groundwater treatment technology resource guide · water treatment technology resource matrix,...

GROUND-WATERTREATMENT TECHNOLOGY

RESOURCE GUIDE

and

GROUND-WATERTREATMENT TECHNOLOGY

RESOURCE MATRIX

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

Technology Innovation OfficeWashington, D.C. 20460

September 1994

NOTICE

This document was prepared by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under EPA Contract Numbg^68-W2-0004, Option 2, Subcontract No. 92-001-01. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not 0constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. C.

This document represents a series of technology resource guides prepared by the Technology Innovation Office."These include the following technology guides: the Bioremediation Resource Guide (EPA/542/B-93/004); thePhysicaVChemical Treatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA/542/B-94/008); and the Soil Vapor ExtractionTreatment Technology Resource Guide (EPA/542/B-94/007).

Information is included in this document on how to obtain these additional resource guides.

FOREWORD

"fiIdentifying and accessing pertinent information resource tools that will help site cleanup managers evaluata^wnovativttechnologies is key to the broader use of these technologies. This Guide is intended to increase awardSss aboutechnical information and specialized support services/resources related to ground water treatment techfSfogies.

CL

Specifically, this document identifies a cross section of information intended to aid users in remedial decision-makingincluding: abstracts of field reports and guidance documents; computer systems/data bases; pertinent regulations ancassociated guidance documents; program hotlines; as well as Federal centers for ordering publications. In additionthe look-up format of this document allows the user to quickly scan available resources and access more detaileiabstracts, as desired.

Please let us know about additional information that could make this Guide (and others in the series) more useful t(you.

^JO .l MWalter W. Kovalick, Jr., Ph.D. VDirector, Technology Innovation Office

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document was prepared under the direction of Mr. John E. Quander and Mr. Michael Forlini, work assignmentmanagers for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Technology Innovation Office. The TecftriologyInnovation Office would like to thank the following EPA organizations and personnel for their expert review andassistance in the development of this document: Librarians in EPA Regions 1,4, and 8; the Center for EnvironmentalResearch and Information (CERI); ORD Laboratories (Edison, Kerr, and Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratories);Regional Technical Liaisons in Regions 7,8, and 10; Waste Program Offices in Regions 2 and 5; Regional EngineeringForum Members; the Office of Solid Waste; the Office of Underground Storage Tanks; and the RCRA/Superfund/OUST Hotline and Document Centers.

111

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY- ^

This Ground-Water Treatment Technology Resource Guide is intended to support decision-making by^'Regional and State Corrective Action permit writers. Remedial Project Managers (RPMs), On-Scene CoorSha-tors, contractors, and others responsible for the evaluation of technologies. This Guide directs managers o^itesbeing cleaned up under the RCRA, UST, and CERCLA waste programs to ground-water treatment technologyresource documents, databases, hotlines, and dockets and identifies regulatory mechanisms (e.g., ResearchDevelopment and Demonstration Permits) that have the potential to ease the implementation of ground-watertreatment at hazardous waste sites.

This Guide provides abstracts of representative examples of over 50 ground-water treatment technology guidance/workshop reports, overview documents, studies and demonstrations, and other resource guides. The Ground-Water Treatment Technology Resource Matrix, which accompanies this Guide, identifies the in situ treatmenttechnology and contaminants covered in each abstracted document. Information contained in this Guide is notintended to be all-inclusive, nor does the inclusion of information represent an endorsement by the U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA).

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................2D0

HOW TO ORDER DOCUMENTS LISTED IN THIS GUIDE ...................................................................6

SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGYINFORMATION/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.........................................................................................4

FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE RELEVANTTO GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES....................................................................... 7

ABSTRACTS OF GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES ........................... 8

REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ..............................................................................................................27

ORDER FORMS ................................................................................................................................... 29

GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE MATRIX....................... Back of Guide

INTRODUCTION

0EPA is committed to identifying the most effective and efficient means of addressing the thousands of hazardouswaste sites in the United States. Therefore, the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response's (OSWER's)Technology Innovation Office (TIO) at EPA is working in conjunction with the EPA Regions and researchcenters and industry to identify and further the implementation of innovative treatment technologies.

The goal of OSWER is to encourage the development and use of innovative hazardous waste treatment technolo-gies. One way of enhancing the use of these technologies is to ensure that decision-makers can avail themselvesof the most current information on technologies, policies, and other sources of assistance. This Guide wasprepared to help identify documents that can directly assist RPMs and permit-writers in investigating existinginformation on ground-water treatment technologies applications for contaminants usually found at RCRA, UST,and CERCLA sites.

HOW TO USE THIS GUIDE

When using this Guide to identify resource information on ground-water treatment technologies, you may wish totake the following steps:

1. Turn to the Ground-Water Treatment Technology Resource Matrix located in the back of this Guide.This matrix lists alphabetically by document type over 60 ground-water treatment-related documents andidentifies the type of information provided by each document, as well as a document ordering number.

2. Select the document(s) that appear to fit your needs based on the content information in the matrix.

3. Check the abstract identification code. This number refers to an abstract of the document. The numbercorresponds to a page number in the Guide and the letter corresponds to an abstract on that page.For example:

AbstractIdentification

Codepage 8 in the

8 A -1

Resource Guide

Abstract A on— page 8 of the

Resource Guide

4. Review the abstract that corresponds to the document in which you are interested to confirm that the docu-ment will fit your needs.

5. If the document appears to be appropriate, check the document number highlighted under the abstract. Forexample:

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/S-92/003

6. Turn to the section entitled "How to Order Documents Listed in this Guide" on page 3 of this Guide and orderyour document using the directions listed. You will find order forms identified in the section entitled "OrderForms," which begins on page 29 of this Guide.

7. When seeking information on technical assistance sources, turn to page 4 of this Guide.

8. To identify information on Federal regulations and guidance relevant to ground water treatment technologies,turn to page 7 of this Guide.

9. If you would like to comment on this Guide or would like additional information, turn to page 27 of thisGuide and follow the directions for mailing or faxing your comments/questions.

HOW TO ORDER DOCUMENTS LISTED IN THIS GUIDE——————————————————————————————^

Documents listed in this Guide are available through a variety of sources. When ordering documents listed in tke5"Ground-Water Treatment Technology Abstracts" section of this Guide, use the number listed in the bar below T-ithe abstract. If using the Ground-Water Treatment Technology Resource Matrix in the back of the Guide, SSSthe number listed below the document title. If multiple document ordering numbers are identified, select the S?appropriate number based on the directions below. EPA/530, EPA/540, EPA/600, and EPA/625 documents maybe available through the Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI); EPA/540 and EPA/542 docu-ments may be obtained through the National Center for Environmental Publications and Information (NCEPI);and EPA/530 may be obtained through the RCRA Information Center (RIC). These document repositoriesprovide in-stock documents free of charge, but document supplies may be limited. Documents obtained throughthe National Technical Information Service (NTIS) are available for a fee; therefore, prior to purchasing a docu-ment through NTIS, you may also wish to review a copy at a technical or university library, or a public librarythat houses government documents.

Document Type Document Source

Publication numbers with the following prefixes:ADDEPBPR (free of charge)

NTIS5285 Port Royal RoadSpringfield, VA 22161(703) 487-4650fax requests to (703) 321-85478:30 a.m. - 5 p.m.. Eastern Time.

NTIS provides documents for a fee. The "NTIS Order Form." included in the "Order Forms" section of this Guide, can be used toorder from NTIS.

Publications with the following numbers:EPA/530 (limited collection)EPA/540 (limited collection)EPA/600EPA/625

Center for Environmental Research Information(CERI)Cincinnati, OH 45268(513)569-75628:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.. Eastern Time.

Out of stock documents may be ordered from NCEPI or may be purchased from NTIS.

Publications with the following numbers: National Center for EnvironmentalEPA/540 Publications and Information (NCEPI)EPA/542 11029 Kenwood Road, Building 5

Cincinnati, OH 45242(513)891-6561fax requests to (513) 891-66858 a.m. - 5 p.m.. Eastern Time.

A document title or number is needed to place an order with NCEPI. Some out of stock documents may be ordered from CERI ormay be purchased from NTIS.

RCRA Information Center (RIC)401 M St., S.W. Mailcode: 5305Washington, DC 20460(202) 260-93279 a.m. - 4 p.m.. Eastern Time.

"Office of Solid Waste Publications Order Form," included in the "Order Forms" section of this Guide can be used to order fromthe RIC.

Publications with EPA/530 numbers

If you have difficulty finding a document or wish to obtain EPA/510 documents, call:RCRA/Superfund/OUST Hotline............................................ 800-424-9346,703-412-9810, TDD: 800-553-7672,703-412-3323

Operates Monday-Friday, 8:30 a.m. - 7:30 p.m.. Eastern Time.Hotline staff can help EPA staff or members of the public locate documents and assist callers with placing document orders.

SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGYINFORMATION/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

•nyNumerous computer-based bulletin boards, regulatory hotlines, dockets, databases, catalogs/bibliographies, and pqg^dicalsare also available. These resources provide technical information on ground-water treatment technology and othei.innovativetechnologies and guide you to additional valuable resources. Most bulletin board services are provided free of charge.

BULLETIN BOARDS:

* Alternative Treatment TechnologiesInformation Center (ATTIC) data line..703-908-2137L/sers can access this collection of hazardous waste data-bases through a bulletin board. Provides hazardous wasteabstracts, news bulletins, conference information, and amessage board.

Help Line 703-908-2138Provides information on access to ATTIC.

• Cleanup Information Bulletin(CLU-IN)data line .................................301-589-8366Provides hazardous waste professionals with current infor-mation on innovative technologies via a bulletin board.Provides information bulletins, message and on-file ex-change, and on-line databases and directories.

Help Line ............................................... 301-589-8368Addresses questions about CLU-IN access and contents;addresses problems with the service.

• Office of Research and Development (ORD)Dataline.................................................800-258-9605Bulletin Board Service (BBS)Data line .................................................513-569-7610Provides a bibliography of over 19,000 documents and amessage board.

Help Line ............................................... 513-569-7272Provides information on access to and contents of the ORDBBS.

CATALOGS/BIBLIOGRAPHIES/DIRECTORIES:

• Accessing Federal Data Bases for Contaminated SiteClean-Up Technologies, Third Edition, September 1993EPA/542/B-93/008Provides information on those systems maintaining data onremedial technologies, including information on data ele-ments, system uses, hardware and software requirements,and access.

• Catalog of Hazardous and Solid Waste Publications,Sixth Edition EPA/530-B-92-001Catalogs Office of Solid Waste policy directives, guidancedocuments, brochures, Regulatory Development Branchmemos, and other documents relevant to hazardous andsolid waste.

• Compendium of Superfund Program PublicationsEPA/540/8-91/014, NTIS PR 881Provides abstracts and ordering information for fact sheets,directives, publications, and computer materials onSuperfund. Use the document ordering directions to obtainthe Compendium.

• Federal Publications onAlternativeand InnovSffve Treat-ment Technologies for Corrective Action and SiteRemediation, Third Edition, September 1993EPA/542/B-93/007L/ste Federal publications on innovative treatment technolo-gies, including thermal, biological, and physical/chemicaprocesses; technology survey reports; treatability studiesand reports on ground water and community relations.

• Ground-Water Research, Technical Assistance Direc-tory, Third Edition EPA/600/9-91/006L/ste research contacts in EPA Headquarters and Regiona.offices. In addition, the directory provides brief organiza-tional descriptions of the ground-water research program foieach ORD office.

• Literature Review of Nonbiological Remediation Tech-nologies Which May Be Applicable to Fertilizer/Agrichemical Dealer SitesNTIS DE93003877/XABThis bulletin provides a general literature overview of themore prominent nonbiologicalremediation technologies thaimay be applicable to fertilizer/agrichemical dealer sites.

• Literature Survey of Innovative Technologies for Haz-ardous Waste Site Remediation, 1987-1991EPA/542/B-92/004, NTIS PB93-105617Provides a survey of publications useful to those investigat-ing innovative technologies. Includes information on currenidevelopments and identifies references to support addi-tional research.

• Selected Alternative and Innovative Treatment Tech-nologies for Corrective Action and Site Remediation,November 1993 UpdateEPA/542/B-93/010Provides a list of EPA information resources related to theuse of alternative and innovative treatment technologies.including guidance documents, study results, bulletins, anadatabases.

• Technical Assistance Directory, July 1993EPA/600/K-93/006L/ste the programs, areas of expertise, and primary contactsin each of the major Office of Research and Development(ORD) operations.

DATABASES/SOFTWARE:

• DIALOG Database............................... 800-3-DIALOGContains files relevant to hazardous waste including:Enviroline, CA Search, Pollution Abstracts, Compendex,Energy Science and Technology, National Technical Infor-mation Service (NTIS), and others.

NTIS DatabaseContains abstracts of government-sponsored research, development, anaengineering analyses prepared by approximately 250 Federal agencies andsome State and local governments. Accessible via the DIALOG system.

SOURCES OF GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGYINFORMATION/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE (CONT'D)

• FEDWORLDTo access via modem .To access via Internet.192.239.92.201Allows access to more than 100 Federally-operated on-linecomputer systems, including eight environmentally relatedsystems, under a single umbrella. Environmental systemsinclude the Alternative Treatment Technology InformationCenter, the Waste Water Treatment Information Exchange,the CLU-IN (Superfund) Bulletin Board, the Clean-Up Stan-dards and Outreach Bulletin Board, the Office of Researchand Development Bulletin Board, and the Pesticide Informa-tion Network. FEDWORLD operates 24 hours a day, sevendays a week, free of charge.

Help Line...............................................703-487-4608Answers questions about access and contents.

• Records of Decision System (RODs)To get information on accessingRODs .....................................................703-271-5400Contains the full text of all signed RODs for hazardous wasteclean-up sites nationwide. Direct access to RODS is avail-able to EPA personnel and organizations that have relevantEPA contracts. Regional libraries will provide public citizenswith ROD information.

• Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory TreatabilityDatabaseTo fax a request.................................... 513-891-6685To send a request NCEPI

P.O. Box 42419Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419

Contains extensive review of the removal and destruction of1,200 chemicals in both aqueous and solid media. Send afax to the above number or mail a request to the aboveaddress to order, free of charge, the database on3 1/2" disk.

• Vendor Information System for InnovativeTreatment Technologies (VISITT)....... 800-245-4505Contains current information on the availability, performance,and cost of innovative technologies to remediate hazardouswaste sites.

DOCKETS:

• Federal Facilities Docket Hotline ........800-548-1016Provides the name, address, NPL status, agency, andRegion for the Federal facilities listed on the Federal Facili-ties Docket. Facilities are on the docket because theyreported being a RCRA TSDF or having spilled or having thepotential to release CERCLA hazardous waste. OperatesMonday - Friday, 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.. Eastern Time.

• Exposure Models Library and Integrated Model Evalua-tionEPA/600/C-92/002Presents about 90 exposure models for determining fate andtransport in various environmental media.

................703-321-8020telnet fedworld.gov or

fs• OUST Docket.........................................202-260-9720 ^

Provides documents and regulatory information pertinent to^RCRA Subtitle I (the Underground Storage Tank program f^Operates Monday - Friday, 9a.m. -4:30 p.m.. Eastern TimeC,.

