundwater within the barrier has an average arsenic concentration
  of less than 0.01 mg/L. In addition to this demonstration, this report
  addresses aspects of site characterization, remedial design, and remedy
  implementation, and monitoring results for this pilot scale PRB effort,
  including a flux-based analysis for arsenic.
                                                           Backfilling of Trench with Granular Iron


 The VI publications listed below represent some of the most up-to-date information available on the
 evaluation and (if appropriate) the mitigation of the VI pathway. They also provide guidance on how to
 assess the human health risks associated with the VI pathway and incorporate this information into the
 baseline human health risk assessment used to decide whether site remediation is warranted to address
 contaminants of concern (COCs).
    OSWER Draft Guidance for
    Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion
    to Indoor Air Pathway from
     Groundwater and Soils
    (Subsurface Vapor Intrusion
OSWER Draft Guidance for Evaluating the Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air
Pathway from Groundwater and Soils.  This draft guidance was published
by EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) in November
2002. It provides useful information in evaluating the VI pathway, including
a three-tiered approach to evaluate the potential risks associated with this
pathway. This draft guidance  provides the basis for other documents that
followed, such as the DoD VI handbook, described below. The draft guidance
is available on line  at http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/correctiveaction/eis/
 Vapor Intrusion Pathway: A Practical Guideline. Published by the Interstate
 Technologyand Regulatory Council (ITRC)'s Vapor IntrusionTeam in January 2007,
 this technical and regulatory guidance provides a generalized 13-step framework
 for evaluating the VI pathway and describes the various tools available for site
 investigation, data evaluation, and mitigation. The guideline is intended to be
 used in conjunction with any applicable federal or state vapor intrusion policy
 or guidance. A companion document (described below) puts this framework in
 the light of typical VI site scenarios. This document is available on lineathffp://
DoD Vapor Intrusion Handbook.  This handbook, developed by DoD
in January 2009, discusses various technical approaches associated with
evaluating the VI pathway and provides perspective for site managers on
developing and interpreting VI investigations. By considering project needs,
state regulations, and the pros and cons of the various approaches, the site
managers can make informed and cost-effective decisions on the best way to
evaluate VI at a site. This handbook is available on line at https://www.denix.


                              PERFORMANCE REPORT
  Field Testing of Activated Carbon Mixing and In situ Stabilization of Polychlorinated Biphenyls
     (PCB) in Sediment at Hunters Point Shipyard (HPS) Parcel F, San Francisco Bay, California
HPS is a former Navy installation located on a peninsula in the southeastern corner of San Francisco, California. The
site is approximately 928 acres, with approximately 432 acres of offshore sediment. Historical site activities associated
with ship repair and maintenance released chemicals such as PCBs to the environment, including offshore sediment
located near the South Basin.  Because PCBs tend to adsorb to fine grained sediment particles and organic matter,
sediment resuspension and deposition are major contaminant transport pathways at the site.  In 1989, HPS was
included on the National Priorities List (NPL). The Navy closed the base in 1991 under the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act. The base is being remediated and will be converted to nonmilitary use.
A site characterization study was conducted in 1991 to evaluate the presence of contaminants in offshore areas of
the HPS. Results of the study indicated that PCBs were a major risk driver for HPS Parcel F, located at the HPS tidal
mudflat within the South Basin. Within this area of the site, PCB concentrations were identified as approximately
2 parts per million (ppm) from a depth of 0 to 12 inches. As a result, Parcel F of the site was selected for the in situ
remedial technology demonstration study.
A 3-year field-scale project was conducted at the site to demonstrate that activated carbon (AC) sorbent mixed with
sediment is a cost effective,/ns/tu,nonremoval, management strategy for reducing risk and the bioavailability of PCBs
in offshore sediments. Four test plots with areas of 370 square feet each were studied to compare mixing technologies
and evaluate the AC treatment technology. Two test plots were amended with AC in January 2006 using two different
mixing devices (Aquamog  rototiller system and CEI slurry injector system). At each of these plots, AC was added to
a nominal 1-foot depth. The other  	
two test plots served as controls; one
test plot served as a mixing control,
and the other served as a non-
mixing control. The four plots were
analyzed  using a combination of
sampling and analysis and statistical
tests. The plots were sampled
once before and three times after
treatment.  This 3 year field scale
project successfully demonstrated
that the top layer of sediments
in a  PCB contaminated tidal
mudflat could be amended with
AC using large scale commercial
mixing equipment. Field-scale AC-
amendment reduced the availability
of PCBs to water without impairing
the natural  benthic community of
macroinvertebrates or releasing
PCBs into overlying water.          AC_ Sedinumi Miyiny
AC - Sediment Mixing