• RCRA Information Center.................... 202-260-9327 ,Indexes and provides public access to all regulatory materi-als supporting the Agency's actions under RCRA, and dis-seminates current Office of Solid Waste publications. Oper-ates Monday - Friday, 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.. Eastern Time.

• Super-fund Docket................................. 202-260-3046Provides access to Superfund regulatory documents,Superfund Federal Register Notices, and RODs. OperatesMonday - Friday, 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.. Eastern Time.

HOTLINES/REGULA TORY/TECHNICAL ASSIS-TANCE:

• Ground-Water and Drinking-WaterResource Center................................... 202-260-7786Distributes ground-water and drinking-water publicationsand maintains a bibliographic database on Office of Ground-Water and Drinking-water documents. Operates Monday -Friday, 8:30 a.m. -5p.m., Eastern Time.

• Ground-Water Fate and Transport TechnologySupport Center .....................................405-436-8603Provides technical support on general ground-waterremediation technologies and provides a catalog of variousground-water remediation technologies. Operates Monday- Friday, 8 a.m. - 4 p.m., Central Time.

• RCRA/Superfund/OUST Hotline .........800-424-9346,703-412-9810, TDD: 800-553-7672, 703-412-3323Provides regulatory assistance related to RCRA, CERCLA,and UST programs. Serves as a liaison between theregulated community and EPA personnel and providesinformation on the availability of relevant documents. Oper-ates Monday - Friday, 8:30 a.m. - 7:30 p.m.. Eastern Time.

• Superfund Health Risk TechnicalSupport Center .....................................513-569-7300Provides EPA Regional Superfund risk assessors. Stateagencies, and those working under EPA contract with tech-nical, typically chemical-specific, support and risk assess-ment review. Operates Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.,Eastern Time.

• TSCA Hotline......................................... 202-554-1404Answers public and private regulatory questions on TSCA.Refers callers to appropriate EPA contacts, and takes TSCA-relevant document orders. Operates Monday - Friday,8:30 a.m. -5p.m., Eastern Time.

INFORMATION CENTER:

• National Center for EnvironmentalPublications and Information (NCEPI) 513-891-6561To fax a request....................................513-891-6685Stores and distributes to public and private callers alimited supply of most EPA publications, videos, posters,

SOURCES OF GROUND-WATERINFORMATION/TECHNICAL

TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY S>ASSISTANCE (CONT'D) S

and other multi-media materials. Callers should know _ . ... ,. , _ . t~~>document titles or numbers when calling. The following - ^S'0" 4 ^ (Atlanta, GA)---404-347-^'6

documents can be obtained from NCEPI, while supplies lax •—••—•••— •———_••..................».....404-347-4486Iggf Operates Monday - Friday, 8a.m. - 3:45p.m., Eastern Time'Bioremediation in the Field - Region 5 Library (Chicago, IL) .........312-353-2022A periodical devoted to bioremediation that contains 140 potential Fax ..................................................... 312-353-1155applications of bioremediation, including bioremediation lor remedy of Operates Monday - Friday, 7:30a m. - 5p.m., Central Timecontaminated ground water.Ground Water Currents - Region 6 Library (Dallas, TX)........... 214-665-6427A newsletter that reports on innovative in situ and ex situ ground-water Fax ..................................................... 214-665-2146remediation technologies to be applied in the field. Operates Monday - Friday, 7:30a.m. - 4:30p.m., Central

LIBRARIES: Time

. The EPA Headquarters and Regional Libraries provide infor- - \w 7 Library (Kansas c^' Ks) ;:mation services covering a wide range of environmental and „ ~7""' ',i""' ""'£-' ",""(:l""",""'c"on,, „, ,•'„„*,„» -r; ,related subjects, including hazardous waste, air and water Operates Monday - Friday, 9a.rn.-5.30p.rn., CentralTirnepollution and control, environmental law solid waste, toxic . p , g (Denver, CO) ........303-293-1444substances, and test methods. These libraries also provide pax 303294-1087acollectionofmaterialsonsocial,economic,legislative,legal, p^//c'/nformafcn'Cente7opera^administrative, and management projects related to all as- g . 5 ^ Operates Monday - Friday. 12p.m. -Pects of environmental policy. EPA Headquarters and Re- 4p.m., Mountain Timegional Libraries contact information is provided below. In 'addition to resources available through EPA libraries, users Reoion 9 Librarymay also access relevant documents through university li- - Francisco, CA) ..........................415-744-1510branes or other public libranes that house government docu- p 415-744-1474me Operates Monday - Friday, 9a.m. - 5p.m., Western Time- EPA Headquarters Library ...............202-260-5921 Reoion 10 Library

Operates Monday - Friday, 10a.m. - 2p.m.. Eastern Time ' (se-attle, WA)....................... 206-553-1289 or 1259Caw SOfi-'iR^-ft'inQ

- Region 1 Library (Boston, MA) ........617-565-3300 Operates"Monday "F ay"9a:m:"-"4p:/77., Western Time

Operates Monday-Friday, 8-.30a.rn. - 5p.m., Eastern Time . RREUSite Superfund Videotape

- Region 2 Library (New York, NY)..... 212-26^2881 ^2scompos;te'wtfeotepes^^' ••—"•———————•—•—•——— ••A"^ —•"0<— produced documentaries on specific Superfund InnovativeOperates Monday - Friday (except Tuesday), 8-.30a.rn. - Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program demonstrations.5p.m., Lastem lime Operates Monday- Friday, 8-.30a.rn.- 4:30p.m.. Eastern TimeOperates Tuesday, 1p.m. - 5p.m., Eastern Time •

- Region 3 Library (Philadelphia, PA) 215-597-0580Fax .....................................................215-597-7906Operates Monday - Friday, 8a.m. - 4p.m., Eastern Time

FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE RELEVANT TOGROUND WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

This table lists pertinent RCRA regulations, with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and Federal Register (TT^)citations and provides information on guidance documents relevant to these regulations. In addition, States may etectto have more stringent regulations than the Federal regulations identified here. Contact your State environmentalprotection agency when considering the applicability of any of the following Federal regulations. ^

CITATION REGULATION DESCRIPTION

40 CFR Part 261 Treatability Study Provides for treatability studiesFebruary 18,1994 Exemption under RCRA59 FR 8362

40 CFR §270.65July 15,198550 FR 28728

40 CFR §270.42(0)December 10,198752 FR 46946

40 CFR §270.42(0)March 7,198954 FR 9596(Changes certain permitmodifications for hazardouswaste)

40 CFR §268.40June 1,199055 FR 22686(Presents third-thirdwastes)

40 CFR §268.44(h) Variance from an LDR Allows for a site-specificAugust 17,1988 Treatment Standard treatability variance to be53 FR 31143, 31185, 31188, issued as a nonrulemaking31196,31199,31202 procedure(Presents final rule on first-third wastes and nationalcapacity variances)

40 CFR §264.552 Corrective Action Encourages treatment,February 16, 1993 Management including use of innovative58 FR 8658 Unn (CAMU) treatment, instead of

containment

40 CFR §264.1030 Air Emission Standards for Sets forth standards for processJune 21,1990 Proceu Vents vents associated with RCRA55 FR 25454 permitted hazardous waste

facilities that manage wastewith organic concentrations ofat least 10 ppm

40 CFR §264.1050June 21,199055 FR 25454

40 CFR §264.90July 26,198247 FR 32274

GRoundwater Information Tracking System with STATistical Analysis Capability (GRITS/STAT) Is a comprehensive ground-water databasesystem designed to store, analyze, and report data generated from ground water monitoring programs such as facilities regulated by RCRASubtitles C & D. GRITS/STAT is IBM PC/AT compatible, includes a User's Manual, and is available as an EPA ORD Publication (EPA625/11-91/002). For more information contact Jack Teuschler at EPA/ORD/RREL (513) 567-7314.

Research Development Allows the issuance of a RCRAand Demonstration permit for a pilot scale studyPermits pertaining to an innovative or

experimental technology

Subpart X Miscellaneous Allows the issuance of a RCRAUnits permit for a miscellaneous unit

RCRA Permit Modification Allows the permitting agency toRule: Temporary grant a facility a temporaryAuthorization authorization to perform certain

activities (e.g., cleanups,corrective action, and closureactivities) for up to 180 days

Land Disposal Restrictions Sets forth RCRA hazardous(LOR) Subpart D - waste treatment standardstreatment Standards

Air Emission Standards for Sets forth standards for processEquipment Leaks vents associated with RCRA

permitted hazardous wastefacilities that manage wastewith organic concentrations ofat least 10% by weight

Ground Water Monitoring Sets forth ground watermonitoring regulations forRCRA permitted treatment,storage, and disposal facilities

GUIDANCE

Conducting Treatability Studies UnderRCRA (7/92, OSWER Directive9380.3-09FS, NTIS PB92-963-501)

Guidance Manual for ResearchDevelopment and Demonstration Permits(7/86, EPA/530-SW-86-008, OSWERDirective 9527.00-1 A, NTISPB86-229192/AS)

No guidance specifically related toground-water technologies is available.

Modifying RCRA Permits (9/89,EPA/530-SW-89-050)

Land Disposal Restrictions Summary ofRequirements(2/91, OSWER Directive 9934.0-1 A, NTISPB91-190835)

Regional Guide: Issuing Site-SpecificTreatability Variances for ContaminatedSoils and Debris from LDRs (1/92, OSWERDirective 9380.3-08FS, NTIS PB92-963284)

No Migration Variances to the HazardousWaste Land Disposal Prohibitions; AGuidance Manual for Petitioners (7/92, NTISPB92-207695)

Environmental Fact Sheet:EPA Issues Final Rules for CorrectiveAction Management Units and TemporaryUnits(1/93, EPA/530-F-93-001)

Hazardous Waste TSOF - TechnicalGuidance Document for RCRA Air EmissionStandards for Process Vents and EquipmentLeaks (7/90, EPA/450-3-89-021, NTISPB90-263880)

Hazardous Waste TSDF • TechnicalGuidance Document for RCRA Air EmissionStandards for Process Vents and EquipmentLeaks (7/90, EPA/450-3-89-021, NTISPB90-263880)

RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring: DraftTechnical Guidance (11/92,EPA/530-R-93-001, NTIS PB93-139350)

Statistical Analysis of Ground-WaterMonitoring Data at RCRA Facilities; DraftAddendum to Interim Final Guidance(EPA/53WR-93/003, PB89-151047)

Handbook of RCRA Ground-WaterMonitoring Constituents: Chemical andPhysical Properties (40 CFR Part 264,Appendix IX, June 1992)(EPA/530/R-92/002, PB92-233287)

GRITS/STAT - A ground water informationsystem tracking system with statisticalanalysis capability (EPA/625/11-91/002)

ABSTRACTS OF GROUND-WATER TREATMENTTECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

The following abstracts describe the contents of pertinent ground-water treatment technology documents, which are^Sga-nized alphabetically within each document type. Documents that address the same site are grouped together and lisS3inalphabetical order by site name. Document types included are: C.

Begins on Page

Guidance/Workshops ...........Overview Documents...........Studies and Demonstrations,Other Resource Guides.........

..8

..81425

To quickly identify documents pertinent to your interest area, see the Ground-Water Treatment Technology ResourceMatrix in the back of this Guide. The documents in the matrix are categorized using the document types identified aboveand can be cross-referenced with the abstracts using the code to the left of the document titles on the matrix. In an effort tolimit the number of resources listed here. Records of Decision (RODs), documents more than five years old, and mostproceedings are not included. Those seeking RODs or proceedings may wish to contact the hotlines, dockets, etc. listed onpage 4 of this Guide. These abstracts were pulled from the NTIS Database.

GUIDANCE/WORKSHOPS EPA Document Number: EPA/540/F-93/019

8A

Biotechnology Workgroup for Department of DefenseSoil and Ground Water Decontamination Applications,Final Report for Period Ending March 1989.Reuter, R. H., Life Systems, Inc., Cleveland, OH, NavalCivil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, CA, June 1991

NTIS Document Number: PB93-963327/XAB

The report discusses EPA's policy for categorizingbioremediation and soil vapor extraction sites as ConstructionCompletions. Technologies addressed are: in situ soil vaporextraction, in situ bioremediation, and ex situ bioremediation.

OVERVIEW DOCUMENTSNTIS Document Number: AD-A237 956/8/XAB

This report contains materials used in and generated by theDepartment of Defense Biotechnology Workshop on Soil andGround-Water Decontamination Applications. Variousbioremediation techniques for treating soil and water contami-nated with sludges, solvents, toxins, acids, bases, and heavymetals were discussed as well as the overall place of biotechnol-ogy in Installation Restoration programs. Among the specificapplications discussed were: biochemical sensors to determineenvironmental stress in organisms; in situ detoxification andbiodecontamination of pollutants in soils and waste streams;sequestration, removal, and recovery of metals in waste streamswith metal-binding proteins; and the use of vegetation to limitthe transport to sequester and/or to remove contaminants fromsoil or water.

8B

t——kAn Overview of Underground Storage Tank RemediationOptions.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC,October 1993

| EPA Document Number: E P A / 5 1 0 / F - 9 3 / 0 2 9 |

This document contains a series of fact sheets to answer basicquestions about selected alternative cleanup technologies andto provide an easy way to compare one another. The ground-water remediation technologies include: in situ air spargingwith soil vapor extraction, in situ bioremediation, in situbioventing combined with low flow air sparging (biosparging),and vacuum enhanced pump and treat.

NPL Construction Completion Definition at Bioremedia-tion and Soil Vapor Extraction Sites Directive.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC,June 1993

8D

Bioremediation.Thomas, J. M.; Ward, C. H.; Raymond, R. L.; Wilson, J. T.;and Loehr, R. C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,RobertS. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada,

Overview Documents

OK, National Center for Ground Water Research, Houston,TX, 1992

EPA Document Number: EPA/600/A-93/004

field projects. Finally, the research needed to advance in situbioremediation to become a reliable and acceptable tool isoutlined.

CI 9 B I <^9B


Bioremediation is defined in the article as the process by whichmicroorganisms are stimulated to rapidly degrade hazardousorganic contaminants to environmentally safe levels in soils,subsurface materials, water, sludges, and residues. Stimulationis achieved by the addition of nutrients and a terminal electronacceptor, usually oxygen, because most biological reactionsoccur faster under aerobic than anaerobic conditions. Underanaerobic conditions, nitrate has been used as the terminalelectron acceptor. The microorganisms use the contaminants asa food source and convert the contaminants into biomass andharmless by-products of metabolism such as CO, and inorganicsalts. Usually bioremediation is used to degrade contaminantsthat are sorbed to surfaces or dissolved in water rather than todegrade pure chemicals. As a result, the process is used inconjunction with other techniques in remediation of contami-nated sites. The contaminants can be biodegraded in situ orremoved and placed in a bioreactor, which can be placed off orat the site where the contamination occurred.

9A

Critical Review of In Situ Bioremediation, TopicalReport, January 1990-March 1992.Rittmann, B. E.; Valocchi, A. J.; Seagren, E.; Ray, C.; andWrenn, B., Dlinois University at Urbana-Champaign,Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, North DakotaUniversity, Grand Forks, ND; Energy and EnvironmentalResearch Center, Gas Research Institute, Chicago, IL; U.S.Department of Energy, Morgantown Energy TechnologyCenter, Morgantown, WV, August 1992


In situ bioremediation, which is the managed, in-place cleanupof contaminated ground water aquifers and surface soils bymicroorganisms, is a promising technology because it is versa-tile and can have significant economic advantages. Manycommon contaminants are biodegradable, and new microbialcapabilities for degradation are being discovered all the time.Success in the field and in laboratory studies point out thepromise. On the other hand, the promises are not yet fulfilled,.mainly because of the complexity of the subsurface situation.The report provides a comprehensive and in-depth criticalreview of in situ bioremediation. It is organized to evaluate thepossibilities and restrictions inherent in all facets of in situbioremediation, including microbiology, hydrodynamics, en-gineering, and legal and other nontechnical aspects. Several ofthe key conclusions are illustrated by case studies of successful

00C

Evaluation of Ground-Water Extraction Remedies:Phase 2, Volume 1, Summary Report.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emer-gency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC, February1992


The report is the second phase of a study to evaluate theeffectiveness of ground-water extraction systems being used toremediate ground-water contamination at hazardous wastesites. The report was prepared in two volumes. Volume 1contains an executive summary and chapters which discuss thepurpose, methodologies, and conclusions of the project.

9C

Fifth Forum on Innovative Hazardous Waste TreatmentTechnologies: Domestic and International, Proceedings,Chicago, Illinois, May 3-5,1994.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Office of Research and Development, Washington,DC, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati,OH, May 1994

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/R-94/503

OnMay3-5,1994, theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency'sTechnology Innovation Office and Risk Reduction Engineer-ing Laboratory hosted an international conference in Chicago,Illinois to exchange solutions to hazardous waste treatmentproblems. During the conference, scientists and engineersrepresenting government agencies, industry, and academiaattended over 40 technical presentations and case studies de-scribing domestic and international technologies for the treat-ment of waste, sludges, and contaminated soils at uncontrolledhazardous waste disposal sites. A session was also held onopportunities in research and commercialization, which in-cluded presentations on export assistance programs and part-nerships with EPA in developing innovative technologies. Thiscompendium includes the abstracts of the presentations fromthe conference and many of the posters that were on display.

9D

Fourth Forum on Innovative Hazardous Waste Treat-ment Technologies: Domestic and International, Techni-cal Papers, San Francisco, California, November 17-19,1992.

Overview Documents

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Office of Research and Development, Washington,DC, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati,OH, February 1993


10B| 1ua | 0T"!

Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Sta^Report, Fifth Edition. ^Fiedler, L., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofSolid Waste and Emergency Response, Technology Innova-tion Office, Washington, DC, September 1993

On November 17-19,1992, the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency's Technology Innovation Office and Risk ReductionEngineering Laboratory, the Department of Energy, the Corpsof Engineers, and the California Environmental ProtectionAgency, hosted an international conference in San Francisco,California, to exchange solutions to hazardous waste treatmentproblems. This conference was attended by approximately1,000 representatives from the U.S. and 25 foreign countries.During the conference, scientists and engineers representinggovernment agencies, industry, and academia attended 42technical presentations and case studies describing domesticand international technologies for the treatment of waste, slud-ges, and contaminated soils at uncontrolled hazardous wastedisposal sites. Technologies included physical/chemical, bio-logical, thermal, and stabilization techniques. Presentationswere made by EPA, their Superfund Innovative TechnologyEvaluation (SITE) program participants, other Federal andState agencies and their contractors, international scientists,and vendors. This document contains abstracts of the presen-tations from the conference and many of the posters that wereon display.



This annual report contains site-specific information onSuperfund sites (both remedial and emergency response ac-tions) and non-Superfund sites (within the Departments ofDefense and Energy) where innovative treatment technologieshave been or are being used. Innovative treatment technologiesare treatment technologies for which a lack of data on cost andperformance makes their selection and use at Superfund sitesmore difficult. The report documents the use of the followinginnovative treatment technologies to treat ground water in situ;soils, sediments, sludge, and solid-matrix wastes; bioremediation(ex situ); bioremediation (in situ); chemical treatment; dechlo-rination; in situ flushing; in situ vitrification; soil vapor extrac-tion; soil washing; solvent extraction; thermal desorption; andother technologies.

10C

10A

Guidance for Evaluating the Technical Impracticabilityof Ground-Water Restoration.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC, Septem-ber 1993

Innovative Treatment Technologies: Overview andGuide to Information Sources.Quander, J. and Kingscott, J., U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,Technology Innovation Office, Washington, DC, October1991

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/9-91/002EPA Document Number: EPA/540/R-93/080

NTIS Document Number: PB92-179001'/XABNTIS Document Number: PB93-963507/XAB

This guidance clarifies how EPA will determine whether groundwater restoration is technically impracticable and what alterna-tive measures or action must be undertaken to ensure that thefinal remedy is protective of human health and the environment.Topics covered include the types of technical data and analysesneeded to support EPA's evaluation of a particular site and thecriteria used to make a determination. As technical impractica-bility (TI) decisions are part of the process of site investigation,remedy selection, remedial action, and evaluation of remedyperformance, the guidance also briefly discusses the overallframework for decision making during these phases of sitecleanup.

The document is a compilation of information on innovativetreatment technologies being used in the Superfund programand is intended to assist site project managers, consultants,responsible parties, and owner/operators in their efforts toidentify current literature on innovative treatment technologiesfor hazardous waste remediation on corrective action. Thetechnologies addressed in the guide include the following:incineration, thermal desorption, soil washing, solvent extrac-tion, dechlorination, bioremediation, vacuum extraction, vitri-fication, and ground-water treatment. Also included in theguide for the user's reference are summary statistics of EPA'sselection and application of innovative treatment technologiesbetween 1982 and 1990. In addition, for each technology the

10

Overview Documents

guide provides a detailed description, status of developmentand application, strengths, weaknesses, and materials handlingconsiderations. A comprehensive bibliography for each tech-nology can be found within each chapter.

1 1 A

In Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Ground Water.Sims, J. L.; Suflita, J. M.; and Russell, H. H.; U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste andEmergency Response, Washington, DC, February 1992



sions and examples of developed technologies, the report alsoprovides insights to emerging technologies that are at theresearch level of formation, ranging from theoretical concepts,through bench-scale inquiries, to limited field-scale investiga- /v^tions. The report centers around a number of bioremediation y^technologies applicable to the various subsurface compart- ^xments into which contaminants are distributed. The processes ("">that drive these remediation technologies are discussed in depth ©along with the attributes that direct their applicability and c,limitations according to the phases into which the contaminantshave partitioned. These discussions include in situ remediationsystems, air sparging and bio venting, use of electron acceptorsalternate to oxygen, natural bioremediation, and introduction oforganisms into the subsurface. The contaminants of majorfocus in the report are petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinatedsolvents.

In-situ bioremediation, where applicable, appears to be a poten-tial cost-effective and environmentally acceptable remediationtechnology. Suflita (1989) identified characteristics of the idealcandidate site for successful implementation of in-situbioremediation. These characteristics included: (l)a homoge-neous and permeable aquifer, (2) a contaminant originatingfrom a single source; (3) a low ground-water gradient; (4) nofree product; (5) no soil contamination; and (6) an easilydegraded, extracted, or immobilized contaminant. Obviously,few sites meet these characteristics. However, development ofinformation concerning site-specific geological and microbio-logical characteristics of the aquifer, combined with knowledgeconcerning potential chemical, physical, and biochemical fateof the wastes present, can be used to develop a bioremediationstrategy for a less-than-ideal site.

1 1 B^sstSsess^i'Si^

In Situ Bioremediation of Ground Water and GeologicalMaterial: A Review of Technologies, Research ReportNorris, R. D.; Hinchee, R. E.; Brown, R.; and McCarty, P.L.; Semprini, L.; Dynamac Corporation, Ada, OK, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Robert S. Kerr Environ-mental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, July 1993



The report provides the reader with a detailed background of thetechnologies available for the bioremediation of contaminatedsoil and ground water. The document has been prepared forscientists, consultants, regulatory personnel, and others whoare associated in some way with the restoration of soil andground water at hazardous waste sites. It provides the mostrecent scientific understanding of the processes involved withsoil and ground-water remediation, as well as a definition of thestate-of-the-art technologies with respect to circumstances oftheir applicability and their limitations. In addition to discus-

1 1 C

In Situ Bioremediation of Ground Water, SummaryPaper.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Robert S. Ken-Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, January 1993



The Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory(RSKERL) has developed a number of issue papers and brief-ing documents that are designed to exchange up-to-date infor-mation related to the remediation of contaminated soil andground water at hazardous waste sites. In an attempt to makethe content of thes& documents available to a wider audience,RSKERL is developing a series of summary papers that arecondensed versions of the original documents. There are anumber of techniques that may potentially be used for dealingwith problems resulting from the contamination of groundwater with organic compounds. Ground water can sometimesbe treated in place using chemical or biological processes. Anemerging technology for the in situ remediation of groundwater is the use of microorganisms to degrade contaminantsthat are present in aquifer materials. Although in situbioremediation has been used for a number of years in therestoration of ground water contaminated with petroleum hy-drocarbons, its application to other classes of contaminants isrelatively recent. This is discussed in the summary paper.

1 1 D

In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Ground Water: AnInventory of Research and Field Demonstrations andStrategies for Improving Ground Water RemediationTechnologies.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid

11

Overview Documents

Waste and Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Washington, DC, January 1993

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of^Qearchand Development, Risk Reduction Engineering LatBSBtory,Cincinnati, OH, November 1993 f-^

EPA Document Number: EPA/500/K-93/001


The predominance of ground-water contamination at hazard-ous waste sites and the dearth of methods to efficiently treat thiscontamination is a problem that the U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency (EPA) is examining. The contaminated groundwater found at most Superfund sites is often the limiting factorfor complete site remediadon. The purpose of the document isto describe recent research, development, and application oftechnologies that either treat ground-water contaminants inplace or improve the solubility and mobility of contaminants toenhance pump-and-treat remediadon effecdveness. The reportdiscusses techniques that can be applied in situ and excludespumping methodologies or surface treatment systems. Inaddidon, the publicadon presents conclusions based on obser-vadons of the survey. Finally, strategies for action for stake-holders concerned with in situ ground-water technology devel-opment are presented. The study has not defined the extent oracdvides of research and development outside of EPA-sup-ported groups.

Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)Program: Innovation Making a Difference.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Researchand Development, Risk Reducdon Engineering Laboratory,Cincinnati, OH, May 1994

EPA Document Number: EPA540/F-94/505

The SITE Program encourages commercialization of innova-tive technologies for characterizing and remediating hazardouswaste site contamination through four components: demon-stration; emerging technology; monitoring and measurementprograms; and technology transfer activities. The informationpresented in this brochure addresses the demonstration segmentof the program. The demonstration component evaluatespromising innovative remedial technologies on site and pro-vides reliable performance, cost, and applicability informationfor making cleanup decisions. This document lists the advan-tages of the SITE Program, as well as statistics such as thepercentage ofRODs using innovative technology, cost savingswith innovative technologies for 17 sites, and market activitiesas reported by SITE vendors.

EPA Document Number:

NTIS Document Number:

EPA/540/R-93/526

PB93-163053/XAB

0-G:.———•

This document contains a collection of abstracts describinginnovative technologies being implemented in the SuperfundInnovative Technology Evaluation Program for treating con-taminated ground water, soils, and sludges. Each technologyprofile contains a: I) technology description, 2) discussion ofwaste applicability, 3) schematic diagram or photograph of theprocess, and 4) summary of demonstration results. The docu-ment contains over 30 abstracts concerning ground-waterremediation.

12C

Surfactants and Subsurface Remediation, JournalArticle: Published in Environmental Science Technology,v26nl2, pg. 2324-2330,1992.West, C. C. and Harwell, J. H., U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency, Robert S. Kerr Environmental ResearchLaboratory, Ada, OK, Oklahoma University ResearchInstitute, OK, 1992

| EPA Document Number: E P A / 6 0 0 / J - 9 3 / 0 0 5 |


Becauseof the limitations of pump-and-treat technology, atten-tion is now focused on the feasibility of surfactant use toincrease its efficiency. Surfactants have been studied for use insoil washing and enhanced oil recovery. Although similaritiesexist between the applications, there are significant differencesin the objectives of the technologies and the limitations placedon surfactant use. This article reviews environmental studiesconcerned with the fate and transport of surface-active com-pounds in the subsurface environment and discuss key issuesrelated to their successful use for in situ aquifer remediation,particularly with respect to nonaqueous-phase liquids.

12D

Synopses of Federal Demonstrations of Innovative SiteRemediation Technologies.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Washington, DC, Prepared by the Member Agenciesof the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable,October 1993

Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program:Technology Profiles, Sixth Edition.

12

Overview Documents

EPA Document Number: EPA/542/B-93/009


This collection of abstracts describes demonstrations of inno-vative technologies to treat hazardous waste includingremediation costs and contacts. The collection is intended to bean information resource for hazardous waste site project man-agers for assessing the availability and viability of innovativetechnologies for treating contaminated ground water, soils, andsludge. It is also intended to assist government agencies incoordinating ongoing hazardous waste remediation technologyresearch initiatives, particularly those sponsored by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of En-ergy, and U.S. Department of Defense. In total 75 demonstra-tions in seven different categories are described.

developed and applied to remediate sites including biologicaltreatment, immobilization techniques, and in situ methods. The} tmanagement and disposal of hazardous wastes is changiiQpbecause of Federal and State legislation, as well as public-*concern. Future waste management systems will emphasize tSS?substitution of alternatives for the use of hazardous materi^S?and process waste recycling. On site treatment will alfobecome more frequently adopted.

13C

Technology Assessment of Soil Vapor Extraction and AirSparging.Loden, M. E.; Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc., Cambridge,MA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk ReductionEngineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, September 1992

EPA Document Number EPA/600/R-92/17313A

NTIS Document Number: PB93-100154/XABTCE Removal from Contaminated Soil and GroundWater.Russell, H.H.; Matthews, J.E.; and Sewell, G.W. Robert S.Kerr Environmental Laboratory, Ada, OK, U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Develop-ment, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,Technology Innovation Office, Washington, DC, January1992



The purpose of this paper is to present a synopsis ofphysiochemical properties and reactive mechanisms ofTrichlo-roethylene (TCE) and to delineate and discuss promisingremediation technologies that have been proposed and/or dem-onstrated for restoring TCE-contaminated subsurface environ-mental media. The technologies discussed include air stripping,granular activated carbon adsorption, soil venting, in-wellaeration, bioremediation of extracted ground waters/subsur-face air streams, and in situ bioremediation.

Air sparging, also called "in situ air stripping" and "in situvolatilization," injects air into the saturated zone to strip awayvolatile organic compounds (VOCs) dissolved in ground waterand adsorbed to soil. These volatile contaminants transfer in avapor phase to the unsaturated zone where soil vapor extraction(SVE) can then capture and remove them. In addition toremoving VOCs via mass transfer, the oxygen in the injected airenhances subsurface biodegradation of contaminants. Airsparging is a relatively new treatment technology. Researchefforts have not yet fully elucidated the scientific basis (orlimitations) of the system, nor completely defined the associ-ated engineering aspects. However, a substantial body ofavailable information describes the effectiveness and charac-teristics of air sparging systems. This document summarizesthe available literature and addresses case studies of practicalair sparging applications. It also identifies needs for furtherresearch.