       A Guide for Assessing Biodegradation and Source Identification of Organic Ground'
                   Contaminants using Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSI/"
  This report, prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), provides a guide to the use of
  Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA) to examine organic groundwater contaminants. CSIA has
  the ability to improve our understanding of the behavior of organic contaminants at hazardous waste
  sites. Recent advances in analytical chemistry make it possible to perform CSIA on dissolved organic
  contaminants such as chlorinated solvents, aromatic petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel oxygenates, at
  concentrations in water that are near their regulatory standards. Since CSIA is a new approach, there are
  no widely accepted standards for accuracy, precision and sensitivity, and no established approaches to       IJ
  document accuracy, precision and sensitivity and representativeness.
  This Guide provides general recommendations on good practice for sampling groundwater for CSIA,
  and quality assurance recommendations for measurement of isotope ratios. The Guide also provides
  recommendations for data evaluation and interpretation to use CSIA to document degradation of organic contaminants, or to
  associate plumes of contaminants in groundwater with their sources. The report is divided into nine sections with additional
  references, tables and figures. The first two sections introduce the CSIA process and describe the benefits and value of data
  provided byCSIA.Thenexttwo sections explain different col lection methods and strategies based on varying contaminants, plume
  size, location, etc. The remaining five sections provide recommendations for potential  site and project managers, contractors
  or chemical analysts for CSIA data interpretation and application. In addition, this report provides information about various
  demonstration designs where CSIA has been used effectively to characterize a site.
chlorinated hydrocarbons, (2) electrical resistive
heating to treat chlorinated hydrocarbons, and
(3) permeable reactive barrier to treat arsenic in

Site Characterization and Monitoring Reports

This focus area includes reports on field-based site
characterization and monitoring technologies, and
documents experiences and lessons learned in field
demonstrations and full-scale applications; more
than 195 reports are currently available. Seven new
reports have been added, three each from ESTCP
and EPA.  Two of the EPA reports describe organic
and inorganic chemical characterization, while one
report describes the use of the Triad approach at a
hydrocarbon-contaminated site. Two ESTCP reports
address characterization of organic chemicals,
including the use of fiber optic biosensors, while one
report addresses characterization of bioavailability
of lead. One ESTCP report provides information on
characterization of unexploded ordnance.

Long-Term Monitoring and Optimization Case
Study Reports

This focus area includes reports that describe
long-term management and optimization efforts
that involve techniques such as evaluations of
groundwater monitoring programs and plume and
hydraulic optimization.  More than 125 reports are
currently available under this focus area. Five new
documents have been recently added and include
one report from ESTCP and four reports from EPA.
The ESTCP report summarizes an adaptive long-term
monitoring program for environmental restoration
sites.  The four EPA reports focus on evaluations of
extraction systems used for remediation at four sites
across the United States.

Remediation Technology Assessment Reports

The reports in this focus area provide broad
assessments of technologies based on results from
field experience gained from multiple sites. Four
new reports were added to this focus area, bringing
the total to more than 92, including two new reports
from ITRC and one each from EPA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). The ITRC
reports provide information on evaluating remedial
technologies and monitored natural attenuation
for light non-aqueous phase liquids (LNAPL). The
EPA report overviews solidification/stabilization
technology for use in site remediation. The USACE
report is an engineering and design manual for in situ
thermal remediation (ISTR) and provides guidance
and background information to support screening
and selection of ISTR technologies.

            Remediation System Evaluation at 10th Street Superfund Site in Nebraska
This report documents the evaluation and recommendations for optimizing the treatment systems currently in place
at the 10th Street Superfund Site located in Columbus, Nebraska.The remedies consist of three parts: a groundwater
extraction and treatment system; an air sparging/soil vapor extraction system; and an in situ chemical oxidation
treatment system. Recommendations associated with improving the effectiveness of the treatment system included
evaluating the need of further evaluation or potential for vapor intrusion, discontinuing pumping, addressing
calibration issues, and addressing potential plume migration. Cost recommendations included discontinuing the
in situ chemical oxidation treatment, continuing to use passive diffusion bags without extensive comparison, and
reducing the monitoring and reporting. Technical improvement recommendations included measuring and tracking
the specific capacity of wells and considering variable frequency drives for extraction well pumps. Recommendations
for improved sustainability and consideration for gaining site closeout are also included in this report.