Technology Catalogue, First Edition.Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Manage-ment, Office of Technology Development, Washington, DC,February 1994

Technologies to Remediate Hazardous Waste Sites.Faico, J.W., Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,Richland, WA, March 1990

DOE Document Number: DOE/EM-0138P

NTIS Document Number: DE90-011946/XAB

Technologies to remediate hazardous wastes must be matchedwith the properties of the hazardous materials to be treated, theenvironment in which the wastes are imbedded, and the desiredextent of remediation. Many promising technologies are being


The catalogue provides performance data on the technologiesdeveloped by the Office of Technology Development (OTD) toscientists and engineers assessing and recommending technicalsolutions within the Department's clean-up and waste manage-ment programs, as well as to industry, other Federal and State

13

Studies and Demonstrations

agencies, and academic community. The Technology Cata-logue features technologies that have been successfully demon-strated in the field through Integrated Demonstrations (IDs) andare considered sufficiently mature to be used in the near term.The catalogue also discusses the status of the development ofthese innovative technologies. Forty-three technologies arefeatured: 22 characterization/monitoring technologies; and 21remediation technologies.

]14A'

VOCs in Arid Soils: Technology Summary.U.S. Department of Energy, Office of EnvironmentalManagement, Office of Technology Development, Wash-ington. DC, February 1994

DOE Document Number: DOE/EM-0136P


The Office of Technology Development at the U.S. Departmentof Energy developed cost effective mechanisms for assemblinga group of related and synergistic technologies to evaluate theirperformance individually or as a complete system in correctingwaste management and environmental problems from cradle tograve called Integrated Demonstrations. An Integrated Dem-onstration for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in AridSoils is discussed in this document. The document discussestechnologies to clean up VOCs and associated contaminants insoil and groundwater at arid sites and includes information ondrilling, characterization and monitoring, retrieval of contami-nants, above ground treatment of contaminants, and in-groundtreatment of contaminants. Technologies discussed include,heavy-weight cone penetrometer drilling, directional drilling,ResonantSonic^ drilling, borehole samplers, halosnifs, por-table acoustic wave sensors, unsaturated wave apparatus, andsupercritical fluid extraction / field detection. Processes andtechnologies used to complete them which are discussed in-clude in-well vapor stripping, off-gas membrane separation,supported liquid membranes, steam reforming, turnable hybridplasma, and in situ bioremediation of groundwater.

STUDIES AND DEMONSTRATIONS

Documents Focusing on Test Design

Combining Treatability Studies and Site Characteriza-tion for Rational Design of In Situ Bioremediation UsingNitrate as an Electron Acceptor.Hutchins, S. R.; Kampbell, D. H.; Cook, M. L.; Pfeffer, F.M.; and Cosby, R. L.; U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory,Ada, OK, ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc., Ada,OK, Dynamac Corporation, Ada, OK, 1993


NTIS Document Number: PB93-221901/XAB -y-i———————————————————————CT-

Rational design relates laboratory treatability studi®at fieldscale to the distribution of contaminants and to theSesidencetime of remedial fluids. The electron acceptor is usually thelimiting factor in bioremediation. Ideally, the electron acceptorshould not be depleted as water or air moves across the regioncontaminated with oily phase material. When all of the con-taminated mass receives adequate supplies of electron accep-tor, the course of redemption should parallel that established inthe laboratory study. If regions of the contaminated mass arenot adequately supplied, the course ofremediadon at field scaleis not predicted in any straightforward way from the laboratorystudy. Rational design compares the residence time and con-centration of electron acceptor at field scale to the demanddemonstrated for the electron acceptor in the laboratory toensure that the engineered implementation of in situbioremediation is adequate.

Effects of Ground Water Chemistry on Co-Metabolismof Chlorinated Solvents by Methanotrophic Bacteria.Palumbo, A. V. and Strandberg, G. W., U.S. Department ofEnergy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN,1990

I NTIS Document Number: DE91-014223/XAB

Degradation of chlorinated alkenes such as trichloroethylene(TCE) by methanotrophic bacteria is a promising technologyfor the remediation of contaminated ground water. Ultimately,the success of this approach may be dependent on the influenceof ground-water chemistry on degradation rates and extent.TCE can rapidly be reduced to low levels in laboratory culturesgrowing on defined media. However, if major changes inground-water chemistry are necessary to achieve substantialTCE degradation, field application of processes (i.e., above-ground and in situ treatment) may be limited by cost or logisticproblems. For example, the presence of competitive inhibitorsmay limit the extent of TCE degradation. The goal of theresearch is to quantify the potential effects of ground-waterchemistry on the biodegradation of TCE by methanotrophs andto define concentrations of methane that need to be added to thesystem to produce maximum rates of TCE degradation. Thisincludes evaluation of major nutritional requirements (e.g.,PO^) in addition to the focus on competitive inhibition.

Experimental Evaluation of the Mathematical Model forIn Situ Aquifer Restoration Processes.Short, T. E. and Yeh, G. T., U.S. Environmental Protection

14


Agency, Robert S. Ken- Environmental Research Laboratory,Ada, OK, Pennsylvania State University, University Park,PA, U.S. Department of Civil Engineering, 1993


NTIS Document Number PB93-212363/XAB

This report discusses a project to develop, test, and evaluate insitu methods for immobilizing inorganic contaminants (tggtals,inorganic ions, and radionuclides) and destroying nitrfflfiS or-ganic contaminants, (primarily chlorinated hydrocarbona^-Thisresearch work is being performed for the U.S. DepartifiS&t ofEnergy through the In Situ Remediation Integrated Pr<$g&m.

______ CI 1 5 C |

An experimental investigation using an artificial aquifer wasconducted on in situ denitrification. Methanol substrate wasinjected into the aquifer to enable denitrifying bacteria toconvert the nitrates into nitrogen. The experiment in the studyprovided a database that was used to evaluate mathematicalsimulations of the processes involved. Numerical dispersionwas found to be a critical characteristic of the numericalsolution technique. Density drive and plugging of the aquiferdue to biological growths were found to be important processesthat need to be considered in future simulations.

Methodologies for Evaluating In Situ Bioremediation ofChlorinated Solvents, Research Report 21, August 19,1989 - June 19,1991.Semprini, L.; Grbic-Galic, D.; McCarty, P. L.; and Roberts,P. V.; Stanford University, CA, U.S. Department of CivilEngineering, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RobertS. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK,March 1992

EPA Document Number: EPA/600/R-92/04215A

NTIS Document Number: PB92-146943/XABIn Situ Bioremediation of Spills from UndergroundStorage Tanks: New Approaches for Site Characteriza-tion, Project Design, and Evaluation of Performance.Wilkson, J. T; Lowell, E. L., Michalowski, J.; Vandergrift,S.; and Callaway, R., U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory,Ada, OK, July 1989

EPA Document Number: EPA/600/S2-89/042


This report presents a systematic approach for the design of insitu bioremediation of hydrocarbon contamination in groundwater from the determination of the total quantity of hydrocar-bons in the aquifer to the utilization of that information in anactual field demonstration. This report explains why the totalquantity of hydrocarbons in an aquifer can only be determinedby collecting cores. A procedure to acquire cores from acontaminated aquifer is described. The procedures described inthe report were field tested in designing a demonstration of thebioremediation of an aviation gasoline leak. The performanceof the demonstration was consistent with the expected perfor-mance based on the preliminary site characterization using thedescribed procedures.

The report summarizes the behavior of and requisite conditionsfor a class of natural biological processes that can transformchlorinated aliphatic compounds. These compounds areamong the most prevalent hazardous chemical contaminantsfound in municipal and industrial wastewaters, landfills andlandfill leachates, industrial disposal sites, and ground water.Biological degradation is one approach that has the potential fordestroying hazardous chemicals so that they can be renderedharmless for all time. Methodologies are presented that areuseful for evaluating the potential for biorestoration of groundwater contaminated with chlorinated aliphatic compounds.Section 1 provides an introduction and an overview of theproblems with chlorinated aliphatic compounds in groundwater. Section 2 presents a review of the processes affecting themovement and fate of chlorinated aliphatics in the subsurface,including advection, dispersion, sorption and relative mobility,diffusional transport, and immiscible transport. Methodologiesand results are presented for evaluating the presence of a nativemethantrophic community and its ability to degrade the con-taminants of concern, determining the sorption of contaminantsto the aquifer material, and preliminary designing of an in situtreatment approach using the model previously described.

I ^B |b&UMUIU!

In Situ Redox Manipulation: Enhancement of Contami-nant Destruction and Immobilization.Fruchter, J. S., Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,Richland, WA, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,DC, January 1993

Novel Closed Loop Air Stripping Process for VOCRemoval from Contaminated Water, Final ReportBhowmick, M.; Sontag, T. K.; and Semmens, M. J.; Minne-sota University, Minneapolis, MN, Department of Civil andMineral Engineering, U.S. Geological Survey, WaterResources Division, Reston, VA, December 1990

NTIS Document Number: DE93-007877/XABNTIS Document Number: PB92-218247/XAB

15


The study presents an approach for the treatment of contami-nated ground water, which includes Volatile Organic Com-pounds (VOCs) stripped from the water using hollow fibermembranes or using conventional air stripping technology andthen the VOCs are oxidized in the gas phase using UV oxidationor a combination of photo oxidation and photo-catalysis withTitanium Dioxide (TiO^). The work on the photooxidation ofVOCs is applicable to both water and soil treatment techniques,such as air stripping and in situ vacuum extraction. The studyis divided into five major segments. Each segment includesrelevant sections on the experimental methods employed, theresults from the tests conducted, the development of models,and the conclusions that were drawn from the work.

nologies for possible inclusion in the demonstration'. Theevaluations are made with respect to the initial foGeS of theVOC-Arid ID: the carbon tetrachloride contaminaflon at theHanford Site, where it was disposed to the vadose zone alongwith other volatile and nonvolatile organic wastes, heavy met-als, acids, and radionuclides. The purposes of this report are (1)to identify candidate in situ technologies for inclusion in theprogram, (2) to evaluate the candidate technologies based ontheir potential applicability to VOC contamination at arid sitesand geologic conditions representative of the ID host site (i.e.,Hanford Site), and (3) to prioritize those technologies for futureU.S. Department of Energy support.

16A... ^maal

Office of Technology Development Integrated Programfor Development of In Situ Remediation Technologies.Peterson, M., Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories,Richland, WA, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,DC, August 1992

Savannah River: Horizontal Wells for In SituRemediation of Ground Water and Soils.Kaback, D. S.; Looney, B. B.; Corey, J. C.; Wright, L. M.;and Steele, J. L., DuPont de Nemours (E.I.) and Company,Aiken, SC, Sirrine Environmental Consultants, Greenville,SC, U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Laboratory,Aiken, SC, 1989

NTIS Document Number: DE93-001312/XABNTIS Document Number: DE89-010456/XAB

The Department of Energy's Office of Technology Develop-ment has instituted an integrated program focused on develop-ment of in situ remediation technologies. The development ofin situ remediation technologies will focus on five problemgroups: buried waste, contaminated soils, contaminated groundwater, containerized wastes, and underground detonation sites.The contaminants that will be included in the developmentprogram are volatile and nonvolatile organics, radionuclides,inorganics, and highly explosive materials, as well as mixturesof these contaminants. The In Situ Remediation IntegratedProgram (ISRIP) has defined the fiscal year 1993 research anddevelopment technology areas for focusing activities, and theyare described in this paper. These R&D topical areas include:nonbiological in situ treatment, in situ bioremediation, electro-kinetics, and in situ containment.

Preliminary Evaluation of Selected In Situ RemediationTechnologies for Volatile Organic Compounds Contami-nation at Arid Sites.Lenhard, R. J.; Gerber, M. A.; and Amonette, J. E., BattellePacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, WA, U.S.Department of Energy, Washington, DC, October 1992

Two horizontal wells were installed adjacent to an abandonedprocess sewer line at the Savannah River Plant. Documentedleaks from the process sewer have contaminated the underlyingvadose zone and ground water with volatile organic com-pounds. The wells were installed to test new methods of in situremediation of soils and ground water. A deep horizontal well,installed below the water table, is to be used as an air-injectionwell to strip volatile organics from the contaminated groundwater. The shallow horizontal well, installed in the vadosezone, is to be used to remove vapor-phase volatile organiccompounds from the vadose zone and to recover the organicspurged from the ground water. Horizontal wells were selectedfor injection and extraction because this geometry shouldmaximize the surface area available for in situ remediationreactions to occur. Target zones for the lateral well screenswere selected on the basis of (1) concentrations of volatileorganic compounds in ground water from nearby monitoringwells, and (2) porosity and permeability of the sediments asdetermined by core analysis, geophysical logs, and sieve analy-ses.


To support the Volatile Organic Compounds-Arid Site (VOC-Arid) Integrated Demonstration (ID) in its technical, logistical,institutional, and economical testing of emerging environmen-tal management and restoration technologies. Pacific North-west Laboratory is evaluating several in situ remediation tech-

Savannah River: In Situ Remediation System for Con-taminated Ground Water, Patent Application.Corey, J. C.; Looney, B. B.; and Kaback, D. S., U.S.Department of Energy, Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken,SC, August 1988

NTIS Document Number DE91-017331/XAB

16


A system for removing volatile contaminants from a subsurfaceplume of contamination comprising two sets of wells, a well forinjecting a fluid into a saturated zone on one side of the plumeand an extracting well for collecting the fluid together withvolatilized contaminants from the plume on the other side of theplume, is described. The fluid enables the volatile contami-nants to be volatilized and carried through the ground to theextracting well. Injecting and extracting wells are preferablyhorizontal wells positioned below the plume in the saturatedzone and above the plume in the vadose zone. The fluid may beair or other gas or a gas and liquid mixture depending on the typeof contaminant to be removed and may be preheated to facilitatevolatilization. Treatment of the volatilized contamination maybe by filtration, incineration, atmospheric dispersion, or thelike.

factured gas plant (MGP) sites. In situ solvent extraction would .involve injection, recovery, and reclamation for reinjection ofan environmentally-benign, water-miscible solvent. Both labo-ratory experiments and engineering evaluations were performedto provide a basis for the initial feasibility assessment. La6©a-tory work included identification and evaluation of pronfisSigsolvents, measurement of fundamental properties of coaFtar-solvent-water systems, and measurement of rates of dissoltrtronof coal tar in porous media into flowing solvent-water solutions.Engineering evaluations involved identification of corrimonhydrogeologic features and contaminant distributions at MGPsites, and identification and evaluation of possible injection-recovery well deployment schemes.

STUDIES AND DEMONSTRATIONS (CONT'D)

Documents Focusing on Study Results

Savannah River: Test Plan for In Situ BioremediationDemonstration of the Savannah River Integrated Demon-stration Project, DOE/OTD TTP No. SR 0566-01.Revision 3.Hazen, T. C.; Westinghouse Savannah River Company,Aiken, SC, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC,September 1991


This project is designed to demonstrate in situ bioremediationof ground water and sediment contaminated with chlorinatedsolvents. Indigenous microorganisms will be simulated todegrade trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE)and their daughter products in situ by addition of nutrients to thecontaminated zone. In situ biodegradation is a highly attractivetechnology forremediation because contaminants are destroyed,not simply moved to another location or immobilized, thusdecreasing costs, risks, and time, while increasing efficiencyand public and regulatory acceptability. Bioremediation hasbeen found to be among the least costly technologies in appli-cations where it will work.

Solvent Extraction for Remediation of Coal Tar Sites,Final Report.Luthy, R. G.; Dzombak, D. A.; Peters, C.; Ali, M. A.; andRoy, S. B., Camegie-Mellon University, Department of CivilEngineering, Pittsburgh, PA, U.S. Geological Survey, WaterResources Division, Reston, VA, September 1992


The report presents the results of an initial assessment of thefeasibility of solvent extraction for removing coal tar from thesubsurface or for treating contaminated soil excavated at manu-

17C j

Applied Geologic, Microbiological, and EngineeringConstraints of In Situ BTEX Bioremediation, JournalArticle: Published in Remediation, v3nl, pg. 83-110,Winter 1992-1993.Kennedy, L. G. and Hutchins, S. R., U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Robert S. Kerr Environmental ResearchLaboratory, Ada, OK, American Environmental Consultants,Inc., Norman, OK, February 1993

EPA Document Number: EPA/600/J-92/450


An in situ bioremediation project has been designed and con-structed for a site in south-central Kansas just north of Wichita.A pipeline leaked an unknown quantity of refined fuels in the1970s. The spill was undetected until hydrocarbons were foundin a nearby municipal water supply well. Of concern, from aregulatory perspective, are the alkylbenzene components foundin the ground water, including benzene, toluene, efhylbenzene,and xylene (BTEX). Initial abatement procedures, includingfree product removal and pumping, had become ineffective. Insitu bioremediation was selected to complete the restorationprocess. The project emphasizes the need for a strong under-standing of the geologic and hydrogeologic conditions preva-lent under the site. Site studies were conducted to determine thedistribution and mass of the contaminant and the hydraulicregime. Laboratory microbial studies were used to determinethe efficacy of nitrate as a primary electron acceptor. Informa-tion from site studies was used to design a treatment systemtailored to the requirements of the site. The treatment system isdesigned to deliver the maximum amount of nutrient-enrichedwater to the contaminated zone while maintaining hydrauliccontrol of the site.

17


18A

A Process for Contaminant Removal and Waste VolumeReduction to Remediate Groundwater ContainingCertain Radionuclides, Toxic Metals, and Organics, FinalReport.Buckley, L. P.; Killey, D.; Vijayan, S.; and Wong, P.,Argoiuie National Laboratory, Chemical TechnologyDivision, August 1993

plex, with large spatial variabilities in hydraulic propg0(es. Athorough understanding of the problem is essentiatflD theselection of appropriate containment, retrieval, and/orm situremedial technologies. The effectiveness of remedial tffBnolo-gies depends on knowing where the contaminants are; 1SS3i/ theyare hold up in a given physical and chemical subsurfaceenvironment; and knowing the physical, chemical, and micro-biological changes that are induced by the various remedialtechnologies.

18CDOE Document Number: DOE/CH-9201

A project to remove groundwater contaminants by an improvedtreatment process was performed during October 1990 toMarch 1992 by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for theUnited States Department of Energy, managed by ArgonneNational Laboratory. The goal was to generate high-qualityeffluent while minimizing secondary waste volume. Twoeffluent target levels, within an order of magnitude or less of theU.S. Drinking Water Limit, were set to judge the processeffectiveness. The program employed mixed waste feedscontaining cadmium, uranium, lead, iron, calcium, strontium-85-90, cesium-137, benzene, and trichloroethylene in simu-lated and actual groundwater and soil leachate solutions. Acombination of process steps that included sequential chemicalconditioning, cross-flow microfiltration and dewatering by lowtemperature-evaporation, and filter pressing were effective forthe treatment of mixed waste having diverse physicochemicalproperties. Overall test results revealed a three-step chemicaltreatment / microfiltration sequence combined with a finaldewatering step is optimal.

| 18B g' '.i..*a;%B!t'K

Characteristics of the Volatile Organic Compounds —Arid Integrated Demonstration Site.Last, G. V.; Lenhard, R. J.; Bjomstad, B. N.; Evans, J. C.;and Roberson, K. R., Battelle Pacific Northwest Laborato-ries, Richland, WA, U.S. Department of Energy, Washing-ton, DC, October 1991


The Volatile Organic Compounds — Arid Integrated Demon-stration Program (VOC-Arid ED) is targeted at demonstrationand testing of technologies for the evaluation and cleanup ofvolatile organic compounds and associated contaminants atarid DOE sites. The initial demonstration site is an area ofcarbon tetrachloride (CCl^) contamination located near thecenter of the Hanford Site. The movement of CCl^ and othervolatile organic contaminants in the subsurface is very com-plex. The problem at the Hanford Site is further complicated bythe concurrent discharge of other waste constituents includingacids, lard oil, organic phosphates, and transuranic radionu-clides. In addition, the subsurface environment is very com-

Chemical Enhancements to Pump-and-TreatRemediation.Palmer, C.D. and Fish, W., Robert S, Kerr EnvironmentalLaboratory, Ada, OK, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Office of Research and Development, Office ofSolid Waste and Emergency Response, Technology Innova-tion Office, Washington, DC, January 1992


NTIS Document-Number: PB92-180074

The document looks into the use of chemical enhancement toimprove ground-water remediation efficiencies using pump-and-treat technologies and points out arenas of contaminationwhere such techniques are not practical. While various chemi-cal enhancement methods must be evaluated with regard tospecific site conditions, there are general concepts applicable toall chemical enhancement methods, and they are discussed inthis document. In addition, this document poses key questionsthat should be answered before any chemical-enhancementscheme is initiated and stimulates discussion on the merits andlimitations of chemical enhancement methods.

18D~

Comparison of Bioventing and Air Sparging for In SituBioremediation of Fuels.Kampbell, D. H.; Griffin, C. J.; and Blaha, F. A., U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Robert S. Kerr Environ-mental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, Solar UniversalTechnologies, Inc., Traverse City, MI, Coast Guard CivilEngineering Unit, Cleveland, OH, 1993



Bioremediation pilot-scale subsurface venting and spargingsystems were operated at a low aeration rate at an aviationgasoline spill site. Bioventing removed 99 percent of vadosezone contamination in eight months with minimal surfaceemissions. The biosparging process is presently operating andhas removed one-third of oily phase residue below the water

18


table in one year. The ground-water plume has been cleansedof benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) compo-nents by sparging.

where hydrogen peroxide was injected. This indicated that asignificant fraction of hydrogen peroxide rapidly decomposadto oxygen gas and escaped into the unsaturated zone. 1' ,

19A

E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Company/Oberlin FilterCompany Microfiltration Technology: ApplicationsAnalysis Report.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Researchand Development, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,Cincinnati, OH, October 1991

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/A5-90/007


19C| 19C | o0

Experimental Examination of Integrated Soil Vapor <Extraction Techniques, Journal Article: Published in :

Proceedings of the Petroleum Hydrocarbons and OrganicChemicals in Ground Water: Prevention, Detection, andRestoration, pg. 441-452, November 1992.Johnson, R. L.; Bagby, W.; Perrott, M.; and Chen, C. T.,Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology,Department of Environmental Science and Engineering,Beaverton, OR, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RiskReduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1992

This document discusses the Superfund Innovative Technol-ogy Evaluation (SITE) Program Demonstration of the DuPont/Oberlin microfiltration technology. This document evaluatesthe microfiltration technology' s ability to remove metals (presentin soluble or insoluble form) and particulates from liquid wasteswhile producing a dry filter cake and a filtrate that meetapplicable disposal requirements. In addition, it presents eco-nomic data from the SITE demonstration, and discusses thepotential applicability of the technology. The DuPont/Oberiinmicrofiltration technology combines Oberlin's automatic pres-sure filter with DuPont's new microporous Tyvek filter media.It is designed to remove particles that are 0.1 micron in diam-eter, or larger, from liquid wastes, such as contaminated groundwater. This report also summarizes the results from three casestudies. All three facilities treated process waste waters con-taining metals and total suspended solids (TSS) ranging fromseveral parts per million to several percent.

19B

Enhanced Bioremediation Utilizing Hydrogen Peroxideas a Supplemental Source of Oxygen: A Laboratory andField Study.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Robert S. KerrEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, February1990



Soil vapor extraction (SVE) has been shown to be effective atremoving hydrocarbons from the unsaturated zone. However,at many spill sites significant fractions of the mass are at orbelow the water table, in which case SVE is far less effective.To improve its efficiency in cases where gasoline is trappedbelow the water table, SVE can be used in conjunction withother techniques to get at that trapped mass. In the last few yearsthe direct injection of air into the formation below the watertable (i.e., in situ sparging) has become a popular technique.Another approach is to lower the water table to improve airflowin the vicinity of the trapped product. This can be accomplishedeither in the localized area of a ground water draw down coneor as the result of larger scale dewatering. In experimentsconducted at the Oregon Graduate Institute (OGI), hydrocar-bon spills into a large three-dimensional physical model filledwith sand are being used to study the efficiencies of SVEcombined with other techniques. Experiments to date haveexamined SVE operating as a stand-alone technique, as well asin conjunction with air sparging below the water table, dewater-ing of the "smear zone" (i.e., where product is trapped asresidual below the water table), and air injection into thedewatered smear zone.

EPA Document Number: EPA/600/S-29/006 19D


Laboratory and field-scale studies were conducted to investi-gate the feasibility of using hydrogen peroxide as a supplemen-tal source of oxygen for bioremediation of an aviation gasolinefuel spill. Ground water data from the enhanced in situbioremediation pilot field study indicates that hydrogen perox-ide successfully increased the concentration of available oxy-gen downgradient. In this study, however, it was observed thatthere was a measurable increase of oxygen in the soil gas area

Feasibility of Biodegradation of Tetrachloroethylene inContaminated Aquifers, Final ReportFogel, S., Cambridge Analytical Associates, Inc.,Bioremediation Systems Division, Boston, MA, NationalScience Foundation, Division of Industrial Science andTechnological Innovation, Washington, DC, September 16,1988


19


Tetrachloroethylene (TCE), a solvent and de-greasing agent, iswidely spilled and disposed of on soil. It is easily transportedin ground water, causing wide-spread aquifer contamination.Conventional technology for the treatment of solvent-contami-nated aquifers, which involves pumping out the water andabove-ground treatment by physical/chemical techniques, isslow and expensive. Cambridge Analytical AssociatesBioremediation Systems has carried out experiments to demon-strate the feasibility of in situ biodegradation of TCE. Theprocess would involve controlled addition of nutrients to theground water to stimulate the activity of naturally occurringbacteria. A 23 liter laboratory aquifer simulator was con-structed and filled with soil, and amended ground water wasrecirculated throughout the soil. Methanogenic conditionswere brought about in the reactor within 15 days and TCE wasshown to degrade rapidly to dichloroethylene. Oxygen wasthen introduced and the oxidation of dichlororethylene bymethanotrophic bacteria was initiated. The aquifer simulatorexperiment indicated that aquifer conditions can be manipu-lated in situ to bring about the complete degradation of TCE.

20A

Influence ofMicrobial Transport Processes on "In Situ"Biodegradation of Ground Water Contaminants, Techni-cal Progress Report, Final.Cunningham, A. B. and Characklis, W. G.; Montana StateUniversity, Bozeman Institute for Biological and ChemicalProcess Analysis, MT, U.S. Geological Survey, WaterResources Division, Reston, VA, 1991


A fundamental understanding of both transport and transforma-tion processes is essential to the development of technicallysound remediation strategies for ground water contamination.Accordingly, the goal of the project is to enhance the rate andefficiency of in situ microbial degradation of subsurface con-taminants through an improved understanding of processes thatgovern transport, attachment, growth, and activity of microor-ganisms in porous media. The report is organized into thefollowing sections: 1) Transport Processes: contains experi-mental methods and results that document the effect ofbiofilmaccumulation on the transport of water, nutrients, and sus-pended cells in one-dimensional porous media flow reactions,2) Effects of Cell Starvation and Motility: presents experimen-tal procedures and results describing transport characteristics ofstarved vs. growing and motile vs. nonmotile cells in porousmedia, 3) Modeling Microbial Transport and Activity: de-scribes development of a mathematical model that simulatescontaminant biodegradation/biosorption, nutrient depletion andbiomass accumulation in one-dimensional porous media flow,and 4) Bioremediation Guidelines: summarize relevant infor-mation, in the form of guidelines useful to decision-makersconcerned with bioremediation of contaminated water and soil.

20B

In Situ Biodegradation Treatment, ys^U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emer-gency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC, Qfi§ce ofResearch and Development, Cincinnati, OH, April J2^4


In situ biodegradation may be used to treat low-to-intermediateconcentrations of organic contaminants in place without dis-turbing or displacing the contaminated media. Although thistechnology has been used to degrade a limited number ofinorganics, specifically cyanide and nitrate, in situ biodegrada-tion is not generally employed to degrade inorganics or to treatmedia contaminated with heavy metals. During in situ biodeg-radation, electron acceptors (e.g., oxygen and nitrate), nutri-ents, and other amendments may be introduced into the soil andgroundwater to encourage the growth of an indigenous popula-tion capable of degrading the contaminants of concern. Thesesupplements are used to control or modify site-specific condi-tions that impede microbial activity and, thus, the rate andextent of contaminant degradation. Depending on site-specificclean-up goals, in situ biodegradation can be used as the soletreatment technology or in conjunction with other biological,chemical, and physical technologies in a treatment train. In thepast, in situ biodegradation has often been used to enhancetraditional pump and treat technologies. As of Fall 1993, in situbiodegradation was being considered or implemented as acomponent of the remedy at 21 Superfund sites and 38 RCRA,Underground Storage Tank, Toxic Substances Control Act, andFederal sites with soil, sludge, sediment, or groundwater con-tamination. This bulletin provides information on thetechnology's applicability, the types of residuals produced, thelatest performance data, the site requirements, the status of thetechnology, and sources for further information.

20C

In Situ Bioremediation of Hanford Ground Water.Skeen, R. S.; Roberson, K. R.; Workman, D. J.; Petersen, J.N.; and Shouche, M., Battelle Pacific Northwest Laborato-ries, Richland, WA, U.S. Department of Energy, Washing-ton, DC, April 1992


Liquid wastes containing radioactive, hazardous, and regulatedchemicals have been generated throughout the 40+ years ofoperations at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) HanfordSite. Some of these wastes were discharged to the soil columnand many of the waste components, including nitrate, carbontetrachloride (CC1), and several radionuclides, have been de-tected in the Hanford ground water. Current DOE policy

20


prohibits the disposal of contaminated liquids directly to theenvironment, and remediation of existing contaminated groundwaters may be required. In situ bioremediation is one technol-ogy currently being developed at Hanford to meet the need forcost effective technologies to clean ground water contaminatedwith CCl^, nitrate, and other organic and inorganic contami-nants. This paper focuses on the latest results of an ongoingeffort to develop effective in situ remediation strategies throughthe use of predictive simulations.