 Technology Performance Review: Selecting and Using Solidification / Stabilization Treatment for
                                       Site Remediation
This report prepared by EPA provides assistance to decision makers such as Remedial Project Managers (RPMs)
and other interested parties in evaluating Solidification/Stabilization (S/S) as a treatment option for their sites. S/S
is a widely used treatment technology to prevent migration and exposure of contaminants from contaminated
media (i.e. soil, sludge and sediment). Solidification refers to a process that binds contaminated media with a
reagent, changing its physical properties by increasing the compressive strength, decreasing its permeability and
encapsulating the contaminants to form a solid material. Stabilization refers to the process that involves a chemical
reaction that reduces the leachability of a waste, chemically immobilizing it and reducing its solubility. Therefore,
the contaminants become less harmful and less mobile.
The report provides a basic summary of the S/S
process and its potential applicability across multiple
sites and conditions. This document also addresses
important factors to consider in the selection of S/S
treatment, such as S/S specifications to evaluate
performance, type of contaminants to be treated,
and cost considerations. Site specific case studies
illustrate where this technology has been successfully
applied and where there are limitations. Each case
study includes a brief project description, regulatory
status, S/S treatment process (including the binder
materials used), and a summary of the performance
data. Estimated treatment costs and  maintenance
activities are also included when available.

                                             In-Situ Treatment of Sludge Pit Wastes at the South 8th Street
                                             Landfill Superfund Site in West Memphis, Arkansas

                               ASSESSMENT REPORT
              Engineering and Design Manual, Design: In situ Thermal Remediation
               Steam Enhanced Extraction
                                                      This U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
                                                      Engineering and Design Manual, Design:  In situ
                                                      Thermal Remediation (ISTR) provides guidance
                                                      and background for screening and selection of
                                                      ISTR technologies, including steam enhanced
                                                      extraction, electrical  resistivity heating, and
                                                      thermal conductive heating.  This document is
                                                      intended to help distinguish proper applications
                                                      of the technology and identify important design,
                                                      operational, and monitoring issues relevant to
                                                      government oversight personnel. The following
                                                      topics  are included:  fundamental processes
                                                      of ISTR performance, site characterization for
                                                      ISTR technology screening and design, design
                                                      considerations, cost and performance results,
                                                      monitoring requirements and  approaches, and
                                                      system shut down. The manual identifies specific
issues related to implementation of ISTR technology, including regulatory considerations, contracting, safety, and
patent and licensing. Specific applications of ISRT technologies are summarized where information is available.
John Kingscott, a long-time supporter and original member of the FRTR, retired in July 2010 after an illustrious 36-year
career as a dedicated public servant at EPA. John distinguished himself through his pioneering efforts in introducing and
mainstreaming innovative technologies for hazardous waste site remediation. John helped to organize the FRTR to improve
collaboration among federal agencies involved in waste site cleanup. Over the years, John was a tireless advocate for the
FRTR. John conceptualized the FRTR cost and performance case study initiative and, in June of 1996, the USEPA and the
Air and Waste Management Association presented the EPA Science Achievement Award in Waste Management to John
for advancing acceptance of innovative technologies through development of a national framework for documenting
 cost and performance of remediation projects.
               August 2010 (EPA-530-F-10-001) - ORDERING INFORMATION

This FRTR fact sheet is available free of charge from the U.S. EPA National Service Center for Environmental Publications
(NSCEP), while supplies last. To order, mail a request to:

                     U.S. EPA/National Service Center for Environmental Publications
                                          P.O. Box 42419
                                       Cincinnati, OH 45242
                                     Or FAX to  (513) 489-8695.
                In addition, telephone orders may be placed at (800) 490-9198 or (513) 489-8190.


National Service Center for
Environmental Publications
P.O. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OH 45242
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
August 2010
                       Office of Solid Waste and
                       Emergency Response
   AUGUST 2010-