21A

In Situ Generation of Oxygen By Electrolysis and theElectrochemical Effects on Microorganisms' Population,Final Report, September 19,1990- November 19,1991.Han, M. K.; Wyza, R. E.; and Olfenbuttel, R. F., BatteUeColumbus Laboratories, OH, Naval Civil EngineeringLaboratory, Port Hueneme, CA, June 1992

ground water under some conditions. The resultant condense^;.-liquid contaminants can be recycled or treated prior to disposal^The steam extraction process is applicable to organic wastes but-*',has not been used for removing insoluble inorganics and metal^SSteam is injected into the ground to raise the soil temperatur£3and drive off volatile contaminants. Alternatively, steam can b6injected to form a displacement front by steam condensation todisplace ground water. The contaminated liquid and steamcondensate are then collected for further treatment. Two typesof systems are discussed in the document: 1) the mobile systemand 2) the stationary system. The bulletin provides informationon the technology applicability, limitations, a description of thetechnology, types of residuals produced, site requirements, thelatest performance data, the status of the technology, andsources for further information.

21 C

NTIS Document Number: AD-A252 358/7/XAB

The objective of this program was to quantitatively assess theeffectiveness of in situ electrolysis of ground water on thegrowth of soil microorganisms. The electrolysis method wasused to supply oxygen to soil microorganisms to enhancebioremediation of sites that are contaminated with hydrocar-bons. Electrochemical tests were performed with two differenttypes of soils in a 10-gallon glass container. Experimentalvariables examined included driving voltage, current, and elec-trode spacing. Stainless steel mesh was used for both the anodeand the cathode. Depending on the soil, a sustained supply ofdissolved oxygen up to 16 ppm was achieved. The populationof soil microorganisms increased with increasing the oxygencontent in the ground water. A slight decrease in the populationwas seen at the cathode, which might have been due to anincrease in the pH at the cathode.

21 B

Laboratory Evaluation of the In Situ Chemical Treat-ment Approach for Remediation of Contaminated Soilsand Ground Water.Thorton, E. C.; Jurgensmeier, C. A.; and Baechler, M. A.,Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, WA, U.S.Department of Energy, Washington, DC, October 1991


Bench-scale solution and soil tests were conducted in a proof ofprinciple demonstration of the in situ chemical treatment ap-proach to the remediation of metal and radionuclide contami-nated soil and ground water. These tests were directed specifi-cally towards treatment of Cr^ contaminated solutions andunsaturated soil as an application of the approach. Testing wasplanned and conducted to provide general information relatingtreatment agent concentrations to effect. This approach servedto define the amount of a specific agent required to achieveacceptable results and provided information regarding treat-ment rates and pH effects associated with the treatment reac-tions.

In Situ Steam Extraction Treatment, EngineeringBulletin.Science Applications International Corporation, Cincinnati,OH, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Office of Emergency andRemedial Response, Washington, DC, May 1991

21 D

Performance Evaluation of a Ground Water and Soil GasRemedial Action.Hansen, M. C. and Hartnett, S. L., U.S. Department ofEnergy, Argonne National Laboratory, IL, July 1990

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/2-91/005NTIS Document Number: DE90-017659/XAB

| NTIS Document Number: PB91-228064/XAB______

In situ steam extraction removes volatile and semivolatilehazardous contaminants from soil and ground water withoutexcavation of the hazardous waste. Waste constituents areremoved in situ by the technology and are not actually treated.The use of. steam enhances the stripping of volatile contami-nants from soil and can be used to displace contaminated

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) continue to be remediatedby a ground-water extraction system and an in situ vaporextraction system at a Midwest agricultural site. Carbon tetra-chloride (CC\) and chloroform (CHCL,) contamination levelswere detected at maximum concentrations of 4000 parts perbillion (ppb) and 360 ppb, respectively, for on-site ground-water samples and 6000 ppb and 1800 ppb, respectively, for on-

21


site gas samples. Ground water from a domestic well and amonitoring well located at least 2300 ft. downgradient from thesite also had CCl^ and CHC1, contamination. Furthermore, apublic water supply well, located downgradient of the site, wasfound to have ground water contaminated with CC1. Duringtwo years of operation of the remedial action, ground-water andsoil gas samples have been analyzed to monitor potentialmigration of contaminants from the site and to track the overallprogress toward cleanup. Results demonstrate a decrease inground-water contamination in both on- and off-site monitor-ing wells and a decrease in soil gas air emissions from the site.This paper presents the sampling results for the site over the lasttwo years and discusses trends indicating the effectiveness ofthe remedial action system in controlling contaminant migra-tion and overall progress toward reducing the source of con-tamination in the unsaturated subsoils.

22A

perox-pure^ Chemical Oxidation TechnologyPeroxidation Systems, Inc.: Applications AnalysisReport.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Researchand Development, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,Cincinnati, OH, July 1993



Introduction and large-scale production of synthetic; haloge-nated organic chemicals over the last 50 years has resulted in agroup of contaminants that tend to persist in the environmentand resist both biotic and abiotic degradation. The low solubil-ity of these types of contaminants, along with their toxicity andtendency to accumulate in food chains, make them particularlyrelevant targets for remediation activities. Among the mecha-nisms that result in dehalogenation of some classes of organiccontaminants are stimulation of metabolic sequences throughintroduction of electron donor and acceptor combinations,addition of nutrients to meet the needs of dehalogenatingmicroorganisms, possible use of engineered microorganisms,and use of enzyme systems capable of catalyzing reductivedehalogenation. The current state of research and developmentin the area of reductive dehalogenation is discussed along withpossible technological application of relevant processes andmechanisms to remediation of soil and ground water contami-nated with chlorinated organics. In addition, an overview ofresearch needs is suggested, which might be of interest fordevelopment of in situ systems to reduce the mass of haloge-nated organic contaminants in soil and ground water.

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/AR-93/50122C


This document discusses the Superfund Innovative Technol-ogy Evaluation (SITE) Program Demonstration of the perox-pure™ chemical oxidation technology's ability to removevolatile organic compounds (VOC) and other organic contami-nants present in liquid wastes. The perox-pure™ chemicaloxidation technology was developed to destroy dissolved or-ganic contaminants in water. The technology uses ultraviolet(UV) radiation and hydrogen peroxide to oxidize organiccompounds present in water at parts per million levels or less.This treatment technology produces no air emissions and gen-erates no sludge or spent media that require further processing,handling, or disposal. Economic data and the results from threecase studies are also summarized in this report. The contami-nants of concern in these case studies include acetone, isopropyialcohol (IPA), TCE, and pentachlorophenol (PCP).

22B

Reductive Dehalogenation: A Subsurface Bioremedia-tion Process, Journal Article: Published in Remediotion,Winter 1990-1991.Sims, J. L.; Suflita, J. M.; and Russell, H. H., U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency, Robert S. Ken- EnvironmentalResearch Laboratory, Ada, OK, Utah Water ResearchLaboratory, Logan, OK, Oklahoma University, Departmentof Botany and Microbiology, Norman, OK, 1990

Removal of Radionuclides by Electrokinetic Soil Process-ing, Journal Article: Published in Journal of the NationalTechnical Association, Spring 1993.Parker, R. A., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Officeof Research and Development, Risk Reduction EngineeringLaboratory, Cincinnati, OH, 1993



Electrokinetics promises to be an innovative treatment processfor in situ treatment of soils and ground water contaminatedwith heavy metals and radionuclides. Electrokinetics refers tothe movement of ionic liquids and charged particles relative toone another under the action of an applied direct current electricfield. The paper summarizes the results of laboratory tests forthe removal of uranium, thorium, and radium, conducted fromFebruary 28,1991, to March 30,1991, and a review of progressto date.

22D

Retrospective Performance Evaluation on In SituBioremediation: Site Characterization.Wilson, J. T. and Kampbell, D. H., Robert S. Kerr Environ-mental Research Laboratory, Ada, OK, 1993

22


EPA Document Number: EPA/600/A-93/173Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC, U.S.Department of Energy, Washington, DC, June 1991

NTIS Document Number: PB93-221919/XAB NTIS Document Number: DE92-009749/XAB

Performance of in situ bioremediation was demonstrated at ashallow water site with subsurface contamination of used crankcase oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, and other oily phase products.Treatment involved ground-water amendment by hydrogenperoxide and nutrients by a recharge gallery. The system wasoperated for 2 1/2 years. During treatment benzene and totalBTEX concentrations in ground water were reduced in magni-tude exceeding ten and twenty times, respectively. Verticalprofile core samples showed a two-feet thick interval near thewater table containing significant amounts of hydrocarbons.The center of the interval had not been depleted of BTEXcompounds, but the surrounding cortex had been physically andbiologically weathered. The interval material was fine texturedwhich restricted flow of remedial fluids resulting in littleopportunity for bioremediation.

23A

Savannah River: Field Demonstration of In Situ AirStripping Using Horizontal Wells.Looney, B. B. and Kaback, D. S., Westinghouse SavannahRiver Company, Aiken, SC, U.S. Department of Energy,Washington, DC, 1991


Under sponsorship from the U.S. Department of Energy, tech-nical personnel from the Savannah River Laboratory and otherDOE laboratories, universities, and private industry have com-pleted a full scale demonstration of environmental remediationusing horizontal wells. The 139-day long test was designed toremove volatile chlorinated solvents from the subsurface usingtwo horizontal wells. One well, approximately 90 m long and45 m deep drilled below a contaminant plume in the groundwater, was used to inject air and strip the contaminants from theground water. A second horizontal well, approximately 50 mlong and 20 m deep in the vadose zone, was used to extractresidual contamination in the vadose zone along with thematerial purged from the ground water. The test successfullyremoved approximately 7250 kg of contaminants. A largeamount of characterization and monitoring data was collectedto aid in interpretation of the test and to provide the informationneeded for future environmental restorations that employdirectionally drilled wells as extraction or delivery systems.

23B

Savannah River: Full-scale Field Test of the In Situ AirStripping Process at the Savannah River IntegratedDemonstration Test Site.Looney, B. B.; Hazen, T. C.; Kaback, D. S.; and Eddy, C. A.,

Under sponsorship from the U.S. Department of Energy, tenical personnel from the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL).other DOE laboratories, universities, and private industry hayecompleted a full-scale demonstration of environmentalremediation using horizontal wells. This demonstration wasperformed as Phase I of an Integrated Demonstration Projectdesigned to evaluate innovative remediation technologies forenvironmental restoration of sites contaminated with organiccontaminants. The demonstration utilized two directionallydrilled horizontal wells to deliver gases and extract contami-nants from the subsurface. The resulting in situ air strippingprocess was designed to remediate soils and sediments aboveand below the water table as well as ground water contaminatedwith volatile organic contaminants. The 139-day long testsuccessfully removed volatile chlorinated solvents from thesubsurface using the two horizontal wells. One well, approxi-mately 300 ft (90 m) long and 165 ft (50 m) deep drilled belowa contaminant plume in the ground water, was used to inject airand strip the contaminants from the ground water. A secondhorizontal well, approximately 175 ft (53 m) long and 75 ft (23m) deep in the vadose zone, was used to extract residualcontamination in the vadose zone along with the materialpurged from the ground water. Pre-test and post-test character-ization data and monitoring data during the demonstration werecollected to aid in interpretation of .the test and to provide theinformation needed for future environmental restoration thatemploys directionally drilled wells as extraction or deliverysystems. Contaminant concentration data and microbiologicalmonitoring data are summarized in this report; the characteriza-tion data and geophysical monitoring data are documented in aseries of related project reports.

23C

Savannah River: Ground Water and Soil Remediation:In Situ Air Stripping Using Horizontal Wells.Kaback, D. S.; Looney, B. B.; Eddy, C. A.; and Hazen, T. C.,Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC, U.S.Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1990

| NTIS Document Number: D E 9 2 - 0 0 9 9 0 6 / X A B [

An innovative environmental restoration technology, in situ airstripping, has been demonstrated at the U.S. Department ofEnergy (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina.This process, using horizontal wells, is designed to concur-rently remediate unsaturated-zone soils and ground water con-taining volatile organic compounds (VOCs). In situ technolo-gies have the potential to substantially reduce costs and timerequired for remediation, as well as improve effectiveness ofremediation. Horizontal wells were selected to deliver and

23


extract fluids from the subsurface because their geometry canmaximize the efficiency ofaremediation system and they havegreat potential for remediating contaminant sources underexisting facilities. The first demonstration of this new technol-ogy was conducted for a period of twenty weeks. A vacuum wasfirst drawn on the vadose zone well until a steady-state removalofVOCs was obtained. Air was then injected at three differentrates and at two different temperatures. An extensive character-ization program was conducted at the site and an extensivemonitoring network was installed prior to initiation of the test.Significant quantities of VOCs have been removed from thesubsurface (equivalent to an eleven-well, 500-gpm, pump-and-treat system at the same site). Concentrations of VOCs in theground water have been significantly reduced in a number of themonitoring wells.

24A

Savannah River: Immunological Techniques as Tools toCharacterize the Subsurface Microbial Community at a.Trichloroethylene Contaminated Site.Fliermans, C. B.; Dougherty, J. M.; Franck, M. M.;McKinzey, P. C.; and Hazen, T. C., Westinghouse SavannahRiver Company, Aiken, SC, U.S. Department of Energy,Washington, DC, 1992


The complexity of subsurface systems makes thy*§e of selec-tive monitoring tools imperative. y>»

I—————l ^24B o0

Savannah River: Savannah River Integrated Demonstra-tion Program.Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, SC, U.S.Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1991


Leakage of solvents (trichloroethylene and tetrachloroethylene)from an underground process sewer line has contaminated soilsand underlying ground water at the Savannah River facility ofthe Department of Energy (DOE). This site was chosen for anexperimental project, conducted as part of DOE'S integrateddemonstrated program for environmental remediation. Theproject demonstrated a new in situ remediation technology thathas the potential to reduce clean-up costs and time. Known asin situ air stripping, the new technology involves injection of airthrough underground horizontal wells to strip ground water andsoils of volatile organics; the resulting diffused air is collected,and the hazardous chemicals are removed to the surface forfurther processing. This brochure briefly describes the use ofthe integrated demonstration approach, and in situ air strippingwith horizontal wells as a viable new remediation method.

Effective in situ bioremediation strategies require an under-standing of the effects pollutants and remediation techniqueshave on subsurface microbial communities. Therefore, de-tailed characterization of a site's microbial communities isimportant. Subsurface sediment borings and water sampleswere collected from a trichloroethylene (TCE)-contaminatedsite, before and after horizontal well in situ air stripping andbioventing, as well as during methane injection for stimulationof methane-utilizing microorganisms. Subsamples were pro-cessed for heterotrophic plate counts, acridine orange directcounts (AODC), community diversity, direct fluorescent anti-bodies (DFA) enumeration for several nitrogen-transformingbacteria, and Biolog (regsign) evaluation of enzyme activity incollected water samples. Plate counts were higher in near-surface depths than in the vadose zone sediment samples.During the in situ air stripping and bioventing, counts increasedat or near the saturated zone and remained elevated throughoutthe aquifer, but did not change significantly after the air strip-ping. Sporadic increases in plate counts at different depths aswell as increased diversity appeared to be linked to differinglithologies. AODCs were orders of magnitude higher than platecounts and remained relatively constant with depth except forslight increases near the surface depths and the capillary fringe.Nitrogen transforming bacteria, as measured by serospecificDFA, were greatly affected both by the in situ air stripping andthe methane injection. Biolog (regsign) activity appeared toincrease with subsurface stimulation both by air and methane.

Stabilization of Microorganisms for In Situ Degradationof Toxic Chemicals, Progress Report, Year Two.Crawford, R. L. and Stormo, K., Idaho University, Moscow,ID, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, March1991


Methods were developed to microencapsulate a petachloro-phenol (PCP)-degrading Flavobacteriumandap-cresol (PCR)-degrading Pseudomonas within beads of 5-100 am diameter,and these entrapped cells were examined for their ability tomineralize PCP and PCR in the presence of subsurface soils andwaters obtained from the University of Idaho (UI) Ground-Water Research Site (GRS). Matrices employed to make beadsincluded alginate, agarose, polyurethane, agarose coated bypolyurethane, and novel polyurethanes containing cross-linkedsources of supplemental carbon and/or nitrogen sources. A low-pressure-nozzle apparatus was developed for the production ofmicrospheres. Results showed that microencapsulated cellssurvived better and were catabolically more active than freecells in the presence of aquifer materials. Microcosm studiesreported here confirmed that microbeads containing long-livedpollutant-degrading bacterial cells can be readily prepared insizes that will travel through subsurface sand/gravel aquifer

24

Other Resource Guides

matrixes. Microencapsulated bacteria at PCP concentrations upto 275 ppm and free cells at PCP concentrations <150 ppm canremain active for extended periods under simulated aquiferconditions. Periods of several months are certainly attainable.This should be sufficient time to effect significant environmen-tal restoration through biodegradation of specific targeted pol-lutants.

25A

Surfactant Flooding Technology for In Situ Cleanup ofContaminated Soils and Aquifers—A Feasibility Study.Porzucek, C., U.S. Department of Energy, Los AlamosNational Laboratory, NM, November 1989

and sampling and analysis information were monitored care-fully to establish a database against which vendor's claims forthe technology could be evaluated. Additional data on thetechnology's performance at other sites is also discussed, Tteconclusions from the results of the Groveland demonstrajrea)test and from other available data are: 1) the process can be u^adto remediate a site contaminated with VOCs; 2) the process Qjpremove VOCs from soils with permeabilities as low as tff?cm/s; 3) the process operates well in all weather conditions; add4) the process implementation costs can be as low as $20/ton,depending on various site-specific conditions.

25C


The process of in situ, surfactant-enhanced soil washing hasbeen investigated to determine its usefulness and limitations.Previous work on this subject has been reviewed critically.Entrapment/displacement mechanisms of nonaqueous phaseliquids (NAPLs) in porous media have been identified and arediscussed. The effect of surfactant on each of these mechanismshas been investigated. A joint research project has beeninitiated with Howard University personnel to determine theeffect of surfactant on contaminants that have adsorbed ontosoil surfaces. Results of this research are necessary to morefully determine the limitations of in situ, surfactant-enhancedsoil washing. However, based on field observations of NAPLsand modification of an existing mass-transfer-based model, it isapparent that in situ, surfactant-enhanced soil washing alonewill not be a sufficient remedial action plan because it cannotdisplace enough contaminant to clean the soil to within theEnvironmental Protection Agency's guidelines of cleanliness.The process shows the most promise when it is used in conjunc-tion with another remedial action plan such as biorestoration.

25B

Terra Vac In Situ Vacuum Extraction System: Applica-tions Analysis Report.Stinson, M., Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc., Livingston,NJ, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofResearch and Development, Risk Reduction EngineeringLaboratory, Cincinnati, OH, July 1989

Treatability of Contaminated Ground Water andAquifer Solids at "Town Gas" Sites, Using PhotolyticOzonation and Chemical In Situ Reclamation, FinalReport.Peyton, G. R.; LeFaivre, M. H.; and Smith, M. A., IllinoisState Water Survey Division, Champaign, Aquatic Chemis-try Section, Illinois Department of Energy and NaturalResources, Champaign, Hazardous Waste Research andInformation Center, August 1990


The feasibility of cleaning up contaminated ground water andaquifer solids from so-called "town gas" sites using photolyticozonation and chemical in situ aquifer reclamation (CISR)techniques was investigated in the laboratory. At the actual site,coal was thermally oxidized to produce methane for municipaldistribution. The degradation left a coal which, if released intothe ground, could contaminate ground water and aquifer solidswith a number of organic substances, including aromatic hydro-carbons such as benzene, toluene, xylene (BTX), and poly-nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at environmentallysignificant concentrations. A chemical in situ treatment methodusing persulfate as a source of free radicals destroyed organiccontaminants that were adsorbed to the aquifer solids. PAHswere reduced by 34 percent after 12 days of treatment and by 52percent after 40 days.

OTHER RESOURCE GUIDES

25D

EPA Document Number: EPA/540/A5-89/003


The report analyzes the results from the Superfund InnovativeTechnology Evaluation Program's 56-day demonstration at theValley Manufactured Product Company's site in Groveland,Massachusetts. Conclusions were reached concerning thetechnology's suitability for use in remediations involving bothsimilar and different materials at other sites. Operational data

Bioremediation Resource Guide.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste and Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Washington, DC, September 1993(see abstract below)

EPA Document Number: EPA/542/B-93/004

25

Other Resource Guides

26A

Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology ResourceGuide.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste And Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Washington, DC, September 1994(see abstract below)

I>r-T"00c

EPA Document Number: EPA/542-B-94/008

26B

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Treatment TechnologyResource Guide.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of SolidWaste And Emergency Response, Technology InnovationOffice, Washington, DC, September 1994

EPA Document Number: EPA/542-B-94/007

These documents are intended to support decision-making byRegional and State Corrective Action permit writers. RemedialProject Managers (RPMs), On-Scene Coordinators, contrac-tors, and others responsible for the evaluation of innovative.treatment technologies. These guides direct managers of sitesbeing remediated under RCRA, UST, and CERCLA tobioremediation, ground-water, physical/chemical, and soil va-por extraction treatment technology resource documents; data-bases; hotlines; and dockets, and identify regulatory mecha-nisms (e.g.. Research Development and Demonstration Per-mits) that have the potential to ease the implementation of thesetechnologies at hazardous waste sites. Collectively, the guidesprovide abstracts of over 300 guidance/workshop reports, over-view/program documents, studies and demonstrations, andother resource guides, as well easy-to-use Resource Matricesthat identify the technologies and contaminants discussed ineach abstracted document.

26

WE WOULD LIKE YOUR COMMENTS

r-TIO wishes to provide you with tools that meet your needs. To do so, we need your feedback. Please send to th^EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response's Technology Innovation Office: 0

0• Comments on this Guide C• Questions on ground-water treatment or other innovative technologies• Information on ground-water treatment technology documents that you have drafted or completed

that may be suited for inclusion in an update to this Guide.

Mail this form:

Fold the form into thirds (along the dotted lines) so that the address shows on the outside.Tape the form closed.Add a first class stamp (EPA employees use interoffice or pouch mail).Drop it in the mail.

Fax this form:

TIO - (703) 308-8528

COMMENTS

27

c-!>T- .00

Return Address:PlaceStampHere

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OFFICEOFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSEU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY401 M STREET, SW MAIL CODE 5102WWASHINGTON, DC 20460

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Technical Information ServiceSpringfield, VA 22161 NTIS Order Form

(703) 487-46508:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., EST

Subscriptions (703) 487-4630 FAX this form (703) 321-8547

C00

TELEX 89-9405

U.S. shipping: Printed reports and microfiche copies are shipped FIRST CLASS MAIL or equivalent.International shipping: Regular service: Printed reports and microfiche copies are shipped surface mail.

Air Mail service to Canada and Mexico: add $4 per printed report; $1 per microfiche copy.Air Mail service to all other addresses: add $8 per printed report; $1.25 per microfiche copy.

T-.0

D ADDRESSDate:

Last Name First Initial

Title

Company/Organization

Address

City/State/ZIP

Attention

Required to validate order

Q PAYMENT| | Charge my NTIS Deposit Account _ _ _

| | Check/Money order enclosed for $.(Payable in U.S. dollars)

| | Purchase order enclosed, add $7.50 (u.s., Canada & Mexico only)

Purchase Order No. _______________________

Charge my | | Amer. Express | | VISA | | Mastercard

Account No. _______________ Exp.

Signature:

Telephone Number FAX Number

El ORDER SELECTIONQUANTITY

Enter order numbers or FREE brochure(Ordering by title alone will delay your order)

i.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7,

number

/CAU

/CAU

/CAU

/CAU

/CAU

/CAU

/CAU

Customer)-Routing pnnted

(up to 8 digits) . ^WMicro-fiche

UNITPRICE

Intem'lShipping

(see above)TOTALPRICE

fNTIS will label each item with up to 8 characters of your organization'srouting code.

NTIS does not permit return of items for credit or refund. NTIS will replaceitems if an error was made in filling your order or if the item is defective.

After the original stock of a technical report is exhausted, NTIS reprintsdirectly from the master archival copy. These printed-to-order copies arethe best possible reproductions.

Prices are subject to change.

Handling Fee U.S., Canada & Mexico — $3Other countries — $4

Purchase order fee. if required — $7.50

GRAND TOTAL

RUSH SERVICE - Call (703) 487-4650 or 1 -800-553-NTIS outside the U.S.

Orders are generally shipped the next day by overnight courier in the U.S. or by Air Mail outside the U.S. Add $15per report. Outside the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, add $25 per report. Rush service is also available for computerproducts. Do not mail rush orders.

COT"00c

Return Address:

PlaceStampHere

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICESPRINGFIELD, VA 22161

ORDER FORMS

Office of Solid Waste PublicationsOrder Form (Free of Charge)

NTIS Order Form

29

Office of Solid Waste Publications Order Form (Free of Charge) ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————3—c"

0Documents that are ordered through the Office of Solid Waste (OSW) are free. To order, either call the RCRAASuperfund/UST Hotline or mail this form with your request. ;

PHONE: MAIL TO:You can call the RCRA/Superfund/UST Hotline, Monday RCRA Information Centerthrough Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.. Eastern Time. The Office of Solid Wastenational toll free number is (800) 424-9346; TDD (800) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency553-7672 (hearing impaired); in Washington, DC, the 401 M Street, SW Mailcode: 5305number is (703) 412-9810, TDD (703) 412-3323 (hearing Washington, DC 20460impaired).

OSW Document # Document Title Quantity

Customer Address

Name

Company

Street Address

City State Zip Code

Daytime Phone Number

•T'

COT-.c-G:c

Return Address:PlaceStampHere

RCRA INFORMATION CENTEROFFICE OF SOLID WASTEU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY401 M STREET, SW MAIL CODE: 5305WASHINGTON, DC 20460

GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE MATRIXAbstractIdentifi-cationCode8 (page *•) A(abstract code)

GUIDAN8A

8B

OVERVI8C

8D

9A

9B

9C

9D

10A

10B

10C

1 1 A

1 1 B

HC

HD

12A

Document TitleDocument Ordering Number

CE/WORKSHOPSBiotechnology Workgroup for Department of Defense Soil and Ground WaterDecontamination Applications. Final Report for Period Ending March 1989NTIS AD-A237 956/8/XAB

NPL Construction Completion Definition at Bioremediation and Soil Vapor ExtractionSites DirectiveEPA/540/F-93/019, NTIS PB93-963327/XAB

EW DOCUMENTSAn Overview of Underground Storage Tank Remediation OptionsEPA/510/F-93/029

BioremediationEPA/600/A-93/004, NTIS PB93-149193/XAB

Critical Review of In Situ Bioremediation, Topical Report, January 1990 - March1992NTISPB93-114247/XAB

Evaluation of Ground-Water Extraction Remedies: Phase 2, Volume 1 ,Summary ReportNTIS PB92-963346/XAB

Fifth Forum on Innovative Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies: Domesticand InternationalEPA/540/R-94/503

Fourth Forum on Innovative Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies; Domesticand International, Technical PapersEPA/540/R-93/500

Guidance for Evaluating the Technical Impracticability of Ground-Water RestorationEPA/540/R-93/080, NTIS PB93-963507/XAB

nnovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report, Fifth EditionEPA/542/R-93/003, NTIS PB93-133387/XAB

nnovative Treatment Technologies: Overview and Guide to Information SourcesEPA/540/9-91/002, NTIS PB92-179001/XAB

n Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Ground WaterEPA540/S-92/003, NTIS PB92-224336/XAB

n Situ Bioremediation of Ground Water and Geological Material: A Review ofTechnologies. Research ReportEPA/600/R 93/124, NTIS PB93-215564/XAB

n Situ Bioremediation of Ground Water, Summary PaperEPA/540/S-92/017. NTIS PB93-146850/XAB

In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Ground Water: An Inventory of Research andField Demonstrations and Strategies for Improving Ground Water RemediationTechnologiesEPA/500/K-93/001, NTIS PB93-193720/XAB

Supertund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program: Innovation Making aDifferenceFP/\/''"10/^ tw^y;

TECHNOLOGY TYPE 2

^1 OT

M§-s-tg.§. S wwm 'S .;= .•=> UJ < <

•

•

•

•

•

s|§'10 (U00 1^

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Other Technologies

Pump and Treat

MicrofiltrationSorption FiltrationPhotochemical Oxidation

Chemical OxidationMicrofitt ration

Chemical Treatment,Dechlori nation. In SituFlushing, In Situ Vitrification,Solvent Extraction, ThermaDesorption

In Situ Chemical Treatment.In Situ Flushing

Electrokinetics

CONTAMINANTS 2

VOCs

0

•

•

(Au§

0

•

•

•

•

•

•

Semi-VOCs

0)I<D

CON

CON

•

wU^£ c6 &

TENT

•

TENT

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

SS|CL

rs

rs 1 '

^CO01

0

•

•

•

•

•

•

^ si'lfs S2£

•

•

•

•

•

(D>•*=

•

•

•

•

„

OriginatingOrganization/Author

Life Systems, Inc., Naval CivilEngineering Lab.; Reuter

EPA/OSWER

EPA/OSWER

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab, NationallCenter for Ground Water Research;Thomas, Ward, Raymond, Wilson,Loehr

Illinois University. North DakotaUniversity, Gas Research Institute.DOE; Rittman. Valocchi. Seagren,Ray, Wrenn

EPA/OERR

EPA/OSWER/TIO/ORD/RREL

EPA/OSWER/TIO/ORD/RREL

EPA/OSWER

EPA/OSWER/TIO; Fiedler

EPA/OSWER/TIO; Quander,Kingscott

EPA/OSWER; Sims, Suflita, Russell

Dynamac Corp., EPA/Robert S. KerrLab; Norris, Hinchee, Brown,McCarty, Semprtni

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab

EPA/OSWER/TIO; Stelmie

0013^EPA/ORD/RREL

GROUND-WATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY RESOURCE MATRIXAbstractIdentifi-cationCode8(page #) A(abstract code)

17A

17B

Docum

17C

18A

18B

18C

18D

19A

19B

19C

19D

20A

20B

20C

21A

"IR

Document TitleDocument Ordering Number

Savannah River: Test Plan for In Situ Bioremedialion Demonstration of theSavannah River Integrated Demonstration Project, DOE/OTD TTP No. S0566-01NTIS DE92-013973/XAB

Solvent Extraction for Remediation of Coal Tar Sites, Final ReportNTISPB93-118347/XAB

ents Focusing On Study Results

Applied Geologic, Microbiological, and Engineering Constraints of In Situ BTEXBioremedialion, Journal Article: Published in Pemediation, v3 n1, pg. 83-110,Winter 1992-93EPA/600/J 92/450, NTIS PB93-141513/XAB

A Process for Contaminant Removal and Waste Volume Reduction to RemediateGroundwater Containing Certain Radionuclides, Toxic Metals, and Organics. FinalReportDOE/CH-9201

Characteristics of the Volatile Organic Compounds - Arid Integrated DemonstrationSiteNTIS DE92-003882/XAB

Chemical Enhancements to Pump-and-Treat RemediationEPA/540/S-92/001. NTIS PB92-180074/XAB

Comparison of Bioventinq and Air Sparging for In Situ Bioremediation of FuelsEPA/600/A-93/178, NTIS PB93-221968/XAB

E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Company/Oberlin Filter Company MicrofiltrationTechnology: Applications Analysis ReportEPA/540/A5-90/007, NTIS PB92-119023/XAB

Enhanced Bioremediation Utilizing Hydrogen Peroxide as a Supplemental Sourceof Oxygen: A Laboratory and Field StudyEPA/600/S-29/006, NTIS PB90-183435/XAB

Experimental Examination of Integrated Soil Vapor Extraction Techniques, JournalArticle: Published in Proceedings ol the Petroleum Hydrocarbons and OrganicChemicals in Ground Water: Prevention, Detection, and Restoration, pg- 441-452.November 1992EPA/600/J-92/280, NTIS PB93-131738/XAB

Feasibility of Biodegradation of Tetrachloroethylene in Contaminated Aquifers, FinalReportNTISPB91-199778/XAB

nfluence of Microbial Transport Processes on "In Situ" Biodegradation of GroundWater Contaminants, Technical Progress Report, FinalNTIS PB91-234732/XAB

n Situ Biodegradation TreatmentEPA/540/S-94/502

n Situ Bioremediation of Hanford Ground WaterNTIS DE92-012350/XAB

n Situ Generation of Oxygen By Electrolysis and the Electrochemical Effects onMicroorganisms' Population. Final Report, September 19. 1990 - November 19,1991NTIS AD-A252358/7/XAB

,,.W,,^,-,,,,F.I,-.^n^lin.,-. r,,ni,,..n,i,.., Pi ill^.-,

TECHNOLOGY TYPE 2

^i?§ °:psits^ 2 01 U3

5555

•

•

„

§1o 2B i-

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Other Technologies

Chemical Treatment,Solvent Extraction

MicrofiltrationChemical TreatmentFilter PressingDewalering

Multiple Technologies

Pump and Treat

Microfiltration

n Situ Biodegradation

n Situ Electrolysis

SI^^'TI E^tincti^n

CONTAMINANTS2

VOCs

nXUJED

•

•

•

•

(0

80).c5

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

,..,

Semi-VOCs

(A

5Q-

•

t/)0,§

I) c

•

•

•

-»

S-0'sss0.

•

<T0)u5CT

0

•

•

•

•

•

»"•

t SSl(0 0)(C 05£

•

•

•

•

0)>"Cro0

15ft

•

•

OriginatingOrganization/Author

Westinghouse Savannah River Co..DOE: Hazen

Carnegie-Mellon University. U-S-Geological Survey; Luthy. Dzombak,Peters, Ali, Roy

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab, AmericanEnvironmental Consultants, Inc-:Kennedy. Hutchins

Argonne National Lab., ChemicalTechnology Division; Buckley, Kelley,Vijayan, Wong

Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, DOE;Last, Lenhard, Bjornstad, Evnns,Roberson

EPA/ORD/OSWER/TIO, Robert S.Kerr Env. Lab; Palmer and Fish

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab. SolarUniversal Technologies, Inc., CoastGuard Civil Engineering Unit;Kampbell, Griffin, Blaha

EPA/ORD/RREL

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab

Oregon Graduate Institute of Scienceand Technology, EPA/ORD/RREL:Johnson. Bagby. Perrott. Chen

Cambridge Analytical Associates, Inc .National Science Foundation: Fogel

Montana State University, U.S-Geological Survey; Cunningham,Characklis

EPA/OERR/ORD

Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, DOE;Skeen, Roberson, Workman,Petersen. Shouche

Batteto Columbus Lab&J^ai il CivilEngirteeriBgELifcj ,,7 'OlfenbutteT '- ••- '"' '••'

PAIC EPA/OSWEn/OKnR

EditionEPA/540/R. 93/526, NTIS PB93.163053/XAB

Surt.ictant;; arid Siibsuiface Remcdiation, Journal Article Published 1 1 1Envirt)iinif)iitiii t^cn'tH <-• If'clinok'fjy, v26 [il2. pi) 2'.}?^ ?'.\'W. 19');'EPA/600/J 93/003. NIIS PB93 149BM/XA13

Synopses of Fedei.d Dcrnonslr.ttions ot Innovative Site Hemediation lechnoloqicsEPA/542/IJ 93/009, NIIS PH94 1510Gi>/XAH

TCE Removal from Contaminated Soil and Ground WaterEPA/540/S 92/002, NTIS PB92 224104/XAB

Technologies to Remediate Hazardous Waste SitesDE90-OH946/XAB

Technology Assessment of Soil Vapor Extraction and Air SpargingEPA/600/H 92/173. NTIS PB93 100154/XAB

Technology Catalogue, First EditionDOE/EM-0138P, NTIS DE94-008866/XAB

VOCs in And Soils: Technology SummaryDOE/EM-0136P, NIIS UE94-OOB864/XAB

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Multiple 1 echnotonn."-,

Surtactants, Chciinc.il

Electioklnntici;,Multiple Technologies

Carbon AdsorptionIn-well Aeration

Dynamic UndergroundStripping

-'

•

•

•

•

•

• •

-— .... —- -"

•

•

«>

•

•

«

•

•

, , ^ , l , l ,h, , , l

llniv.'n.ily Hi",r,i[i:li lir.liliilr. Wr;.lHarwell

1 l'A'();,WI 1 1 / I K )

EPA/OnD/OSWER/IIO. Hobert SKerr Environmental Lab; Russell,Matthews. Sewell

Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs. DOE,Faico

CDM. Ini; . LPA/ORD/1'IHEI ; 1 oden

DOC/OEM/OTl'l

nor OLM/OII)

STUDIES AND DEMONSTRATIONS'

Documents Focusing On Test Design

14B

14C

1 4 1 1

1 5 A

1'>B

I5C

15D

IBA

t6B

I6C

ll.ll

Combining Treatability Studies and Site Characterization for Rational DesKJn In SituBioremediation Using Nitrate as an Electron AcceptorEPA/600/A 93 /1 /? , N HS PB93 221901/XAB

Efioct-i ol GroLind Water Clieinistry on Co-Metabolism of Chlorinated Solvents byMt'thiinotrophic BacteriaNTISDE91-014223/XAB

Ex|ieilincnl.il F-.vdiu.tlion ol tli<' M;illioin<illC(il Model for In Siln Aquifer fi(",lo[,iti<"iPlOCOSM'S

LFWtiOO/A 9;t/1'l/, NIIS P139:1 ^l^lf^/XAU

tn Silu Bluiemediation of Spills from Underground Storage Tanks: New AppioiK.hr .lor Site Chaiactehzation, Project Design, and Evaluation of PerformancrEPA/600/S2 89/042, NTIS PB89 219976/XAB

In Situ Redox Manipulation bnhnncement ot Contaminant De'.truclion andImmobilizationNT!SDE93-00787//XAL-i

Methodologies for Evaluating In Situ Blorernedialion of Chlorinated Solvents.Research Report 2 1 , August 19 , 1989 -June 19, 1991EPA/600/n-92/042, NTIS PB92-146943/XAB

Novel Closed 1 oop Air Stripping Process foi VOC Removal from ContaminatedWater, Final ReportNTISPB92-218247/XAB

Office o( Technology Developim'iil Intcgmtpd Program tni Drvflopiiicnl of In 'iifiiRomndiation TechnologiesNTISDE93-001312/XAB

Preliminary Evalualion of Selected In Situ Remndiaiion Technologies tor VolatileOrganic Compounds Contamination ;it Arid SitesNT1SDE93-002182/XAB

Savannah K/riv Horizuiit:)! WrII;; for tn Sim ncmcdialion of Ground Walnr andSoilsNIIS Dfc89 010-156, XAH

Patent Ap[i|ic<itionNTIS D E 9 1 - 0 1 7 3 3 1 / K A B

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Chemiciil Treatment

In Silii Iriiatmont,In Situ Conta.nnHinI,Electrokinetics

Multiple Technologies

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

EPA/Robert S Ken Lab. Man InchEnvironmental lochnology, Inc ,Dynamnc Corf) : Hutctiins. K;impln;ll,Cook. Pteticr, Cosby

DOE/Oak Ridye National Lal?.Piilumbo, Sirandberg

l:PA/Rol.Olt S KCI! 1 ,)h. Pi?]iir,yiv;ini;f

EPA/Robf;rl S. Korr EnvironmentalResearch I ;it). Wilkson, 1-owull,MIchalowski, Vandergrift. Callaway

Battelle Pncific Norlhwebl 1 abs, DOE,Fruchlcr

Stanford University, EPA/Robert SKerr Lab, Sempnni. Grinc Galk:.McCarty, Roberts

Minnesota University. U.S GeologicalSurvey; Bhowmick, Sontag, Semmcns

Petcrsol^

Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs, Dnb:Lonhiird, Geibur, Amonelle

UuPonI Co . DOE/Sav.mniih R|V(;[Lab, Sitrlne EnvironmenliilConsultants' Katiac^k Loonny Con:-'.'Wnghtp^ ^

i)()r.";w,i]Si']ii'Hu»M,»»'(:i«rv.1 iinni •y. k,lli,li,k

intiniiod on hark

21D

22A

22B

22C

22D

23A

23B

23C

21A

24B

W,

25A

2SB

25C

OTHER250

26A

26B

Performance evaluation of a Ground Water and Soil Gas Remedial ActionNTIS DE90-017659/XAB

perox-pLire 'M Chemical Oxidation lechnoloqy Peroxidation Syslems. Inc.:AiX)licahoia.Anflly;iL^Reaor1E)^5^AR-91/50J,^T13 PB94-130325/XAB

Reductive Dehalogenation: A Subsurface Bioremediation Process. Jouinal Article:Published in Remediation, Winter 1990-1991EPA/600/J-90/259, NTIS PB91-144873/XAB

Removal o( Radionuclides by Electrokinetic Soil Processing, Journal Article:Published in Journal of the National Technical Association, Spring 1993EPA/600/J-93/296. NTIS PB93-222875/XAB

Retrospective Performance Evaluation on In Situ Bioremediation: SiteCharacterizationEPA/600/A-93/173, NTIS PB93-221919/XAB

Savannah River- Field Demonstration of In Situ Air Stripping Using Horizontal WellsNTIS DE92-009963

Savannah River- Full Scalo Field Test of the In Situ Air Stripping Process at theSavannah River Integrated Domonslration Test SiteN7 IS DE92-009749/XAB

Savannah River: Ground Water and Soil Remediation: In Situ Air Stripping UsingHorizontal WellsN7ISDE92-009906/XAB

Savannah ftivcr: Imniunotogicdf rechniquos as Tools to Characterize theSubsurface Microbial Community ;il ;i IrichloioethylenR Contaminated SiteNriS DE93 007443/XAB

Savannah River: Savannah River Integrated Demonstralion ProgramNTIS DE92-009587/XAB

Stabilization of Micfoorqiinl'.iii1, fur In Silii nf(Jr;id;ition of loxic Cliomlcdis I'[O()H".'|neporf, Ye«'u TwoNITSDE92-040792/XAD

Surfactant Flooding Technology for In Situ Cleanup of Contaminated Soil-; andAquifers. A Feasibility StudyNTIS DE90 003969/XAB

Terra Vac In Silii Vacuum Extraction System: Applications Analysis ReportEPA/540/A5 R9/003. NTIS PB90 119744/XAB

Treatability of Contaminated Ground Watrr and Aquifer Solids at "Town Gas" Sites,Using Photolytic Ozonalion and Chemical In Situ Reclamation. Final ReportNTIS PB90-267253/XAB

RESOURCE GUIDES6

Bioremedialion Resource RindoEPA/r)42B 93/004

Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology Resource GuideEPA/542 B 94/OOR

Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment Technology Resource GuideEPA/542-B-94/007

i

•

•

•

•

•

Bioremedia

Soil Washing/Flushing. Solvent Extraction, Thermal De

Soil Vapor Extraction

•

•

•

•

•

•

on

Ground-Water Extraction

Chemical Oxidation

Electrokinetics

Unspecified

Surfactants. ChemicalTreatment

Chemical Treatment

TECHNOLO

•

•

•

GIES

sorption

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

5 AD

Chemical Dehalogenation

•

•

ORES

•

•

•

•

•

>SED

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

——

DOE/Argonne National Lab; Hansen.Hartnett

EPA/ORD/RREL

EPA/Robort S. Kerr Lab; Sims. Suflila,Russell

EPA/ORD/RREL; Parker

EPA/Robert S. Kerr Lab; Wilson,Kampbell

Westinghouse Savannah River Co.,DOE; Looney. Kaback

Weslinghouse Savannah River Co.,DOE: Looney. Hazen, Kaback. Eddy

Weslinghouse Savannah River Co.,DOE: Kaback. Looney, Eddy Hazen

Weslinghouse Savannah River Co.,DOE; Fliormans, Dougheny. Friinck.McKinzey, Hazen

Westinghouse Savannah River Co.,DOE

Idalio Univrrsily. DOR; Crawliml.Slormo

DOE/Los Alamos National Lab;Porzucek

EPA/ORD/RREL, Foster WheelerEnviresponse, Inc.; Slinson

Illinois Department of Energy andNatural Resources; Peyton, LeFaivie,Smith

EPA/OSWER/IIO

EPA/OSWER/TIO

EPA/OSWER/TIO

re 1 : This matrix provides representative examples of ground water treatment technology resource documents. If is not all inclusive. Those seeking other information may wish to contact the hotlines, dockets, or other sources listed on paqes 4-6 of thisdocument

fe 2: The information in this matrix is derived from NTIS abstracts and is only as detailed as the NTIS abstracts.fe 3. BTEX is included as a separate contaminant category at the request of the Office of Underground Storage Tanksfe 4: An entry under the Organics and Metats/lnorganics columns indicates a general reference to these contaminants Further research into the document content may be necessary to determine precisely which contaminants are discussed.'e 5- The heading. Studies and Demonstrations, is divided info the following two sub headings: Documenis Focusing on Test Designs and Documents Focusing on Study Results. Documents included in the Study Results subsections may comprehensively

cover the sludy process from design thiough completion.'c f; 1hf Hcywn-11 Gui'li"; d i i a - 1 ic.-n/i^ ii» f^ilnm-.il ( l i ' r i i i nm l : tml ilo ,K>| cvi'licilly identify (•iiiii.ifn/.u/ii-;